Cargando…

Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI

OBJECTIVES: Limited studies have compared graft-glenoid apposition and glenoid augmentation area between the latarjet and distal clavicle grafts in glenohumeral stabilization. Additionally, pre-operative planning is typically performed using computerized tomography (CT), and few studies have used 3-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hudson, Caroline, Taylor, Dean, Anakwenze, Oke, Dickens, Jonathan, Lau, Brian, Kim, Billy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10392473/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967123S00152
_version_ 1785082969823641600
author Hudson, Caroline
Taylor, Dean
Anakwenze, Oke
Dickens, Jonathan
Lau, Brian
Kim, Billy
author_facet Hudson, Caroline
Taylor, Dean
Anakwenze, Oke
Dickens, Jonathan
Lau, Brian
Kim, Billy
author_sort Hudson, Caroline
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Limited studies have compared graft-glenoid apposition and glenoid augmentation area between the latarjet and distal clavicle grafts in glenohumeral stabilization. Additionally, pre-operative planning is typically performed using computerized tomography (CT), and few studies have used 3- dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (3D-MRI) reformations to assess graft dimensions. The purpose of the study was two-fold: 1) compare bony apposition, glenoid augmentation, and graft width among coracoid and distal clavicle bone augmentation techniques and 2) to determine the viability of 3D-MRI to assess bone graft dimensions. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with recurrent glenohumeral instability and bone loss were included in this study. 3D-CT and 3D-MRI reformations were utilized to measure pertinent dimensions for five orientations of coracoid and distal clavicle autografts: (1) standard Latarjet (SLJ), (2) congruent arc Latarjet (CLJ), and (3) distal clavicle attached by its posterior surface, (DCP) and (4) inferior surface (DCI), and (5) resected end (DCR). Glenoid augment area was defined as the graft surface area contributing to the glenoid. Bone-on-bone apposition was defined as the graft-glenoid contact area for bone healing potential, and graft width was pertinent for fixation technique. Paired t-tests were performed to compare graft sizes between patients and compare 3D-CT vs 3D-MRI measurements. RESULTS: CLJ had the largest glenoid augmentation area (mean: 318mm(2), sd: 74) while SLJ displayed the most apposition (mean: 318mm(2), sd: 74). DCI had the largest graft width (mean: 21mm, sd: 4). Paired t- tests revealed no significant differences between Latarjet methods, whereas distal clavicle grafts varied significantly with orientation. All 3D-CT and 3D-MRI measurements were within 1mm of each other, and only two demonstrated statistically significant difference (coracoid width: 13.03 vs 13.98mm, p=0.010; distal clavicle thickness: 9.69 vs 10.77, p=0.002). 3D-CT and 3D-MRI measurements demonstrated strong positive correlation (r>0.6 and p<0.001 for all dimensions). CONCLUSIONS: Glenoid augmentation, bony apposition, and graft width can vary with coracoid or distal clavicle graft type and orientation. Differences between 3D-CT and 3D-MRI were small and likely not clinically significant.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10392473
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103924732023-08-02 Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI Hudson, Caroline Taylor, Dean Anakwenze, Oke Dickens, Jonathan Lau, Brian Kim, Billy Orthop J Sports Med Article OBJECTIVES: Limited studies have compared graft-glenoid apposition and glenoid augmentation area between the latarjet and distal clavicle grafts in glenohumeral stabilization. Additionally, pre-operative planning is typically performed using computerized tomography (CT), and few studies have used 3- dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (3D-MRI) reformations to assess graft dimensions. The purpose of the study was two-fold: 1) compare bony apposition, glenoid augmentation, and graft width among coracoid and distal clavicle bone augmentation techniques and 2) to determine the viability of 3D-MRI to assess bone graft dimensions. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with recurrent glenohumeral instability and bone loss were included in this study. 3D-CT and 3D-MRI reformations were utilized to measure pertinent dimensions for five orientations of coracoid and distal clavicle autografts: (1) standard Latarjet (SLJ), (2) congruent arc Latarjet (CLJ), and (3) distal clavicle attached by its posterior surface, (DCP) and (4) inferior surface (DCI), and (5) resected end (DCR). Glenoid augment area was defined as the graft surface area contributing to the glenoid. Bone-on-bone apposition was defined as the graft-glenoid contact area for bone healing potential, and graft width was pertinent for fixation technique. Paired t-tests were performed to compare graft sizes between patients and compare 3D-CT vs 3D-MRI measurements. RESULTS: CLJ had the largest glenoid augmentation area (mean: 318mm(2), sd: 74) while SLJ displayed the most apposition (mean: 318mm(2), sd: 74). DCI had the largest graft width (mean: 21mm, sd: 4). Paired t- tests revealed no significant differences between Latarjet methods, whereas distal clavicle grafts varied significantly with orientation. All 3D-CT and 3D-MRI measurements were within 1mm of each other, and only two demonstrated statistically significant difference (coracoid width: 13.03 vs 13.98mm, p=0.010; distal clavicle thickness: 9.69 vs 10.77, p=0.002). 3D-CT and 3D-MRI measurements demonstrated strong positive correlation (r>0.6 and p<0.001 for all dimensions). CONCLUSIONS: Glenoid augmentation, bony apposition, and graft width can vary with coracoid or distal clavicle graft type and orientation. Differences between 3D-CT and 3D-MRI were small and likely not clinically significant. SAGE Publications 2023-07-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10392473/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967123S00152 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This open-access article is published and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - No Derivatives License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits the noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction of the article in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this article without the permission of the Author(s). For article reuse guidelines, please visit SAGE’s website at http://www.sagepub.com/journals-permissions.
spellingShingle Article
Hudson, Caroline
Taylor, Dean
Anakwenze, Oke
Dickens, Jonathan
Lau, Brian
Kim, Billy
Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI
title Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI
title_full Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI
title_fullStr Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI
title_full_unstemmed Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI
title_short Poster 166: Distal Clavicle versus Traditional and Congruent Arc Latarjet: Comparison of Surface Area and Glenoid Apposition with 3-Dimensional CT and MRI
title_sort poster 166: distal clavicle versus traditional and congruent arc latarjet: comparison of surface area and glenoid apposition with 3-dimensional ct and mri
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10392473/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967123S00152
work_keys_str_mv AT hudsoncaroline poster166distalclavicleversustraditionalandcongruentarclatarjetcomparisonofsurfaceareaandglenoidappositionwith3dimensionalctandmri
AT taylordean poster166distalclavicleversustraditionalandcongruentarclatarjetcomparisonofsurfaceareaandglenoidappositionwith3dimensionalctandmri
AT anakwenzeoke poster166distalclavicleversustraditionalandcongruentarclatarjetcomparisonofsurfaceareaandglenoidappositionwith3dimensionalctandmri
AT dickensjonathan poster166distalclavicleversustraditionalandcongruentarclatarjetcomparisonofsurfaceareaandglenoidappositionwith3dimensionalctandmri
AT laubrian poster166distalclavicleversustraditionalandcongruentarclatarjetcomparisonofsurfaceareaandglenoidappositionwith3dimensionalctandmri
AT kimbilly poster166distalclavicleversustraditionalandcongruentarclatarjetcomparisonofsurfaceareaandglenoidappositionwith3dimensionalctandmri