Is global humeral head offset related to intramedullary canal width? A computer tomography morphometric study

摘要

Abstract BackgroundWhile most anatomic TSA stems allow some intra-operative adjustments, the default configuration assumes that head offset is directly proportional to stem diameter. Some authors reported that humeral head diameter is proportional to intra-medullary canal width and humeral head offset, but none investigated the direct relationship between head offset and endosteal measurements. The purpose of the study was to determine whether global humeral head offset is proportional to intramedullary canal width at the distal metaphysis and proximal diaphysis.MethodsWe analyzed 100 Computed Tomography shoulder scans of patients aged 59.1?±?20.5 with no signs of gleno-humeral arthritis nor humeral dysplasia. The width of the intramedullary diaphyseal canal was determined at four transverse sections 65, 70, 100 and 105?mm below the head center. The inter-observer agreement was excellent for intramedullary canal width (ICC?=?0.96), head diameter (ICC?=?0.97) and global head offset (ICC?=?0.85). Correlations were analysed using Pearson’s coefficients and multivariable regressions were performed to determine associations between head offset and five independent variables (gender, age, intramedullary canal width, head diameter).ResultsGlobal head offset was negatively correlated with head diameter ( r =???0.31, p =?0.002), but not correlated with intramedullary canal width ( r =???0.11, p =?0.282). Multivariable regression confirmed that global head offset was independently associated with head diameter (beta?=???0.15, p =?0.005), but not with intramedullary canal width (beta?=?0.06, p =?0.431).ConclusionsThe present study revealed that humeral offset is not correlated with intramedullary canal width. Implant manufacturers and shoulder surgeons should be aware of the subtle morphologic features, to enhance humeral stem design and restore native anatomy.