MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF BICIPITAL GROOVE OF HUMERUS WITH ITS CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A STUDY IN WEST BENGAL Phalguni Srimani * 1 , Ritaban Saha 2 , Biplab Goswami 3 , Sibani Mazumdar 4 .   *1  Demonstrator, Department of Anatomy, Calcutta National Medical College, Kolkata, India.                  2  Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, Calcutta National Medical College, Kolkata, India. 3  Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, Calcutta National Medical College, Kolkata, India. 4 Professor & Head, Department of Anatomy, Calcutta National Medical College, Kolkata, India. Correspondence   Address:    Dr.   Phalguni   Srimani,   Department   of   Anatomy,   Calcutta   National   Medical   College,   Kolkata   -   700032,   West   Bengal,   India.   Mobile: +91 9830479835 E-Mail: falgunisreemani@yahoo.co.in ABSTRACT Background:    Bicipital   groove   (BG)   is   defined   as   an   indentation   present   on   the   anterior   aspect   of   upper   end   of   humerus.   Morphometry   of   BG   is   known   to play   important   role   in   maintaining   the   stability   and   function   of   shoulder   joint   during   multidirectional   biomechanical   movement   of   arms.   Therefore, knowledge regarding detailed osseous anatomy of BG is essential for better understanding of variety of causes of shoulder pain and disability. Aim:    The   goal   of   the   present   study   was   to   describe   the   detailed   morphometric   features   of   BG   in   dry   humerii   of   West   Bengal   population   and   also   to correlate its clinical implications through literature review. Materials   and   Methods:   The   study   was   undertaken   on   107   dry   human   humerii   of   unknown   age   and   sex   without   any   gross   pathology   collected   from different   medical   colleges   of   West   Bengal.   Total   length,   antero-posterior   and   transverse   width   of   humerii   at   surgical   neck   along   with   length,   width,   depth, medial   wall   and   opening   angles   of   BG   were   measured.   Data   obtained   were   statistically   analyzed.   Finally,   results   were   compared   with   other   similar   type   of studies. Results:    Total   length,   antero-posterior   and   transverse   width   of   humerii   were   303.71   ±   21.25,   22.39   ±   1.35   and   24.89   ±   2.00   mm.   on   right   and   294.69   ± 24.39,   21.60   ±   1.38   and   24.01   ±   1.62   mm.   on   left   sides   respectively.   The   length,   width   and   depth   of   BG   were   71.59   ±   3.78,   8.42   ±   0.85   and   4.63   ±   0.38   mm. on   right   and   70.78   ±   5.04,   7.7   ±   0.50   and   4.45   ±   0.30   mm.   on   left   sides   respectively.   The   mean   length,   width   and   depth   of   BG   corresponded   to   23.84%   of total   length,   33.22%   of   transverse   width   and   20.65%   of   antero-posterior   width   of   humerii   respectively.      The   average   medial   wall   and   opening   angles   of   BG were   50.22+5.35   and   81.41   +   10.90   on   right   and   53.83   +6.80   and   79.31   +   11.32   on   left   sides   respectively.   Statistical   significant   differences   were   found   in length, width, depth and medial wall angles of BG between right and left sides (p < 0.05). Supratubercular ridge of Meyer was not found in any specimen. Conclusion:    The   present   study   revealed   detailed   morphometric   parameters   of   BG   among   West   Bengal   population   which   may   be   helpful   for   anatomists, anthropologists, orthopaedic surgeons and radiologists. KEY WORDS: Bicipital groove, Morphometry, Shoulder joint, West Bengal. References 1 . Standring S. Gray’s Anatomy:In: The anatomical basis of clinical practice, 40 th   edition,     2 . Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone: 2008:796-798. 3 . Kaur   M,   Gupta   R.   Morphometric   and   Morphological   Study   of   Bicipital   Groove   in   North   Indian   Population.   International   Journal   of   Basic   and   Applied Medical Sciences 2015;5(3):48-53. 4 . Rajani S, Man S. Review of bicipital groove morphology and its analysis in North Indian    Population. ISRN Anatomy 2013:1-7. 5 . Arunkumar K R, Manoranjitham R, Delhi Raj U, Shalini R. Morphometric Study of Bicipital     6 . Groove in South Indian Population and its Clinical Implications. Int J Anat Res 2016;4(2):     2187-2191. 7 . Levinsohn EM and Santelli ED. Bicipital groove dysplasia and medial dislocation of the biceps brachii tendon. Skeletal Radiology. 1991;20(6):419–423. 8 . Murthi   AM,   Vosburgh   CL,   Neviaser   TJ.   The   incidence   of   pathologic   changes   of   the   long   head   of   the   biceps   tendon.   Journal   of   Shoulder   and   Elbow Surgery 2000;9(5):382–85. 9 . Farin PU, Jaroma H. The bicipital groove of the humerus: sonographic and radiographic  correlation. Skeletal Radiology. 1996;25:215-19. 1 0 . Robertson DD, Yuan J, Bigliani LU, Flatow EL, Yamaguchi K. Three-dimensional analysis of  1 1 . the proximal part of the humerus: Relevance to arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 2000; 82(11):1594–602. 1 2 . Meyer AW. Spontaneous dislocation and destruction of the tendon of the long head of biceps brachii: 59 instances. Arch Surg. 1928;17:493-506. 1 3 . Hitchcock HH, Bechtol CO. Painful shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg (Am). 1948;30:262-273. 1 4 . Vettivel   S,   Indrasingh   I,   Chandi   G,   Chandi   SM.   Variations   in   the   intertubercular   sulcus   of   the   humerus   related   to   handedness.   Journal   of   Anatomy. 1992;180(2):321–26. 1 5 . Rajan YS, Kumar SKS. Morphometric Study on Bicipital Groove among South Indian  Population. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(7):AC01-AC03. 1 6 . Wafae   N,   Atencio   Santamar   ́ıa   LE,   Vitor   L,   Pereira   LA,   Ruiz   CR,   Wafae   GC.   Morphometry   of   the   human   bicipital   groove   (sulcus   intertubercularis).   J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(1):65–68. 1 7 . Murlimanju   BV,   Prabhu   LV,   Pai   MM,   et   al.   Anthropometric   study   of   the   bicipital   groove   in      indians   and   its   clinical   implications.   Chang   Gung   Medical Journal 2012;35(2):155-59. 1 8 . Gupta C, Jaiswal S, D’souza AS. Anthropometric study of bicipital groove and its clinical   implication. Niger J Surg Sci 2015;25:1-3. 1 9 . Cone RO, Danzig L, Resnick D, Goldman AB. The bicipital groove: radiographic, anatomic and pathologic study. Am J Roentgenol. 1983;141:781-88. 2 0 . De    Palma    AF.    Surgical    anatomy    of    the    rotator    cuff    and    the    natural    history    of    degenerative    periarthritis.    Surgical    Clinics    of    North    America 1963;43:1507-1520. 2 1 . Pfahler M, Branner S, Refior HJ. The role of the bicipital groove in tendinopathy of the long biceps tendon. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999;8:419-24. 2 2 . Abboud   JA,   Bartolozzi   AR,   Widmer   BJ,   DeMola   PM.   Bicipital   groove   morphology   on   MRI   has   no   correlation   to   intra-articular   biceps   tendon   pathology.   J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(6):790–94. 2 3 . Rockwood CA, Masten FA. The Shoulder. Vol 2. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company; 1992. 2 4 . Vettivel   S,   Selvaraj   KG,   Chandi   SM,   Indrasingh   I,   Chandi   G.   Intertubercular   sulcus   of   the         Humerus   as   an   indicator   of   Handedness   and   Humeral   Length. Clinical  Anatomy. 1995;8:        44–50. 2 5 . O Donoghue D. Subluxating biceps tendon in the athlete. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;           164:26-29. 2 6 . Ueberham    K,    Prigent    LF.    Intertubercular    sulcus    of    the    humerus:    Biometry    &    morphology    of    100    dry    bones.    Surgical    and    Radiologic    Anatomy 1998;20:351-54. 2 7 . Nevaiser   RJ,   Nevaiser   TJ.   Lesions   of   musculotendinous   cuff   of   the   shoulder—   diagnosis   and   management   in   American   Academy   of   Orthopaedic Surgeons. Instructional Course Lectures.  1981; 30:238–57, St. Louis, Mo, USA. 2 8 . Neviaser   TJ,   Neviaser   RJ,   Neviaser   JS.   The   four   in-one   arthroplasty   for   the   painful   arc      syndrome.   Clinical   Orthopaedics   and   Related   Research. 1982;163:107–12. 2 9 . Motagi   M,   Shankar   N,   Ravindranath   R.   Estimation   of   the   angle   of   humeral   torsion   from   digital   images   of   dry   humeri   of   South   Indian   origin.   Anatomy 2012-2013;6-7:34-41.