Qingxiang Hu, Chenkai Li, Di Wu, Zian Gu, Hui Xu, Shi Zhan, Xiaofeng Zhang, Zhekun Zhou, Yaohua He
{"title":"Recentering the humeral head does not necessarily improve glenohumeral abduction: A cadaveric biomechanical study.","authors":"Qingxiang Hu, Chenkai Li, Di Wu, Zian Gu, Hui Xu, Shi Zhan, Xiaofeng Zhang, Zhekun Zhou, Yaohua He","doi":"10.1002/ksa.12569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To explore if recentering the humeral head could improve shoulder abduction in shoulders with irreparable massive rotator cuff tears (IMRCTs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nine fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were used to simulate the intact condition and IMRCTs as controls. Four 'recenter' interventions were then sequentially applied: subacromial interposition (SI) using 4- and 8-mm spacers and superior capsule reconstruction (SCR) using two- and four-layer fascia lata grafts. Dynamic biomechanical experiments were performed for each condition. The primary outcomes were glenohumeral abduction angle (GAA). The secondary outcomes were acromiohumeral distance (AHD) and subacromial contact pressure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the intact condition, the GAA was significantly greater compared to the IMRCT condition at most deltoid force levels (p < 0.05 for all except at 80 N). IMRCT significantly increased maximum contact pressure (MCP) compared to intact (Δ +0.09 MPa, p = 0.029). For recentering interventions, neither SI nor SCR improved GAA (p > 0.05). The 8-mm spacer and four-layer SCR condition significantly increased MCP compared to the intact condition (Δ +0.22 MPa, p = 0.048, Δ +0.24 MPa, p = 0.012, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both SCR and SI could effectively recenter the humeral head, but neither technique improved shoulder abduction, with both even significantly increasing subacromial contact pressures. These findings suggest that surgical goals focusing solely on recentering humeral head may need re-evaluation, particularly, for patients with high functional demands on shoulder abduction.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>N/A.</p>","PeriodicalId":17880,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ksa.12569","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To explore if recentering the humeral head could improve shoulder abduction in shoulders with irreparable massive rotator cuff tears (IMRCTs).
Methods: Nine fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were used to simulate the intact condition and IMRCTs as controls. Four 'recenter' interventions were then sequentially applied: subacromial interposition (SI) using 4- and 8-mm spacers and superior capsule reconstruction (SCR) using two- and four-layer fascia lata grafts. Dynamic biomechanical experiments were performed for each condition. The primary outcomes were glenohumeral abduction angle (GAA). The secondary outcomes were acromiohumeral distance (AHD) and subacromial contact pressure.
Results: In the intact condition, the GAA was significantly greater compared to the IMRCT condition at most deltoid force levels (p < 0.05 for all except at 80 N). IMRCT significantly increased maximum contact pressure (MCP) compared to intact (Δ +0.09 MPa, p = 0.029). For recentering interventions, neither SI nor SCR improved GAA (p > 0.05). The 8-mm spacer and four-layer SCR condition significantly increased MCP compared to the intact condition (Δ +0.22 MPa, p = 0.048, Δ +0.24 MPa, p = 0.012, respectively).
Conclusion: Both SCR and SI could effectively recenter the humeral head, but neither technique improved shoulder abduction, with both even significantly increasing subacromial contact pressures. These findings suggest that surgical goals focusing solely on recentering humeral head may need re-evaluation, particularly, for patients with high functional demands on shoulder abduction.
期刊介绍：
Few other areas of orthopedic surgery and traumatology have undergone such a dramatic evolution in the last 10 years as knee surgery, arthroscopy and sports traumatology. Ranked among the top 33% of journals in both Orthopedics and Sports Sciences, the goal of this European journal is to publish papers about innovative knee surgery, sports trauma surgery and arthroscopy. Each issue features a series of peer-reviewed articles that deal with diagnosis and management and with basic research. Each issue also contains at least one review article about an important clinical problem. Case presentations or short notes about technical innovations are also accepted for publication.
The articles cover all aspects of knee surgery and all types of sports trauma; in addition, epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention, and all types of arthroscopy (not only the knee but also the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, ankle, etc.) are addressed. Articles on new diagnostic techniques such as MRI and ultrasound and high-quality articles about the biomechanics of joints, muscles and tendons are included. Although this is largely a clinical journal, it is also open to basic research with clinical relevance.
Because the journal is supported by a distinguished European Editorial Board, assisted by an international Advisory Board, you can be assured that the journal maintains the highest standards.
Official Clinical Journal of the European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA).
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
