Influence of Defect Size and Localization on the Engagement of Reverse Hill-Sachs Lesions
Philipp Moroder, Armin Runer, Manuel Kraemer, Johann Fierlbeck, Alfred Niederberger, Sebastian Cotofana, Imre Vasvari, Bernhard Hettegger, Mark Tauber, Christof Hurschler, Herbert Resch
- Year
- 2015
- Citations
- 67
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reverse Hill-Sachs (RHS) lesions can cause recurrent posterior shoulder instability because of engagement with the posterior glenoid rim; however, the effect of defect size and localization have yet to be determined. HYPOTHESIS: Both size and localization are critical for the engagement of an RHS defect with the posterior glenoid rim. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Ten RHS defects with predefined extent and localization were created through an anterolateral rotator cuff sparing approach in 10 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulder specimens using a custom-made saw guide. Computed tomography scans of all specimens were completed, and standardized measurements were performed to determine the size (alpha angle) and localization (beta angle) of the defect as well as a combination of both parameters (gamma angle). Internal rotation motions were imposed on the shoulder joint in different arm positions and with varying amount of posterior translation by means of a robot-assisted shoulder simulator. The association between engagement of the defects and the defined parameters (alpha, beta, and gamma angles) was analyzed. RESULTS: In 0° of abduction, a cutoff value between engaging and nonengaging defects of 37.5° for the alpha angle (100% sensitivity; 75% specificity; area under the curve [AUC], 0.875; P = .055) and 36.5° for the beta angle (100% sensitivity; 25% specificity; AUC, 0.708; P = .286) was determined. The gamma angle showed the highest discriminatory power (AUC, 0.938; P = .025) with a cutoff value of 85.5° rendering 100% sensitivity and 75% specificity in the prediction of engagement. An increase in the applied posterior translation force decreased the degrees of internal rotation necessary before engagement occurred. No engagement occurred during internal rotation with the arm in 60° of abduction or 60° of flexion. CONCLUSION: The size and localization of RHS defects are both critical factors for engagement. The combination of both parameters in terms of the gamma angle measurement might be a helpful tool to identify defects prone to engagement. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Not only the size but also the localization is decisive for engagement of RHS defects. The standardized measurement of the gamma angle combines both factors and might be a helpful tool to identify defects prone to engagement warranting surgical treatment.
Keywords
Related papers
Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets
Daron Acemoğlu, Pascual Restrepo
2019
Reach and grasp by people with tetraplegia using a neurally controlled robotic arm
Leigh R. Hochberg, Daniel Bacher, Beata Jarosiewicz +8 more
2012
Campbell-Walsh urology
Alan J. Wein editor-in-chief
2012
Stroke rehabilitation
Peter Langhorne, Julie Bernhardt, Gert Kwakkel
2011