Aims. The liner design is a key determinant of the constraint of a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). The aim of this study was to compare the degree of constraint of rTSA liners between different implant systems. Methods. An implant company’s independent 3D shoulder arthroplasty planning software (mediCAD 3D shoulder v. 7.0, module v. 2.1.84.173.43) was used to determine the jump height of standard and constrained liners of different sizes (radius of curvature) of all available companies. The obtained parameters were used to calculate the stability ratio (degree of constraint) and angle of coverage (degree of glenosphere coverage by liner) of the different systems. Measurements were independently performed by two raters, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to perform a reliability analysis. Additionally, measurements were compared with parameters provided by the companies themselves, when available, to ensure validity of the software-derived measurements. Results. There were variations in jump height between rTSA systems at a given size, resulting in large differences in stability ratio between systems. Standard liners exhibited a stability ratio range from 126% to 214% (mean 158% (SD 23%)) and constrained liners a range from 151% to 479% (mean 245% (SD 76%)). The angle of coverage showed a range from 103° to 130° (mean 115° (SD 7°)) for standard and a range from 113° to 156° (mean 133° (SD 11°)) for constrained liners. Four arthroplasty systems kept the stability ratio of standard liners constant (within 5%) across different sizes, while one system showed slight inconsistencies (within 10%), and ten arthroplasty systems showed large inconsistencies (range 11% to 28%). The stability ratio of constrained liners was consistent across different sizes in two arthroplasty systems and inconsistent in seven systems (range 18% to 106%). Conclusion. Large differences in jump height and resulting degree of constraint of rTSA liners were observed between different implant systems, and in many cases even within the same implant systems. While the immediate clinical effect remains unclear, in theory the degree of constraint of the liner plays an important role for the dislocation and notching risk of a rTSA system. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(10):818–824

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe a quantitative 3D CT method to measure rotator cuff muscle volume, atrophy, and balance in healthy controls and in three pathological shoulder cohorts. Methods. In all, 102 CT scans were included in the analysis: 46 healthy, 21 cuff tear arthropathy (CTA), 18 irreparable rotator cuff tear (IRCT), and 17 primary osteoarthritis (OA). The four rotator cuff muscles were manually segmented and their volume, including intramuscular fat, was calculated. The normalized volume (NV) of each muscle was calculated by dividing muscle volume to the patient’s scapular bone volume. Muscle volume and percentage of muscle atrophy were compared between muscles and between cohorts. Results. Rotator cuff muscle volume was significantly decreased in patients with OA, CTA, and IRCT compared to healthy patients (p < 0.0001). Atrophy was comparable for all muscles between CTA, IRCT, and OA patients, except for the supraspinatus, which was significantly more atrophied in CTA and IRCT (p = 0.002). In healthy shoulders, the anterior cuff represented 45% of the entire cuff, while the posterior cuff represented 40%. A similar partition between anterior and posterior cuff was also found in both CTA and IRCT patients. However, in OA patients, the relative volume of the anterior (42%) and posterior cuff (45%) were similar. Conclusion. This study shows that rotator cuff muscle volume is significantly decreased in patients with OA, CTA, or IRCT compared to healthy patients, but that only minimal differences can be observed between the different pathological groups. This suggests that the influence of rotator cuff muscle volume and atrophy (including intramuscular fat) as an independent factor of outcome may be overestimated. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):552–561

Aims

Glenoid bone loss is a significant problem in the management of shoulder instability. The threshold at which the bone loss is considered “critical” requiring bony reconstruction has steadily dropped and is now approximately 15%. This necessitates accurate measurement in order that the correct operation is performed. CT scanning is the most commonly used modality and there are a number of techniques described to measure the bone loss however few have been validated. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the most commonly used techniques for measuring glenoid bone loss on CT.

Aims

The management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures (MSCFs) has evolved over the last three decades. Controversy exists over which specific fracture patterns to treat and when. This review aims to synthesize the literature in order to formulate an appropriate management algorithm for these injuries in both adolescents and adults.

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a correlation between the grade of humeral osteoarthritis (OA) and the severity of glenoid morphology according to Walch. We hypothesized that there would be a correlation.

Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is a disabling condition that remains challenging for upper limb surgeons. Open elbow arthrolysis is commonly used for the treatment of stiff elbow when conservative therapy has failed. Multiple questions commonly arise from surgeons who deal with this disease. These include whether the patient has post-traumatic stiff elbow, how to evaluate the problem, when surgery is appropriate, how to perform an excellent arthrolysis, what the optimal postoperative rehabilitation is, and how to prevent or reduce the incidence of complications. Following these questions, this review provides an update and overview of post-traumatic elbow stiffness with respect to the diagnosis, preoperative evaluation, arthrolysis strategies, postoperative rehabilitation, and prevention of complications, aiming to provide a complete diagnosis and treatment path.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:576–584.