The Critical Shoulder Angle as a Highly Specific Predictor of a Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tear: A Case-Control Study.

Erik Gerlach,Richard W Nicolay,Rusheel Nayak,Carly L Williams,Daniel J Johnson,Mark Plantz,Guido Marra
{"title":"The Critical Shoulder Angle as a Highly Specific Predictor of a Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tear: A Case-Control Study.","authors":"Erik Gerlach,Richard W Nicolay,Rusheel Nayak,Carly L Williams,Daniel J Johnson,Mark Plantz,Guido Marra","doi":"10.1177/03635465241287474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nThe critical shoulder angle (CSA) has become an important topic of study in patients with rotator cuff tears (RCTs). However, there are conflicting data on whether the CSA can differentiate between patients with normal shoulder pathology and full-thickness RCTs on shoulder radiographs.\r\n\r\nPURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS\r\nThe purpose of this study was to define the relationship between full-thickness RCTs and the CSA. It was hypothesized that patients with full-thickness RCTs would have an increased CSA compared with matched controls.\r\n\r\nSTUDY DESIGN\r\nCross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThis retrospective case-control study identified patients with magnetic resonance imaging scans showing full-thickness RCTs between 2009 and 2019. A 1 to 1 propensity score match was performed to identify a control group with normal rotator cuffs while controlling for baseline participant characteristics-including age, sex, body mass index, and tobacco use. A total cohort of 532 was identified, with 266 cases and 266 controls. Two independent observers measured CSAs on true anteroposterior shoulder radiographs.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThere was no difference in baseline participant characteristics between the RCT and the non-RCT groups (P > .05). The mean CSA for the entire cohort was 33.6°± 4.2°. The CSA did not significantly vary by sex (P = .088) or tobacco usage (P = .16). The mean CSA for the RCT case group, 36.2°± 3.3°, was significantly different from the mean CSA for the control group, 30.9°± 3.3° (P < .0001). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis produced an area under the curve of 0.88 (P < .0001). At CSAs ≥35°, there was a 67.7% sensitivity and 89.4% specificity for having a full-thickness RCT. Last, each degree of increase in the CSA increased the risk of having an associated RCT by 1.7 times (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.551-1.852]; P < .0001).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nPatients with RCTs had significantly higher CSAs compared with matched controls. Increased CSA was an independent risk factor for RCTs, with an odds ratio of 1.7 per degree. The CSA is an accurate test (area under the curve, 0.88) with good sensitivity (67.7%) and specificity (89.4%) at values ≥35°. The CSA is a simple, reproducible measurement that can assist in clinical decision-making regarding full-thickness RCTs.","PeriodicalId":517411,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465241287474","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND The critical shoulder angle (CSA) has become an important topic of study in patients with rotator cuff tears (RCTs). However, there are conflicting data on whether the CSA can differentiate between patients with normal shoulder pathology and full-thickness RCTs on shoulder radiographs. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS The purpose of this study was to define the relationship between full-thickness RCTs and the CSA. It was hypothesized that patients with full-thickness RCTs would have an increased CSA compared with matched controls. STUDY DESIGN Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS This retrospective case-control study identified patients with magnetic resonance imaging scans showing full-thickness RCTs between 2009 and 2019. A 1 to 1 propensity score match was performed to identify a control group with normal rotator cuffs while controlling for baseline participant characteristics-including age, sex, body mass index, and tobacco use. A total cohort of 532 was identified, with 266 cases and 266 controls. Two independent observers measured CSAs on true anteroposterior shoulder radiographs. RESULTS There was no difference in baseline participant characteristics between the RCT and the non-RCT groups (P > .05). The mean CSA for the entire cohort was 33.6°± 4.2°. The CSA did not significantly vary by sex (P = .088) or tobacco usage (P = .16). The mean CSA for the RCT case group, 36.2°± 3.3°, was significantly different from the mean CSA for the control group, 30.9°± 3.3° (P < .0001). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis produced an area under the curve of 0.88 (P < .0001). At CSAs ≥35°, there was a 67.7% sensitivity and 89.4% specificity for having a full-thickness RCT. Last, each degree of increase in the CSA increased the risk of having an associated RCT by 1.7 times (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.551-1.852]; P < .0001). CONCLUSION Patients with RCTs had significantly higher CSAs compared with matched controls. Increased CSA was an independent risk factor for RCTs, with an odds ratio of 1.7 per degree. The CSA is an accurate test (area under the curve, 0.88) with good sensitivity (67.7%) and specificity (89.4%) at values ≥35°. The CSA is a simple, reproducible measurement that can assist in clinical decision-making regarding full-thickness RCTs.
临界肩角是全厚肩袖撕裂的高度特异性预测指标:病例对照研究
背景肩关节临界角(CSA)已成为肩袖撕裂(RCT)患者的重要研究课题。然而,关于 CSA 是否能区分正常肩关节病变患者和肩关节 X 光片上的全厚 RCT 患者,目前还存在相互矛盾的数据。目的/假设本研究旨在确定全厚 RCT 与 CSA 之间的关系。研究假设:与匹配对照组相比,全厚 RCT 患者的 CSA 会增加。研究设计横断面研究;证据级别,3。方法这项回顾性病例对照研究确定了 2009 年至 2019 年期间磁共振成像扫描显示全厚 RCT 的患者。在控制基线参与者特征(包括年龄、性别、体重指数和吸烟情况)的同时,进行了1比1倾向得分匹配,以确定肩袖正常的对照组。最终共确定了 532 人的队列,其中有 266 例病例和 266 例对照。结果RCT组和非RCT组的基线参与者特征无差异(P > .05)。整个组群的平均 CSA 为 33.6°±4.2°。CSA在性别(P = .088)或吸烟情况(P = .16)方面无明显差异。RCT 病例组的平均 CSA 为 36.2°±3.3°,与对照组的平均 CSA 30.9°±3.3°有明显差异(P < .0001)。接收者操作特征曲线分析得出的曲线下面积为 0.88(P < .0001)。CSA ≥35°时,全厚 RCT 的敏感性为 67.7%,特异性为 89.4%。最后,CSA 每增加一度,相关 RCT 的风险就增加 1.7 倍(OR,1.7 [95% CI,1.551-1.852];P < .0001)。CSA的增加是RCT的一个独立风险因素,其几率比为1.7/度。CSA 是一种准确的检测方法(曲线下面积为 0.88),在测量值≥35°时具有良好的灵敏度(67.7%)和特异性(89.4%)。CSA 是一种简单、可重复的测量方法,可协助有关全厚 RCT 的临床决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信