Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27106214›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2016

Glenoid version and size: does gender, ethnicity, or body size play a role?

Hristo Ivanov Piponov, David Savin, Neal Shah, Domenic Esposito, Brian Schwartz, Vincent Moretti, Benjamin Goldberg

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Gender-specific factors influencing the glenoid version and reference values for it.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024
    Article
  11. Determining the Normal Glenoid Version in the Indian Population.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Hristo Ivanov PiponovDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 835 S. Wolcott Ave., Room E270, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. piponov@uic.edu.
David SavinDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 835 S. Wolcott Ave., Room E270, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Neal ShahCollege of Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Domenic EspositoDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 835 S. Wolcott Ave., Room E270, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Brian SchwartzDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 835 S. Wolcott Ave., Room E270, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Vincent MorettiDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 835 S. Wolcott Ave., Room E270, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Benjamin GoldbergDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 835 S. Wolcott Ave., Room E270, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionVariations in glenoid morphology among patients of different gender, body habitus, and ethnicity have been of interest for surgeons. Understanding these anatomical variations is a critical step in restoring normal glenohumeral structure during shoulder reconstruction surgery.

methodsRetrospective review of 108 patient shoulder CT scans was performed and glenoid version, AP diameter and height were measured. Statistical multiple regression models were used to investigate the ability of gender and ethnicity to predict glenoid AP diameter, height, and version independently of patient weight and height.

resultsThe mean glenoid AP diameter was 24.7 ± 3.5, the mean glenoid height was 31.7 ± 3.7, and the mean glenoid version was 0.05 ± 9.05. According to our regression models, males would be expected to exhibit 8.4° more glenoid retroversion than females (p = 0.003) and have 2.9 mm larger glenoid height compared to females (p = 0.002). The predicted male glenoid AP diameter was 3.4 mm higher than that in females (p < 0.001). Hispanics demonstrated 6.4° more glenoid anteversion compared to African-Americans (p = 0.04). Asians exhibited 4.1 mm smaller glenoid AP diameters than African-Americans (p = 0.002). An increase of 25 kg in patient weight resulted in 1 mm increase in AP diameter (p = 0.01).

conclusionsGender is the strongest independent predictor of glenoid size and version. Males exhibited a larger size and more retroverted glenoid. Patient height was found to be predictive of glenoid size only in patients of the same gender. Although variations in glenoid size and version are observed among ethnicities, larger sample size ethnic groups will be necessary to explore the precise relations. Surgeons should consider gender and ethnic variations in the pre-operative planning and surgical restoration of the native glenohumeral relationship. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Anatomic Study.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAnthropometryBone MalalignmentFemaleGlenoid CavityHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesScapulaSex FactorsShoulder JointTomography, X-Ray ComputedGlenoid AP diameter and heightGlenoid versionMultiple regression modelPatient height and weightTotal shoulder arthroplasty

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.