The Biomechanical Importance of Bone Block Positioning in Glenoid Augmentation: Every MillimeterMatters.

Oenning S, Wermers J, Köhler A, Sußiek J, Wiethölter M, Raschke MJ, Katthagen JC

Forschungsartikel (Zeitschrift) | Peer reviewed

Zusammenfassung

Background: In the presence of anterior glenoid bone loss (aGBL), options for bony glenoid augmentation include Latarjet procedures and free bone block transfers. Bone graft placement is challenging, and malposition causes complications, such as recurrent instability or osteoarthritis. Hypothesis: With minimal changes in bone block positioning, osteochondral shoulder stability cannot be restored sufficiently. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: In a robotic test setup, 14 human cadaveric scapulae were included. Soft tissue was resected, and matching artificial humeri were selected for each specimen. Testing was performed in 60 degrees of glenohumeral abduction with 50 N of glenohumeral compression and anterior-directed translational force to the humerus. Application of 20% aGBL and screw fixation of artificial bone blocks (artBBs) with different buildup shells allowed the following testing stages: (1) intact, (2) 20% aGBL, (3) flush artBB, (4) 1-mm medialized artBB, and (5) 1-mm lateralized artBB. The stability ratio (SR) and medial-lateral humeral head starting position were assessed. Results: Specimens with 20% aGBL provided lower mean SRs than native joints (20.6% [SD, 4.7%] vs 27.8% [SD, 6.7%]; P < .0001). Flush artBB placement (mean, 35.4%; SD, 7.7%) led to an increased SR compared with both native joints (P = .002) and 20% aGBL (P < .0001). The mean SR in 1-mm medialized artBBs (21.5%; SD, 5.7%) did not differ compared with that for 20% aGBL (P = .908). One-millimeter lateralized artBBs (mean, 40.8%; SD, 5%) provided higher SR and more lateral humeral head starting positions compared with flush artBB (P = .003 and P = .003, respectively). Conclusion: In the presence of aGBL, flush bone block placement restores osteochondral glenohumeral stability, while a 1-mm medialized bone block fails to increase stability. Bone block lateralization of 1 mm provides higher stability but is associated with humeral head lateralization. Clinical Relevance: Glenoid bone block augmentations are established in patients with glenohumeral instability and aGBL. In the case of bone block malposition, complications like recurrent instability or the development of osteoarthritis can occur. This study underlines the importance of accurate bone block placement since only minimum bone block malposition relevantly affects osteochondral shoulder biomechanics.

Details zur Publikation

FachzeitschriftAmerican Journal of Sports Medicine (Am J Sports Med)
Jahrgang / Bandnr. / Volume53
Ausgabe / Heftnr. / Issue5
Seitenbereich1164-1170
StatusVeröffentlicht
Veröffentlichungsjahr2025
DOI10.1177/03635465251322796
Stichwörtershoulder instability; glenoid concavity; glenoid bone loss; bone block; Latarjet; glenoid augmentation; biomechanics

Autor*innen der Universität Münster

Katthagen, Jan Christoph
Klinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie
Köhler, Alina
Klinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie
Oenning, Sebastian
Klinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie
Raschke, Michael Johannes
Klinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie
Wiethölter, Mats Jonas
Klinik für Unfall-, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie