header advert
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Get Access locked padlock

Shoulder & Elbow

The critical size of a defect in the glenoid causing anterior instability of the shoulder after a Bankart repair, under physiological joint loading



Download PDF

Abstract

Aims

Patients with recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder commonly have an anterior osseous defect of the glenoid. Once the defect reaches a critical size, stability may be restored by bone grafting. The critical size of this defect under non-physiological loading conditions has previously been identified as 20% of the length of the glenoid. As the stability of the shoulder is load-dependent, with higher joint forces leading to a loss of stability, the aim of this study was to determine the critical size of an osseous defect that leads to further anterior instability of the shoulder under physiological loading despite a Bankart repair.

Patients and Methods

Two finite element (FE) models were used to determine the risk of dislocation of the shoulder during 30 activities of daily living (ADLs) for the intact glenoid and after creating anterior osseous defects of increasing magnitudes. A Bankart repair was simulated for each size of defect, and the shoulder was tested under loading conditions that replicate in vivo forces during these ADLs. The critical size of a defect was defined as the smallest osseous defect that leads to dislocation.

Results

The FE models showed a high risk of dislocation during ADLs after a Bankart repair for anterior defects corresponding to 16% of the length of the glenoid.

Conclusion

This computational study suggests that bone grafting should be undertaken for an anterior osseous defect in the glenoid of more than 16% of its length rather than a solely soft-tissue procedure, in order to optimize stability by restoring the concavity of the glenoid.


Correspondence should be sent to C. Klemt; email:

For access options please click here