A Clinical Comparison of Linear- and Surface Area-Based Methods of Measuring Glenoid Bone Loss.

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine whether linear-based measurement significantly overestimates glenoid bone loss in comparison with surface area-based measurement in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability and glenoid bone loss.

HYPOTHESIS: Linear-based measurement will significantly overestimate glenoid bone loss in comparison with surface area-based measurement in patients with anterior shoulder instability and glenoid bone loss.

STUDY

DESIGN

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Thirty patients with anterior shoulder instability underwent preoperative bilateral shoulder computed tomography (CT) scans. Three-dimensional CT (3D-CT) reconstruction with humeral head subtraction was performed to obtain an en face view of the 3D-CT glenoid. Glenoid bone loss was measured with the surface area and linear methods of measurement. Statistical analysis was performed with a paired 2-tailed t test.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (5 female and 23 male; mean age, 25.1 years; age range, 15-58 years) were included in the study; 17 patients underwent a glenoid augmentation procedure, and 11 underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair. The mean percentage glenoid bone loss calculated with the surface area and linear methods was 12.8% ± 8.0% and 17.5% ± 9.7% ( P < .0001), respectively. For the 17 patients who underwent glenoid augmentation, mean percentage bone loss with the surface area and linear methods was 16.6% ± 7.9% and 23.0% ± 8.0% ( P < .0001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Linear measurement of glenoid bone loss significantly overestimates bone loss compared with surface area measurement in patients with anterior glenoid bony defects. These results indicate that these different methods cannot be used interchangeably and cannot be used with the same critical thresholds for glenoid bone loss.