IJAR.2018.336

Type of Article:  Original Research

Volume 6; Issue 4.1 (October 2018)

Page No.: 5760-5764

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2018.336

HUMERAL HEAD AND GLENOID DIMENSIONS IN THE INDIAN POPULATION: A CADAVERIC STUDY

Jairam D Jagiasi, Anisha S Valavi, Tushar V Ubale, Dipit Sahu *.

Department of Orthopaedics, Dr RN Cooper Hospital & HBT Medical College, Juhu, Ville Parle, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Corresponding author: Dr. Dipit Sahu, Department of Orthopaedics, Dr RN Cooper Hospital & HBT Medical College, Juhu, Ville Parle, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. Ph: 022 26207254 E-Mail: dip.it@me.com

ABSTRACT:

Background: Shoulder prosthesis should accurately mimic the proximal shoulder and glenoid anatomy to recreate the shoulder biomechanics. There may be a mismatch in the sizes of the Indian native bone and the currently available western shoulder prosthesis, since the bony morphology of Indians may be different from that of the western counterpart.

Purpose: To measure the average humeral head diameter and glenoid length and width, so that a proper implant selection may be done based on the knowledge of average Indian bony morphology.

Methods: Twenty shoulders in ten fresh cadavers were dissected to expose the humeral head and glenoid articular surface. The humeral head diameter was measured with the help of a digital vernier caliper in two planes: Supero-inferior diameter (D1) and antero-posterior diameter (D2). The glenoid length (l) and width (w) were measured with the help of a vernier caliper.

Results: The average humeral head diameter (D1) ± S.D. in the Supero-inferior plane was 45±3.4 mm (range 40-50.6mm) and antero-posterior (D2) plane was 42.7±2.2 mm (range 40-46mm) with a mean difference of 2.2 mm. The average length of the glenoid (l) was 35.4±1.3 mm (range 32-37mm) and width of the glenoid (w) was 25.3±2.1 mm (range 21-28mm). The shape of the humeral head was more ellipsoidal at diameters above 45 mm.

Conclusion. We can conclude that the humeral head diameters and glenoid length and width in Indian population are smaller than the western counterparts. The ellipsoidal shape of the humeral heads becomes more marked at diameters above 45mm.

Key words:  Cadaver Study, Humeral Head Diameter, Glenoid Length, Ellipsoid Humeral Head, Shoulder Prosthesis.

REFERENCES

  1. Jun, B.J., et al., The effects of prosthetic humeral head shape on glenohumeral joint kinematics: a comparison of non-spherical and spherical prosthetic heads to the native humeral head. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2013;22(10):1423-32.
  2. Harrold, F. and C. Wigderowitz, Humeral head arthroplasty and its ability to restore original humeral head geometry. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2013;22(1): 115-21.
  3. Kim, T.K., et al., What Differences in Morphologic Features of the Knee Exist Among Patients of Various Races? A Systematic Review. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2017;475(1):170-182.
  4. Boileau, P. and G. Walch, The three-dimensional geometry of the proximal humerus. Implications for surgical technique and prosthetic design. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1997;79(5):857-65.
  5. Hertel, R., U. Knothe, and F.T. Ballmer, Geometry of the proximal humerus and implications for prosthetic design. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2002;11(4):331-8.
  6. Iannotti, J.P., et al., The normal glenohumeral relationships. An anatomical study of one hundred and forty shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1992;74(4):491-500.
  7. Humphrey, C.S., B.W. Sears, and M.J. Curtin, An anthropometric analysis to derive formulae for calculating the dimensions of anatomically shaped humeral heads. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2016;25(9):1532-41.
  8. Nyffeler, R.W., et al., Influence of humeral prosthesis height on biomechanics of glenohumeral abduction. An in vitro study. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2004;86-A(3):575-80.
  9. Harryman, D.T., et al., The effect of articular conformity and the size of the humeral head component on laxity and motion after glenohumeral arthroplasty. A study in cadavera. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1995;77(4):555-63.
  10. Terrier, A., et al., Biomechanical consequences of humeral component malpositioning after anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2010;19(8):1184-90.
  11. DeLude, J.A., et al., An anthropometric study of the bilateral anatomy of the humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2007;16(4):477-83.
  12. Matsumura, N., et al., Three-dimensional anthropometric analysis of the glenohumeral joint in a normal Japanese population. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2016;25(3):493-501.
  13. Zhang, L., et al., Comparison of anatomical shoulder prostheses and the proximal humeri of Chinese people. Proc Inst Mech Eng H, 2007;221(8):921-7.
  14. Aroonjarattham, P., et al., Three-dimensional morphometric study of the Thai proximal humerus: cadaveric study. J Med Assoc Thai, 2009;92(9):1191-7.

Cite this article: Jairam D Jagiasi, Anisha S Valavi, Tushar V Ubale, Dipit Sahu. HUMERAL HEAD AND GLENOID DIMENSIONS IN THE INDIAN POPULATION: A CADAVERIC STUDY. Int J Anat Res 2018;6(4.1):5760-5764. DOI: 10.16965/ijar.2018.336