Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 7 | Pages 552 - 561
28 Jul 2021
Werthel J Boux de Casson F Burdin V Athwal GS Favard L Chaoui J Walch G

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


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 10 | Pages 826 - 831
28 Oct 2022
Jukes C Dirckx M Bellringer S Chaundy W Phadnis J

Aims. The conventionally described mechanism of distal biceps tendon rupture (DBTR) is of a ‘considerable extension force suddenly applied to a resisting, actively flexed forearm’. This has been commonly paraphrased as an ‘eccentric contracture to a flexed elbow’. Both definitions have been frequently used in the literature with little objective analysis or citation. The aim of the present study was to use video footage of real time distal biceps ruptures to revisit and objectively define the mechanism of injury. Methods. An online search identified 61 videos reporting a DBTR. Videos were independently reviewed by three surgeons to assess forearm rotation, elbow flexion, shoulder position, and type of muscle contraction being exerted at the time of rupture. Prospective data on mechanism of injury and arm position was also collected concurrently for 22 consecutive patients diagnosed with an acute DBTR in order to corroborate the video analysis. Results. Four videos were excluded, leaving 57 for final analysis. Mechanisms of injury included deadlift, bicep curls, calisthenics, arm wrestling, heavy lifting, and boxing. In all, 98% of ruptures occurred with the arm in supination and 89% occurred at 0° to 10° of elbow flexion. Regarding muscle activity, 88% occurred during isometric contraction, 7% during eccentric contraction, and 5% during concentric contraction. Interobserver correlation scores were calculated as 0.66 to 0.89 using the free-marginal Fleiss Kappa tool. The prospectively collected patient data was consistent with the video analysis, with 82% of injuries occurring in supination and 95% in relative elbow extension. Conclusion. Contrary to the classically described injury mechanism, in this study the usual arm position during DBTR was forearm supination and elbow extension, and the muscle contraction was typically isometric. This was demonstrated for both video analysis and ‘real’ patients across a range of activities leading to rupture. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):826–831


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 10 | Pages 815 - 825
20 Oct 2022
Athanatos L Kulkarni K Tunnicliffe H Samaras M Singh HP Armstrong AL

Aims

There remains a lack of consensus regarding the management of chronic anterior sternoclavicular joint (SCJ) instability. This study aimed to assess whether a standardized treatment algorithm (incorporating physiotherapy and surgery and based on the presence of trauma) could successfully guide management and reduce the number needing surgery.

Methods

Patients with chronic anterior SCJ instability managed between April 2007 and April 2019 with a standardized treatment algorithm were divided into non-traumatic (offered physiotherapy) and traumatic (offered surgery) groups and evaluated at discharge. Subsequently, midterm outcomes were assessed via a postal questionnaire with a subjective SCJ stability score, Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS, adapted for the SCJ), and pain visual analogue scale (VAS), with analysis on an intention-to-treat basis.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 10 | Pages 818 - 824
2 Oct 2024
Moroder P Herbst E Pawelke J Lappen S Schulz E

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.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 10 | Pages 929 - 936
22 Oct 2024
Gutierrez-Naranjo JM Salazar LM Kanawade VA Abdel Fatah EE Mahfouz M Brady NW Dutta AK

Aims

This study aims to describe a new method that may be used as a supplement to evaluate humeral rotational alignment during intramedullary nail (IMN) insertion using the profile of the perpendicular peak of the greater tuberosity and its relation to the transepicondylar axis. We called this angle the greater tuberosity version angle (GTVA).

Methods

This study analyzed 506 cadaveric humeri of adult patients. All humeri were CT scanned using 0.625 × 0.625 × 0.625 mm cubic voxels. The images acquired were used to generate 3D surface models of the humerus. Next, 3D landmarks were automatically calculated on each 3D bone using custom-written C++ software. The anatomical landmarks analyzed were the transepicondylar axis, the humerus anatomical axis, and the peak of the perpendicular axis of the greater tuberosity. Lastly, the angle between the transepicondylar axis and the greater tuberosity axis was calculated and defined as the GTVA.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 10 | Pages 851 - 857
10 Oct 2024
Mouchantaf M Parisi M Secci G Biegun M Chelli M Schippers P Boileau P

Aims

Optimal glenoid positioning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is crucial to provide impingement-free range of motion (ROM). Lateralization and inclination correction are not yet systematically used. Using planning software, we simulated the most used glenoid implant positions. The primary goal was to determine the configuration that delivers the best theoretical impingement-free ROM.

Methods

With the use of a 3D planning software (Blueprint) for RSA, 41 shoulders in 41 consecutive patients (17 males and 24 females; means age 73 years (SD 7)) undergoing RSA were planned. For the same anteroposterior positioning and retroversion of the glenoid implant, four different glenoid baseplate configurations were used on each shoulder to compare ROM: 1) no correction of the RSA angle and no lateralization (C-L-); 2) correction of the RSA angle with medialization by inferior reaming (C+M+); 3) correction of the RSA angle without lateralization by superior compensation (C+L-); and 4) correction of the RSA angle and additional lateralization (C+L+). The same humeral inlay implant and positioning were used on the humeral side for the four different glenoid configurations with a 3 mm symmetric 135° inclined polyethylene liner.