Analysis of glenohumeral morphological factors for anterior shoulder instability and rotator cuff tear by magnetic resonance imaging

14Citations
Citations of this article
26Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether there are glenohumeral morphological differences between normal population, glenohumeral instability, and rotator cuff pathology. Method: In this study, shoulder magnetic resonance (MR) images of 150 patients were evaluated. Patients included in the study were studied in three groups of 50 individuals: patients with anterior shoulder instability in group 1, patients with rotator cuff tear in group 2, and control subjects without shoulder pathology in group 3. Results: There were statistically significant differences between groups in evaluations for glenoid version, glenoid coronal height, glenoid coronal diameter, humeral axial and coronal diameters, and coracohumeral interval distances. Significant differences were observed between groups 2 and 3 in glenoid axial diameter, glenoid coronal height, glenoid depth, humeral coronal diameter, and coracohumeral distances. Conclusion: The results obtained in this study suggest that glenoid version, glenoid coronal height and diameter, humeral diameter, and coracohumeral interval parameters in glenohumeral morphology-related parameters in patients with anterior instability are different from those of normal population and patients with rotator cuff pathology. In cases where there is a clinically difficult diagnosis, these radiological measurements will be helpful to clinicians in diagnosis and treatment planning, especially in cases of treatment-resistant cases.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Saygi, B., Karahan, N., Karakus, O., Demir, A. I., Ozkan, O. C., & Soylu-Boy, F. N. (2018). Analysis of glenohumeral morphological factors for anterior shoulder instability and rotator cuff tear by magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499018768100

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free