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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weber, Alexander E, Bolia, Ioanna K, Horn, Andrew, Villacis, Diego, Omid, Reza, Tibone, James E, White, Eric, Hatch, George F
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