Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34159213›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2021

Three-Dimensional Quantification of Glenoid Bone Loss in Anterior Shoulder Instability: The Anatomic Concave Surface Area Method.

Marine Launay, Muhammad Naghman Choudhry, Nicholas Green, Jashint Maharaj, Kenneth Cutbush, Peter Pivonka, Ashish Gupta

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marine LaunayShoulder Surgery QLD Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia.
Muhammad Naghman ChoudhryQueensland Unit for Advanced Shoulder Research, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Nicholas GreenQueensland Unit for Advanced Shoulder Research, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Jashint MaharajShoulder Surgery QLD Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia.
Kenneth CutbushQueensland Unit for Advanced Shoulder Research, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Peter PivonkaQueensland Unit for Advanced Shoulder Research, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Ashish GuptaShoulder Surgery QLD Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia.
Queensland University of Technology · AUGreenslopes Private Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecurrent shoulder instability may be associated with glenoid erosion and bone loss. Accurate quantification of bone loss significantly influences the contemplation of surgical procedure. In addition, assessment of bone loss is crucial for surgical planning and accurate graft placement during surgery. PURPOSE: To quantify the concave surface area of glenoid bone loss by using 3-dimensional (3D) segmented models of the scapula and to compare this method with the best-fit circle and glenoid height/width methods, which use the glenoid rim for bone loss estimations. STUDY

designCohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

methodsA total of 36 consecutive preoperative bilateral computed tomography scans of patients eligible for a primary Latarjet procedure were selected from our institutional surgical database (mean patient age, 29 ± 9 years; 31 men and 5 women). The 3D models of both scapulae were generated using medical segmentation software and were used to map the anatomic concave surface area (ACSA) of the inferior glenoid using the diameter of the best-fit circle of the healthy glenoid. Bone loss was calculated as a ratio of the difference between surface areas of both glenoids (healthy and pathological) against the anatomic circular surface area of the healthy glenoid (the ACSA method). These results were compared with bone loss calculations using the best-fit circle and glenoid height/width methods. Inter- and intraobserver reliability were also calculated.

resultsThe mean (± SD) bone loss calculated using the ACSA, the best-fit circle, and glenoid height/width methods was 9.4% ± 6.7%, 14.3% ± 6.8%, and 17.6% ± 7.3%, respectively. The ACSA method showed excellent interobserver reliability, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.95 versus those for the best-fit circle (ICC, 0.71) and glenoid height/width (ICC, 0.79) methods.

conclusionQuantification of instability-related glenoid bone loss is reliable using the 3D ACSA method.

Indexed as

Bankart repaircomputed tomographyglenoid labrumimaginginstabilityLatarjet procedureshoulder

Identifiers

PMID34159213
PMCPMC8182205
OpenAlexW3170265312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.