抄録
Background: The conventional measuring method for glenoid version is greatly influenced by the scapular body shape that varies widely between patients. We postulated that the glenoid vault version could be more useful than the conventional glenoid version in clinical cases.Objectives: The purposes of this study were to compare the values of glenoid version measured with the conventional method to those with the vault method and to investigate the feasibility of the glenoid vault version.Methods: Computed tomography scans of 150 normal shoulders and 150 arthritic shoulders were analyzed. Three-dimensionally corrected slices were reconstructed from the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data, and glenoid version was measured with both the conventional and vault methods. After determining intra- and interrater reliabilities, differences in glenoid version values between the conventional and vault methods were assessed. In the normal shoulder group, side-to-side differences of glenoid version values were also evaluated in both methods.Results: Both measuring methods demonstrated high intra- and interrater reliabilities. The normal glenoid had 1.1° ± 3.2° retroversion with the conventional method and 8.9° ± 2.7° retroversion with the vault method. The average glenoid retroversion of arthritic shoulders was 10.8° ± 9.3° measured with the conventional method and 18.2° ± 9.1° with the vault method. The vault method showed significantly larger glenoid retroversion than the conventional method in both normal and arthritic shoulder groups. Both conventional glenoid retroversion and glenoid vault retroversion were significantly larger on dominant sides than on nondominant sides in the normal shoulders.Conclusions: The glenoid vault version could be used as an alternative measuring method for glenoid version with high reliability. In clinical use, the glenoid vault version appears to be more useful than the conventional glenoid version to assess the severity of arthritis and difficulty of glenoid replacement. The glenoid vault is not symmetric, but usually retroverted in both normal and arthritic shoulders.
| 元の言語 | English |
|---|---|
| 記事番号 | 17 |
| ジャーナル | Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research |
| 巻 | 9 |
| 発行部数 | 1 |
| DOI | |
| 出版物ステータス | Published - 2014 3 11 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Surgery
- Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
これを引用
Computed tomography measurement of glenoid vault version as an alternative measuring method for glenoid version. / Matsumura, Noboru; Ogawa, Kiyohisa; Ikegami, Hiroyasu; Collin, Philippe; Walch, Gilles; Toyama, Yoshiaki.
：: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 巻 9, 番号 1, 17, 11.03.2014.研究成果: Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Computed tomography measurement of glenoid vault version as an alternative measuring method for glenoid version
AU - Matsumura, Noboru
AU - Ogawa, Kiyohisa
AU - Ikegami, Hiroyasu
AU - Collin, Philippe
AU - Walch, Gilles
AU - Toyama, Yoshiaki
PY - 2014/3/11
Y1 - 2014/3/11
N2 - Background: The conventional measuring method for glenoid version is greatly influenced by the scapular body shape that varies widely between patients. We postulated that the glenoid vault version could be more useful than the conventional glenoid version in clinical cases.Objectives: The purposes of this study were to compare the values of glenoid version measured with the conventional method to those with the vault method and to investigate the feasibility of the glenoid vault version.Methods: Computed tomography scans of 150 normal shoulders and 150 arthritic shoulders were analyzed. Three-dimensionally corrected slices were reconstructed from the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data, and glenoid version was measured with both the conventional and vault methods. After determining intra- and interrater reliabilities, differences in glenoid version values between the conventional and vault methods were assessed. In the normal shoulder group, side-to-side differences of glenoid version values were also evaluated in both methods.Results: Both measuring methods demonstrated high intra- and interrater reliabilities. The normal glenoid had 1.1° ± 3.2° retroversion with the conventional method and 8.9° ± 2.7° retroversion with the vault method. The average glenoid retroversion of arthritic shoulders was 10.8° ± 9.3° measured with the conventional method and 18.2° ± 9.1° with the vault method. The vault method showed significantly larger glenoid retroversion than the conventional method in both normal and arthritic shoulder groups. Both conventional glenoid retroversion and glenoid vault retroversion were significantly larger on dominant sides than on nondominant sides in the normal shoulders.Conclusions: The glenoid vault version could be used as an alternative measuring method for glenoid version with high reliability. In clinical use, the glenoid vault version appears to be more useful than the conventional glenoid version to assess the severity of arthritis and difficulty of glenoid replacement. The glenoid vault is not symmetric, but usually retroverted in both normal and arthritic shoulders.
AB - Background: The conventional measuring method for glenoid version is greatly influenced by the scapular body shape that varies widely between patients. We postulated that the glenoid vault version could be more useful than the conventional glenoid version in clinical cases.Objectives: The purposes of this study were to compare the values of glenoid version measured with the conventional method to those with the vault method and to investigate the feasibility of the glenoid vault version.Methods: Computed tomography scans of 150 normal shoulders and 150 arthritic shoulders were analyzed. Three-dimensionally corrected slices were reconstructed from the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data, and glenoid version was measured with both the conventional and vault methods. After determining intra- and interrater reliabilities, differences in glenoid version values between the conventional and vault methods were assessed. In the normal shoulder group, side-to-side differences of glenoid version values were also evaluated in both methods.Results: Both measuring methods demonstrated high intra- and interrater reliabilities. The normal glenoid had 1.1° ± 3.2° retroversion with the conventional method and 8.9° ± 2.7° retroversion with the vault method. The average glenoid retroversion of arthritic shoulders was 10.8° ± 9.3° measured with the conventional method and 18.2° ± 9.1° with the vault method. The vault method showed significantly larger glenoid retroversion than the conventional method in both normal and arthritic shoulder groups. Both conventional glenoid retroversion and glenoid vault retroversion were significantly larger on dominant sides than on nondominant sides in the normal shoulders.Conclusions: The glenoid vault version could be used as an alternative measuring method for glenoid version with high reliability. In clinical use, the glenoid vault version appears to be more useful than the conventional glenoid version to assess the severity of arthritis and difficulty of glenoid replacement. The glenoid vault is not symmetric, but usually retroverted in both normal and arthritic shoulders.
KW - Glenoid component
KW - Glenoid morphology
KW - Glenoid replacement
KW - Glenoid retroversion
KW - Glenoid vault
KW - Glenoid version
KW - Shoulder arthroplasty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899118340&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899118340&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/1749-799X-9-17
DO - 10.1186/1749-799X-9-17
M3 - Article
C2 - 24618285
AN - SCOPUS:84899118340
VL - 9
JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
SN - 1749-799X
IS - 1
M1 - 17
ER -