Mathematical modeling of glenoid bone loss demonstrate differences in calculations that May affect surgical decision making

Stephen A. Parada, Matthew C. Jones, Mikalyn T. DeFoor, B. Gage Griswold, Aaron D. Roberts, Matthew T. Provencher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: Two glenoid bone loss calculations are compared across a range of anatomic glenoid sizes. Methods: 20 cadaveric paired glenoid diameters were measured to create glenoid models with bone loss calculated in 1 mm linear increments up to 50% bone loss comparing the linear measurement percentage (LMP) to the circle line method (CLM) gold standard. Results: The LMP overestimates glenoid bone loss at every potential 1 mm increment across each glenoid model until bone loss reaches 50%. Conclusion: The widely-used LMP method overestimates bone loss compared to a gold standard potentially misguiding surgeons towards bony reconstruction in shoulder instability during preoperative planning.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)402-407
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Orthopaedics
Volume22
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2020

Keywords

  • Arthroscopy
  • Circle line method (CLM)
  • Glenoid bone loss
  • Linear measurement percentage (LMP)
  • Mathematical modeling
  • Shoulder instability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Mathematical modeling of glenoid bone loss demonstrate differences in calculations that May affect surgical decision making'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this