Mathematical modeling of glenoid bone loss demonstrate differences in calculations that May affect surgical decision making
- Stephen A. Parada(corresponding author),
- Matthew C. Jones,
- Mikalyn T. DeFoor,
- B. Gage Griswold,
- Aaron D. Roberts,
- Matthew T. Provencher
- ,
- Medical College of Georgia,
- Winn Army Community Hospital,
- Steadman Philippon Research Institute
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-reviewAbstract
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.
Publication Information
Output type
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-reviewOriginal language
English (US)Pages from-to (Number of pages)
Pages 402-407 (6 pages)Journal (Volume, Issue Number)
Journal of Orthopaedics (Volume 22)Publication milestones
- Published - 11/01/2020
Publication status
Published - 11/01/2020
Publication IDs
- Scopus: 85091600314
Publication metrics
Metrics
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.17
Fractional count
5
Fractional count
0.83
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
SciVal
FWCI
1.34
SciVal
Author count
6
SciVal
citations
2
SciVal
Paper percentile
78
PlumX, opens in new tab
Citation count
8
Captures
8
