Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Volume 19, Issue 7 , Pages 994-1002, October 2010

A biomechanical study of posterior glenoid bone loss and humeral head translation

  • Chris D. Bryce, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine & Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA
  • ,
  • Andrew C. Davison, MS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine & Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA
  • ,
  • Nori Okita, MS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Kinesiology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
  • ,
  • Gregory S. Lewis, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine & Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA
  • ,
  • Neil A. Sharkey, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine & Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA
    • Department of Kinesiology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA
  • ,
  • April D. Armstrong, MD, MSc, FRCSC

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine & Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: April D. Armstrong, MD, MSc, FRCSC, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, College of Medicine, Bone and Joint Institute, EC089, 30 Hope Drive, Building A, Hershey, PA 17033.

published online 26 July 2010.

Background

Results of shoulder arthroplasty have been reported to be inferior with posterior glenoid wear and accompanying subluxation of the humeral head. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of posterior glenoid wear on posterior subluxation of the humeral head.

Material and methods

A custom loading device was used to simulate physiologic loading conditions in 8 cadaver shoulders with the humerus positioned at neutral, forward flexion, and extension. Three-dimensional motion analysis recorded humeral head translation with respect to the scapula at each humerus position after removing posterior glenoid bone in 5° increments. The magnitude of humeral head translation was analyzed with 2-way ANOVA to determine the effects of arm position and glenoid condition.

Results

Glenoid condition and arm position in the transverse plane significantly influenced head translation (P < .0001). With the humerus at neutral, posterior translation became significant after 20° of posterior bone removal (P < .05). However, with the humerus in forward flexion, posterior translation became significant at only 5° of posterior bone removal (P < .001). No significant differences in translation were detected for posterior defects up to 25° with the arm in extension.

Conclusion

Posterior humeral head translation increased significantly with 5° of posterior glenoid bone loss, which equates to approximately 2.5° of glenoid retroversion. Awareness that humeral head translation may be seen with small amounts of retroversion should be recognized during preoperative planning for shoulder arthroplasty and when counseling the patient with regard to expected outcomes.

Level of evidence: Basic Science Study

Keywords: Glenoid, version, arthroplasty, total shoulder replacement, humeral translation, osteoarthritis

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1058-2746(10)00154-0

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.04.010

Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Volume 19, Issue 7 , Pages 994-1002, October 2010