Lesser tuberosity is more reliable than bicipital groove when determining orientation of humeral head in primary shoulder arthroplasty
Purpose The objective of the study was to provide statistical evaluation of position of bone landmarks of proximal humerus in relation to transepicondylar line and find out which one is the most suitable for setup of the head retroversion in case of humeral head destruction. Methods We measured 185...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical and radiologic anatomy (English ed.) 2010, Vol.32 (1), p.31-37 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 37 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 31 |
| container_title | Surgical and radiologic anatomy (English ed.) |
| container_volume | 32 |
| creator | Hromádka, Rastislav Kuběna, Aleš Antonín Pokorný, David Popelka, Stanislav Jahoda, David Sosna, Antonín |
| description | Purpose
The objective of the study was to provide statistical evaluation of position of bone landmarks of proximal humerus in relation to transepicondylar line and find out which one is the most suitable for setup of the head retroversion in case of humeral head destruction.
Methods
We measured 185 dry humeral preparations (92 left, 93 right). Structures of interest on the proximal humerus were marked with pointers of custom made steel frame. Angular relationships between the humeral head axis and medial margin of the greater tuberosity, lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity, bicipital groove, and crest of the greater tuberosity were evaluated with respect to intramedullary axis of the proximal humeral shaft.
Results
The angle between the humeral head axis and medial margin of greater tuberosity was 11.5 ± 9.0°, the angle between the lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity and the axis was 47.5 ± 7.4°, the angle between the bicipital groove and the axis was 31.6 ± 8.8° at the level of the humeral head. The angle between the crest of the greater tuberosity and the axis was 26.6 ± 9.6° in plane of the surgical neck.
Conclusions
We statistically proved that the lateral margin of lesser tuberosity is more reliable than the bicipital groove; medial margin of the greater and transepicondylar line for reconstruction of humeral head retroversion. We suggest that the lesser tuberosity should be used to determine the retroversion, especially in cases when the margin of humeral head was destructed. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00276-009-0543-6 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_746271470</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>733589107</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-a0c014b4a513d98550404e0416a303b9644b7da8a4db98bb097f8860920c3c3b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkd-q1DAQxoMonnX1AbyRIIhX1UmTNsmlHPwHC97odUna6TaHNlmTVNkX8LnNssUDgng1F_Obb76Zj5DnDN4wAPk2AdSyrQB0BY3gVfuA7FgtdaUaJh-SHWgOFQOubsiTlO4AoGFMPSY3TLeai1rtyK8DpoSR5tViDMnlM3WJLiEijTg7Y2ekeTKeWte7k8tmpscYwg-kPyf0dMCMcXHe-SMN0aHPJrvgaRjptC4YCz6hGajz9BTdYuKZpims81BWmpinGE6zSfn8lDwazZzw2Vb35NuH919vP1WHLx8_3747VL3gda4M9MCEFaZhfNCqaUCAQBCsNRy41a0QVg5GGTFYrawFLUelWtA19Lznlu_J66vuKYbvK6bcLS71OM_GY1hTJ0VbSyYk_J_kvFGagSzky7_Iu7BGX87oalCtLM4ucuwK9eXLKeLYbf_oGHSXMLtrmF0Js7uE2bVl5sUmvNoFh_uJLb0CvNoAk3ozj9H43qU_XF1zwVgxuif1lUul5Y8Y7x3-e_tvQJi4Gw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>208673030</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Lesser tuberosity is more reliable than bicipital groove when determining orientation of humeral head in primary shoulder arthroplasty</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Hromádka, Rastislav ; Kuběna, Aleš Antonín ; Pokorný, David ; Popelka, Stanislav ; Jahoda, David ; Sosna, Antonín</creator><creatorcontrib>Hromádka, Rastislav ; Kuběna, Aleš Antonín ; Pokorný, David ; Popelka, Stanislav ; Jahoda, David ; Sosna, Antonín</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
The objective of the study was to provide statistical evaluation of position of bone landmarks of proximal humerus in relation to transepicondylar line and find out which one is the most suitable for setup of the head retroversion in case of humeral head destruction.
Methods
We measured 185 dry humeral preparations (92 left, 93 right). Structures of interest on the proximal humerus were marked with pointers of custom made steel frame. Angular relationships between the humeral head axis and medial margin of the greater tuberosity, lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity, bicipital groove, and crest of the greater tuberosity were evaluated with respect to intramedullary axis of the proximal humeral shaft.
Results
The angle between the humeral head axis and medial margin of greater tuberosity was 11.5 ± 9.0°, the angle between the lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity and the axis was 47.5 ± 7.4°, the angle between the bicipital groove and the axis was 31.6 ± 8.8° at the level of the humeral head. The angle between the crest of the greater tuberosity and the axis was 26.6 ± 9.6° in plane of the surgical neck.
Conclusions
We statistically proved that the lateral margin of lesser tuberosity is more reliable than the bicipital groove; medial margin of the greater and transepicondylar line for reconstruction of humeral head retroversion. We suggest that the lesser tuberosity should be used to determine the retroversion, especially in cases when the margin of humeral head was destructed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0930-1038</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1279-8517</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00276-009-0543-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19693428</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Paris: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Anatomy ; Anatomy & physiology ; Arthroplasty ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bones ; General aspects ; Humans ; Humerus - anatomy & histology ; Imaging ; Joint surgery ; Medical sciences ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Original Article ; Orthopedics ; Prostheses ; Radiology ; Shoulder ; Shoulder Joint - anatomy & histology ; Shoulder Joint - surgery ; Surgery</subject><ispartof>Surgical and radiologic anatomy (English ed.), 2010, Vol.32 (1), p.31-37</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2009</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-a0c014b4a513d98550404e0416a303b9644b7da8a4db98bb097f8860920c3c3b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-a0c014b4a513d98550404e0416a303b9644b7da8a4db98bb097f8860920c3c3b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00276-009-0543-6$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00276-009-0543-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,4010,27904,27905,27906,41469,42538,51300</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=22341173$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19693428$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hromádka, Rastislav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuběna, Aleš Antonín</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pokorný, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popelka, Stanislav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jahoda, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sosna, Antonín</creatorcontrib><title>Lesser tuberosity is more reliable than bicipital groove when determining orientation of humeral head in primary shoulder arthroplasty</title><title>Surgical and radiologic anatomy (English ed.)</title><addtitle>Surg Radiol Anat</addtitle><addtitle>Surg Radiol Anat</addtitle><description>Purpose
The objective of the study was to provide statistical evaluation of position of bone landmarks of proximal humerus in relation to transepicondylar line and find out which one is the most suitable for setup of the head retroversion in case of humeral head destruction.
Methods
We measured 185 dry humeral preparations (92 left, 93 right). Structures of interest on the proximal humerus were marked with pointers of custom made steel frame. Angular relationships between the humeral head axis and medial margin of the greater tuberosity, lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity, bicipital groove, and crest of the greater tuberosity were evaluated with respect to intramedullary axis of the proximal humeral shaft.
Results
The angle between the humeral head axis and medial margin of greater tuberosity was 11.5 ± 9.0°, the angle between the lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity and the axis was 47.5 ± 7.4°, the angle between the bicipital groove and the axis was 31.6 ± 8.8° at the level of the humeral head. The angle between the crest of the greater tuberosity and the axis was 26.6 ± 9.6° in plane of the surgical neck.
Conclusions
We statistically proved that the lateral margin of lesser tuberosity is more reliable than the bicipital groove; medial margin of the greater and transepicondylar line for reconstruction of humeral head retroversion. We suggest that the lesser tuberosity should be used to determine the retroversion, especially in cases when the margin of humeral head was destructed.</description><subject>Anatomy</subject><subject>Anatomy & physiology</subject><subject>Arthroplasty</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bones</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Humerus - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Joint surgery</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Prostheses</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Shoulder</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><issn>0930-1038</issn><issn>1279-8517</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkd-q1DAQxoMonnX1AbyRIIhX1UmTNsmlHPwHC97odUna6TaHNlmTVNkX8LnNssUDgng1F_Obb76Zj5DnDN4wAPk2AdSyrQB0BY3gVfuA7FgtdaUaJh-SHWgOFQOubsiTlO4AoGFMPSY3TLeai1rtyK8DpoSR5tViDMnlM3WJLiEijTg7Y2ekeTKeWte7k8tmpscYwg-kPyf0dMCMcXHe-SMN0aHPJrvgaRjptC4YCz6hGajz9BTdYuKZpims81BWmpinGE6zSfn8lDwazZzw2Vb35NuH919vP1WHLx8_3747VL3gda4M9MCEFaZhfNCqaUCAQBCsNRy41a0QVg5GGTFYrawFLUelWtA19Lznlu_J66vuKYbvK6bcLS71OM_GY1hTJ0VbSyYk_J_kvFGagSzky7_Iu7BGX87oalCtLM4ucuwK9eXLKeLYbf_oGHSXMLtrmF0Js7uE2bVl5sUmvNoFh_uJLb0CvNoAk3ozj9H43qU_XF1zwVgxuif1lUul5Y8Y7x3-e_tvQJi4Gw</recordid><startdate>2010</startdate><enddate>2010</enddate><creator>Hromádka, Rastislav</creator><creator>Kuběna, Aleš Antonín</creator><creator>Pokorný, David</creator><creator>Popelka, Stanislav</creator><creator>Jahoda, David</creator><creator>Sosna, Antonín</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QP</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2010</creationdate><title>Lesser tuberosity is more reliable than bicipital groove when determining orientation of humeral head in primary shoulder arthroplasty</title><author>Hromádka, Rastislav ; Kuběna, Aleš Antonín ; Pokorný, David ; Popelka, Stanislav ; Jahoda, David ; Sosna, Antonín</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c432t-a0c014b4a513d98550404e0416a303b9644b7da8a4db98bb097f8860920c3c3b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Anatomy</topic><topic>Anatomy & physiology</topic><topic>Arthroplasty</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bones</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Humerus - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Joint surgery</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Prostheses</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Shoulder</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hromádka, Rastislav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuběna, Aleš Antonín</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pokorný, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Popelka, Stanislav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jahoda, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sosna, Antonín</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Surgical and radiologic anatomy (English ed.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hromádka, Rastislav</au><au>Kuběna, Aleš Antonín</au><au>Pokorný, David</au><au>Popelka, Stanislav</au><au>Jahoda, David</au><au>Sosna, Antonín</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Lesser tuberosity is more reliable than bicipital groove when determining orientation of humeral head in primary shoulder arthroplasty</atitle><jtitle>Surgical and radiologic anatomy (English ed.)</jtitle><stitle>Surg Radiol Anat</stitle><addtitle>Surg Radiol Anat</addtitle><date>2010</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>31</spage><epage>37</epage><pages>31-37</pages><issn>0930-1038</issn><eissn>1279-8517</eissn><abstract>Purpose
The objective of the study was to provide statistical evaluation of position of bone landmarks of proximal humerus in relation to transepicondylar line and find out which one is the most suitable for setup of the head retroversion in case of humeral head destruction.
Methods
We measured 185 dry humeral preparations (92 left, 93 right). Structures of interest on the proximal humerus were marked with pointers of custom made steel frame. Angular relationships between the humeral head axis and medial margin of the greater tuberosity, lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity, bicipital groove, and crest of the greater tuberosity were evaluated with respect to intramedullary axis of the proximal humeral shaft.
Results
The angle between the humeral head axis and medial margin of greater tuberosity was 11.5 ± 9.0°, the angle between the lateral margin of the lesser tuberosity and the axis was 47.5 ± 7.4°, the angle between the bicipital groove and the axis was 31.6 ± 8.8° at the level of the humeral head. The angle between the crest of the greater tuberosity and the axis was 26.6 ± 9.6° in plane of the surgical neck.
Conclusions
We statistically proved that the lateral margin of lesser tuberosity is more reliable than the bicipital groove; medial margin of the greater and transepicondylar line for reconstruction of humeral head retroversion. We suggest that the lesser tuberosity should be used to determine the retroversion, especially in cases when the margin of humeral head was destructed.</abstract><cop>Paris</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>19693428</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00276-009-0543-6</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0930-1038 |
| ispartof | Surgical and radiologic anatomy (English ed.), 2010, Vol.32 (1), p.31-37 |
| issn | 0930-1038 1279-8517 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_746271470 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Anatomy Anatomy & physiology Arthroplasty Biological and medical sciences Bones General aspects Humans Humerus - anatomy & histology Imaging Joint surgery Medical sciences Medicine Medicine & Public Health Original Article Orthopedics Prostheses Radiology Shoulder Shoulder Joint - anatomy & histology Shoulder Joint - surgery Surgery |
| title | Lesser tuberosity is more reliable than bicipital groove when determining orientation of humeral head in primary shoulder arthroplasty |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T23%3A32%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Lesser%20tuberosity%20is%20more%20reliable%20than%20bicipital%20groove%20when%20determining%20orientation%20of%20humeral%20head%20in%20primary%20shoulder%20arthroplasty&rft.jtitle=Surgical%20and%20radiologic%20anatomy%20(English%20ed.)&rft.au=Hrom%C3%A1dka,%20Rastislav&rft.date=2010&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=31&rft.epage=37&rft.pages=31-37&rft.issn=0930-1038&rft.eissn=1279-8517&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00276-009-0543-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E733589107%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=208673030&rft_id=info:pmid/19693428&rfr_iscdi=true |