In Vivo Evaluation of Subacromial and Internal Impingement Risk in Asymptomatic Individuals.

OBJECTIVE: The study aim was to evaluate subacromial and internal impingement risk between shoulders (dominant/nondominant) during dynamic motion using subject-specific anatomy and precise in vivo kinematics. DESIGN: In a prospective cross-sectional study, nine subjects underwent bilateral magnetic resonance (N = 18 shoulders) and fluoroscopic imaging during elevation and external rotation at 90 degrees of abduction. Subject-specific bone models were created and distances from footprint to (a) acromion and (b) glenoid were measured to evaluate risk. RESULTS: Throughout elevation, subacromial impingement risk was greater in the dominant shoulder (P = 0.0178). Regardless of side, high subacromial impingement risk occurred at 30% (78 degrees), 50% (101 degrees), and 70% (57 degrees) of the elevation cycle (P < 0.0001). High subacromial impingement risk also occurred at 30% (94 degrees), 50% (120 degrees), and 70% (63 degrees) of the external rotation motion cycle (P < 0.0001). Throughout both motions, internal impingement risk was not observed; however, the footprint and glenoid were closest at 50% of the elevation (101 degrees) and external rotation (120 degrees) cycles (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: During elevation, subacromial impingement risk is greatest at lower arm positions (30% cycle, 78 degrees) and is greater in the dominant shoulder. High subacromial impingement risk also occurs with external rotation (63-120 degrees). Internal impingement risk does not occur with maximal elevation (101 degrees) or external rotation at 90-degree abduction but is more closely approached with elevation.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Glenoid Version and Dislocation Direction on the Influence of Anterior Shoulder Instability and Development of Hill-Sachs Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal glenoid version is a risk factor for shoulder instability. However, the degree to which the variance in version (both anteversion and retroversion) affects one's predisposition for instability is not well understood. PURPOSE: To determine the influence of glenoid version on anterior shoulder joint stability and to determine if the direction of the humeral head dislocation is a stimulus for the development of Hill-Sachs lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Ten human cadaveric shoulders (mean age, 59.4 ± 4.3 years) were tested using a custom shoulder dislocation device placed in a position of apprehension (90° of abduction with 90° of external rotation). Glenoid version was adjusted in 5° increments for a total of 6 version angles tested: +10°, +5°, 0°, -5°, -10°, and -15° (anteversion angles are positive, and retroversion angles are negative). Two humeral dislocation directions were tested. The first direction was true anterior through the anterior-posterior glenoid axis. The second dislocation direction was 35° inferior from the anterior-posterior glenoid axis based on the deforming force role of the pectoralis major. The force and energy to dislocate were recorded. RESULTS: Changes in glenoid version manifested a linear effect on the dislocation force. The energy to dislocate increased as a second-order polynomial as a function of increasing glenoid retroversion. Glenoid version of +10° anteversion and -15° retroversion was highly unstable, resulting in spontaneous dislocation in one-quarter (10/40) and one-half (25/40) of the specimens anteriorly and posteriorly, respectively, in the absence of an applied dislocation force. The greater tuberosity was observed to engage with the anterior glenoid rim, consistent with Hill-Sachs lesions, 40% more frequently when the dislocation direction was true anterior compared with 35° inferior from the anterior-posterior glenoid axis. The engagement of the greater tuberosity caused an increase in the energy required to dislocate. CONCLUSION: Glenoid version has a direct effect on the force required for a dislocation. An anterior-inferior dislocation direction requires less energy for a dislocation and results in a lower risk of the development of a Hill-Sachs lesion than a direct anterior dislocation direction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Consideration should be given to glenoid version when choosing a surgical treatment option for anterior shoulder instability.

Glenohumeral joint cartilage contact in the healthy adult during scapular plane elevation depression with external humeral rotation.

The shoulder (glenohumeral) joint has the greatest range of motion of all human joints; as a result, it is particularly vulnerable to dislocation and injury. The ability to non-invasively quantify in-vivo articular cartilage contact patterns of joints has been and remains a difficult biomechanics problem. As a result, little is known about normal in-vivo glenohumeral joint contact patterns or the consequences that surgery has on altering them. In addition, the effect of quantifying glenohumeral joint contact patterns by means of proximity mapping, both with and without cartilage data, is unknown. Therefore, the objectives of this study are to (1) describe a technique for quantifying in-vivo glenohumeral joint contact patterns during dynamic shoulder motion, (2) quantify normal glenohumeral joint contact patterns in the young healthy adult during scapular plane elevation depression with external humeral rotation, and (3) compare glenohumeral joint contact patterns determined both with and without articular cartilage data. Our results show that the inclusion of articular cartilage data when quantifying in-vivo glenohumeral joint contact patterns has significant effects on the anterior-posterior contact centroid location, the superior-inferior contact centroid range of travel, and the total contact path length. As a result, our technique offers an advantage over glenohumeral joint contact pattern measurement techniques that neglect articular cartilage data. Likewise, this technique may be more sensitive than traditional 6-Degree-of-Freedom (6-DOF) joint kinematics for the assessment of overall glenohumeral joint health. Lastly, for the shoulder motion tested, we found that glenohumeral joint contact was located on the anterior-inferior glenoid surface.

Glenohumeral Contact Pressure With Simulated Anterior Labral and Osseous Defects in Cadaveric Shoulders Before and After Soft Tissue Repair.

BACKGROUND: Glenoid rim fractures and erosion can result from traumatic and repeated shoulder dislocations, leading to glenoid bone loss. Traditional instability surgery includes Bankart repair to restore soft tissue anatomy, although a recent trend is to address glenoid bone deficiency when appropriate with a bone block procedure. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify glenohumeral joint contact pressures as a function of anterior labral detachment, progressive anterior glenoid bone loss, and labral repair. The hypothesis was that a critical glenoid defect size exists whereby labral repair alone cannot restore joint contact pressures, therefore favoring bone block augmentation over soft tissue repair. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were tested under a 440-N compressive load simulating glenohumeral abduction positions of 30° and 60° in neutral rotation and 60° with 90° of external rotation. Glenohumeral joint contact pressures were recorded with a Tekscan pressure sensor system in these configurations: (1) intact specimen, (2) Bankart lesion, (3) 10% anterior rim bone defect, (4) 10% bone defect with labral repair, (5) 20% bone defect, (6) 20% bone defect with labral repair, (7) 30% bone defect, and (8) 30% bone defect with labral repair. The joint contact pressures were compared at all configurations. RESULTS: The Bankart lesion and 10%, 20%, and 30% glenoid defects showed significant (P < .05) increases in mean contact pressures over baseline values. Labral repair at 10% bone loss reduced mean contact pressures to below the intact state, and labral repair of 20% defects demonstrated normalized mean contact pressures. However, mean contact pressures remained statistically elevated compared with baseline values after labral repair of 30% glenoid defects. CONCLUSION: Glenohumeral joint contact pressures were restored to baseline values after labral repair of 10% and 20% anterior glenoid bone defects. Conversely, labral repair at 30% glenoid bone loss did not restore glenohumeral contact mechanics, yielding elevated contact pressures despite repair. Further study is warranted to investigate the stability (resistance to dislocations) of the glenohumeral joint after labral repair and bone block augmentation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A critical glenoid defect size exists in which labral repair alone does not restore normal glenohumeral contact pressures. Surgeons should carefully evaluate glenoid bone loss before selecting a surgical treatment for shoulder instability.

Suprascapular nerve anatomy during shoulder motion: a cadaveric proof of concept study with implications for neurogenic shoulder pain.

BACKGROUND: The suprascapular nerve (SSN) carries sensory fibers which may contribute to shoulder pain. Prior anatomic study demonstrated that alteration in SSN course with simulated rotator cuff tendon (RCT) tears cause tethering and potential traction injury to the nerve at the suprascapular notch. Because the SSN has been implicated as a major source of pain with RCT tearing, it is critical to understand nerve anatomy during shoulder motion. We hypothesized that we could evaluate the SSN course with a novel technique to evaluate effects of simulated RCT tears, repair, and/or release of the nerve. METHODS: The course of the SSN was tracked with a dual fluoroscopic imaging system in a cadaveric model with simulated rotator cuff muscle forces during dynamic shoulder motion. RESULTS: After a simulated full-thickness supraspinatus/infraspinatus tendon tear, the SSN translated medially 3.5 mm at the spinoglenoid notch compared to the anatomic SSN course. Anatomic footprint repair of these tendons restored the SSN course to normal. Open release of the transverse scapular ligament caused the SSN to move 2.5 mm superior-posterior out of the suprascapular notch. CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrated that the dynamic SSN course can be evaluated and may be altered by a RCT tear. Preliminary results suggest release of the transverse scapular ligament allowed the SSN to move upward out of the notch. This provides a biomechanical proof of concept that SSN traction neuropathy may occur with RCT tears and that release of the transverse scapular ligament may alleviate this by altering the course of the nerve.

In-vivo glenohumeral translation and ligament elongation during abduction and abduction with internal and external rotation.

STUDY DESIGN: Basic Science. To investigate humeral head translations and glenohumeral ligament elongation with a dual fluoroscopic imaging system. BACKGROUND: The glenohumeral ligaments are partially responsible for restraining the humeral head during the extremes of shoulder motion. However, in-vivo glenohumeral ligaments elongation patterns have yet to be determined. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to 1) quantify the in-vivo humeral head translations and glenohumeral ligament elongations during functional shoulder positions, 2) compare the inferred glenohumeral ligament functions with previous literature and 3) create a baseline data of healthy adult shoulder glenohumeral ligament lengths as controls for future studies. METHODS: Five healthy adult shoulders were studied with a validated dual fluoroscopic imaging system (DFIS) and MR imaging technique. Humeral head translations and the superior, middle and inferior glenohumeral ligaments (SGHL, MGHL, IGHL) elongations were determined. RESULTS: The humeral head center on average translated in a range of 6.0mm in the anterior-posterior direction and 2.5mm in the superior-inferior direction. The MGHL showed greater elongation over a broader range of shoulder motion than the SGHL. The anterior-band (AB)-IGHL showed maximum elongation at 90° abduction with maximum external rotation. The posterior-band (PB)-IGHL showed maximum elongation at 90° abduction with maximum internal rotation. DISCUSSION: The results demonstrated that the humeral head translated statistically more in the anterior-posterior direction than the superior-inferior direction (p = 0.01), which supports the concept that glenohumeral kinematics are not ball-in-socket mechanics. The AB-IGHL elongation pattern makes it an important static structure to restrain anterior subluxation of the humeral head during the externally rotated cocking phase of throwing motion. These data suggest that in healthy adult shoulders the ligamentous structures of the glenohumeral joint are not fully elongated in many shoulder positions, but function as restraints at the extremes of glenohumeral motion. Clinically, these results may be helpful in restoring ligament anatomy during the treatment of anterior instability of the shoulder.

The accuracy and repeatability of an automatic 2D-3D fluoroscopic image-model registration technique for determining shoulder joint kinematics.

Fluoroscopic imaging, using single plane or dual plane images, has grown in popularity to measure dynamic in vivo human shoulder joint kinematics. However, no study has quantified the difference in spatial positional accuracy between single and dual plane image-model registration applied to the shoulder joint. In this paper, an automatic 2D-3D image-model registration technique was validated for accuracy and repeatability with single and dual plane fluoroscopic images. Accuracy was assessed in a cadaver model, kinematics found using the automatic registration technique were compared to those found using radiostereometric analysis. The in vivo repeatability of the automatic registration technique was assessed during the dynamic abduction motion of four human subjects. The in vitro data indicated that the error in spatial positional accuracy of the humerus and the scapula was less than 0.30mm in translation and less than 0.58° in rotation using dual plane images. Single plane accuracy was satisfactory for in-plane motion variables, but out-of-plane motion variables on average were approximately 8 times less accurate. The in vivo test indicated that the repeatability of the automatic 2D-3D image-model registration was 0.50mm in translation and 1.04° in rotation using dual images. For a single plane technique, the repeatability was 3.31mm in translation and 2.46° in rotation for measuring shoulder joint kinematics. The data demonstrate that accurate and repeatable shoulder joint kinematics can be obtained using dual plane fluoroscopic images with an automatic 2D-3D image-model registration technique; and that out-of-plane motion variables are less accurate than in-plane motion variables using a single plane technique.

Non-invasive determination of coupled motion of the scapula and humerus--an in-vitro validation.

Measuring the motion of the scapula and humerus with sub-millimeter levels of accuracy in six-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) is a challenging problem. The current methods to measure shoulder joint motion via the skin do not produce clinically significant levels of accuracy. Thus, the purpose of this study was to validate a non-invasive markerless dual fluoroscopic imaging system (DFIS) model-based tracking technique for measuring dynamic in-vivo shoulder kinematics. Our DFIS tracks the positions of bones based on their projected silhouettes to contours on recorded pairs of fluoroscopic images. For this study, we compared markerlessly tracking the bones of the scapula and humerus to track them with implanted titanium spheres using a radiostereometric analysis (RSA) while manually manipulating a cadaver specimen's arms. Additionally, we report the repeatability of the DFIS to track the scapula and humerus during dynamic shoulder motion. The difference between the markerless model-based tracking technique and the RSA was ±0.3 mm in translation and ±0.5° in rotation. Furthermore, the repeatability of the markerless DFIS model-based tracking technique for the scapula and humerus was ±0.2 mm and ±0.4°, respectively. The model-based tracking technique achieves an accuracy that is similar to an invasive RSA tracking technique and is highly suited for non-invasively studying the in-vivo motion of the shoulder. This technique could be used to investigate the scapular and humeral biomechanics in both healthy individuals and in patients with various pathologies under a variety of dynamic shoulder motions encountered during the activities of daily living.

Glenohumeral contact kinematics in patients after total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of in vivo glenohumeral joint contact mechanics after total shoulder arthroplasty may provide insight for the improvement of patient function, implant longevity, and surgical technique. The objective of this study was to determine the in vivo glenohumeral joint contact locations in patients after total shoulder arthroplasty. We hypothesized that the glenohumeral joint articular contact would be centered on the glenoid surface because of the ball-in-socket geometric features of the implants. METHODS: Dual-plane fluoroscopic images and computer-aided design models were used to quantify patient-specific glenohumeral articular contact in thirteen shoulders following total shoulder arthroplasty. The reconstructed shoulder was imaged at arm positions of 0 degrees, 45 degrees, and 90 degrees of abduction (in the coronal plane) and neutral rotation and at 90 degrees of abduction with maximum internal and external rotation. The patients were individually investigated, and their glenohumeral joint contact centroids were reported with use of contact frequency. RESULTS: In all positions, the glenohumeral joint contact centroids were not found at the center of the glenoid surface but at an average distance (and standard deviation) of 11.0 +/- 4.3 mm from the glenoid center. Forty (62%) of the sixty-five total contact occurrences were found on the superior-posterior quadrant of the glenoid surface. The position of 0 degrees of abduction in neutral rotation exhibited the greatest variation of quadrant contact location; however, no contact was found on the superior-anterior quadrant of the glenoid surface in this position. CONCLUSIONS: In vivo, glenohumeral joint contact after total shoulder arthroplasty is not centered on the glenoid surface, suggesting that kinematics after shoulder arthroplasty may not be governed by ball-in-socket mechanics as traditionally thought. Although contact locations as a function of arm position vary among patients, the superior-posterior quadrant seems to experience the most articular contact in the shoulder positions tested.

In vivo articular cartilage contact at the glenohumeral joint: preliminary report.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about normal in vivo mechanics of the glenohumeral joint. Such an understanding would have significant implications for treating disease conditions that disrupt shoulder function. The objective of this study was to determine articular contact locations between the glenoid and humeral articular surfaces in normal subjects during shoulder abduction with neutral, internal, and external rotations. We hypothesized that glenohumeral articular contact is not perfectly centered and is variable in normal subjects tested under physiological loading conditions. METHODS: Orthogonal fluoroscopic images and magnetic resonance image-based computer models were used to characterize the centroids of articular cartilage contact of the glenohumeral joint at various static, actively stabilized abduction and rotation positions in five healthy shoulders. The shoulder was investigated at 0 degrees , 45 degrees , and 90 degrees abduction with neutral rotation and then at 90 degrees abduction combined with active maximal external rotation and active maximal internal rotation. RESULTS: For all the investigated positions, the centroid of contact on the glenoid surface for each individual, on average, was more than 5 mm away from the geometric center of the glenoid articular surface. Intersubject variation of the centroid of articular contact on the glenoid surface was observed with each investigated position, and 90 degrees abduction with maximal internal rotation showed the least variability. On the humeral head surface, the centroids of contact were located at the superomedial quarter for all investigated positions, except in two subjects' positions at 0 degrees abduction, neutral rotation. CONCLUSIONS: The data showed that the in vivo glenohumeral contact locations were variable among subjects, but in all individuals they were not at the center of the glenoid and humeral head surfaces. This confirms that "ball-in-socket" kinematics do not govern normal shoulder function. These insights into glenohumeral articular contact may be relevant to an appreciation of the consequences of pathology such as rotator cuff disease and instability.