Cargando…
Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology
BACKGROUD: Recent literature suggests that three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (3D MRI) can replace 3D computed tomography (3D CT) when evaluating glenoid bone loss in patients with shoulder instability. We aimed to examine if 2D MRI in conjunction with a validated predictive formula for as...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Orthopaedic Association
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8173237/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34094013 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios20097 |
_version_ | 1783702686682578944 |
---|---|
author | Weber, Alexander E Bolia, Ioanna K Horn, Andrew Villacis, Diego Omid, Reza Tibone, James E White, Eric Hatch, George F |
author_facet | Weber, Alexander E Bolia, Ioanna K Horn, Andrew Villacis, Diego Omid, Reza Tibone, James E White, Eric Hatch, George F |
author_sort | Weber, Alexander E |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUD: Recent literature suggests that three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (3D MRI) can replace 3D computed tomography (3D CT) when evaluating glenoid bone loss in patients with shoulder instability. We aimed to examine if 2D MRI in conjunction with a validated predictive formula for assessment of glenoid height is equivalent to the gold standard 3D CT scans for patients with recurrent glenohumeral instability. METHODS: Patients with recurrent shoulder instability and available imaging were retrospectively reviewed. Glenoid height on 3D CT and 2D MRI was measured by two blinded raters. Difference and equivalence testing were performed using a paired t-test and two one-sided tests, respectively. The interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to test for interrater reliability, and percent agreement between the measurements of one reviewer was used to assess intrarater reliability. RESULTS: Using an equivalence margin of 1 mm, 3D CT and 2D MRI were found to be different (p = 0.123). The mean glenoid height was significantly different when measured on 2D MRI (39.09 ± 2.93 mm) compared to 3D CT (38.71 ± 2.89 mm) (p = 0.032). The mean glenoid width was significantly different between 3D CT (30.13 ± 2.43 mm) and 2D MRI (27.45 ± 1.72 mm) (p < 0.001). The 3D CT measurements had better interrater agreement (ICC, 0.91) than 2D MRI measurements (ICC, 0.8). intrarater agreement was also higher on CT. CONCLUSIONS: Measurements of glenoid height using 3D CT and 2D MRI with subsequent calculation of the glenoid width using a validated methodology were not equivalent, and 3D CT was superior. Based on the validated methods for the measurement of glenoid bone loss on advanced imaging studies, 3D CT study must be preferred over 2D MRI in order to estimate the amount of glenoid bone loss in candidates for shoulder stabilization surgery and to assist in surgical decision-making. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8173237 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | The Korean Orthopaedic Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81732372021-06-04 Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology Weber, Alexander E Bolia, Ioanna K Horn, Andrew Villacis, Diego Omid, Reza Tibone, James E White, Eric Hatch, George F Clin Orthop Surg Original Article BACKGROUD: Recent literature suggests that three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (3D MRI) can replace 3D computed tomography (3D CT) when evaluating glenoid bone loss in patients with shoulder instability. We aimed to examine if 2D MRI in conjunction with a validated predictive formula for assessment of glenoid height is equivalent to the gold standard 3D CT scans for patients with recurrent glenohumeral instability. METHODS: Patients with recurrent shoulder instability and available imaging were retrospectively reviewed. Glenoid height on 3D CT and 2D MRI was measured by two blinded raters. Difference and equivalence testing were performed using a paired t-test and two one-sided tests, respectively. The interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to test for interrater reliability, and percent agreement between the measurements of one reviewer was used to assess intrarater reliability. RESULTS: Using an equivalence margin of 1 mm, 3D CT and 2D MRI were found to be different (p = 0.123). The mean glenoid height was significantly different when measured on 2D MRI (39.09 ± 2.93 mm) compared to 3D CT (38.71 ± 2.89 mm) (p = 0.032). The mean glenoid width was significantly different between 3D CT (30.13 ± 2.43 mm) and 2D MRI (27.45 ± 1.72 mm) (p < 0.001). The 3D CT measurements had better interrater agreement (ICC, 0.91) than 2D MRI measurements (ICC, 0.8). intrarater agreement was also higher on CT. CONCLUSIONS: Measurements of glenoid height using 3D CT and 2D MRI with subsequent calculation of the glenoid width using a validated methodology were not equivalent, and 3D CT was superior. Based on the validated methods for the measurement of glenoid bone loss on advanced imaging studies, 3D CT study must be preferred over 2D MRI in order to estimate the amount of glenoid bone loss in candidates for shoulder stabilization surgery and to assist in surgical decision-making. The Korean Orthopaedic Association 2021-06 2021-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8173237/ /pubmed/34094013 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios20097 Text en Copyright © 2021 by The Korean Orthopaedic Association https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Weber, Alexander E Bolia, Ioanna K Horn, Andrew Villacis, Diego Omid, Reza Tibone, James E White, Eric Hatch, George F Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology |
title | Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology |
title_full | Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology |
title_fullStr | Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology |
title_full_unstemmed | Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology |
title_short | Glenoid Bone Loss in Shoulder Instability: Superiority of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography over Two-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Established Methodology |
title_sort | glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability: superiority of three-dimensional computed tomography over two-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging using established methodology |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8173237/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34094013 http://dx.doi.org/10.4055/cios20097 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT weberalexandere glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology AT boliaioannak glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology AT hornandrew glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology AT villacisdiego glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology AT omidreza glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology AT tibonejamese glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology AT whiteeric glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology AT hatchgeorgef glenoidbonelossinshoulderinstabilitysuperiorityofthreedimensionalcomputedtomographyovertwodimensionalmagneticresonanceimagingusingestablishedmethodology |