ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
3D modeling and fitted sphere analysis-based biotechniques unveil novel indicators for subacromial impingement syndrome.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the impact and diagnostic value of novel indicators based on 3D modeling and fitted sphere analysis for Subacromial Impingement Syndrome (SIS). Methods: CT data from patients with Subacromial Impingement Syndrome and healthy individuals were imported into a software system to reconstruct a 3D model of the index shoulder. The following parameters were measured: humeral head-pseudo-moving domain volume index, pseudo-moving domain anteversion angle, pseudo-moving domain abduction angle, Critical Shoulder Angle (CSA), Acromion Index (AI), Acromio-humeral Interval (AHI), Lateral Acromial Angle (LAA), Acromion-Greater Tuberosity Impingement Index (ATI), glenoid inclination angle, and glenoid ante/retroversion angle. Influencing factor analysis, Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis, and correlation analysis were then performed. Results: The humeral head-pseudo-moving domain volume index, pseudo-moving domain anteversion angle, and pseudo-moving domain abduction angle were all indicators for SIS (P < 0.05). The humeral head-pseudo-moving domain volume index had high accuracy in predicting SIS (AUC = 0.778, P < 0.001), with an optimal threshold of 0.690, at which sensitivity and specificity were 67.0% and 77.0%, respectively. The pseudo-moving domain anteversion angle had no diagnostic value. The pseudo-moving domain abduction angle had high accuracy in predicting SIS (AUC = 0.728, P < 0.001), with an optimal threshold of 75.012, at which sensitivity and specificity were 62.2% and 72.8%, respectively. When the new indicators were used in combination, the accuracy was higher (AUC = 0.859, P < 0.001), with optimal thresholds of 0.528 or 0.542. The humeral head-pseudo-moving domain volume index had correlation with AI, AHI, LAA, and ATI. The pseudo-moving domain anteversion angle showed no correlation with glenoid anteversion/retroversion. The pseudo-moving domain abduction angle had correlation with critical shoulder angle and glenoid superior inclination. Conclusion: The new indicators based on 3D modeling and fitted sphere analysis are indicators for SIS. The humeral head-pseudo-moving domain volume index and pseudo-moving domain abduction angle have prognostic value for SIS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.