Affiliation:
1. Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Panorama City, California, USA
2. Division of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract
Background: Distal tibial allograft (DTA) reconstruction for glenoid bone loss is nonanatomic, as it does not match the glenoid radius of curvature (ROC) in the anterior-posterior (AP) plane. The dorsal articular portion of the distal radius has not been previously described as an allograft reconstruction option for glenoid bone loss. Purpose: To evaluate distal radius fresh-frozen allograft (DRA) as a potential match for glenoid reconstruction. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Eighteen fresh-frozen human cadaveric specimens—including 6 shoulder, 6 wrist, and 6 tibia specimens—were used. The ROC and the graft length were measured in the superior-inferior (SI) plane. A 30% defect was created in all glenoid specimens, and both DTAs and DRAs were harvested to assess graft fit after fixation. Computed tomography analysis was used to assess bony ROC and bone mineral density (BMD). Results: The cadaveric specimens had a mean age of 77 years. The mean SI glenoid length was 39.7 mm compared with 36.8 mm for the DRA and 30 mm for the DTA. The ROC in the SI plane was 29 ± 5.3 mm for the glenoid, 37.8 ± 4.9 mm for the DRA, and 24 ± 3.7 mm for the DTA. In the AP plane, the ROC was 39.6 ± 6.6 mm for the glenoid, 30.4 ± 18.6 mm for the DRA, and 126.3 ± 9.5 mm for the DTA. On computed tomography analysis, the ROC in the SI plane was 30.4 ± 1.5 mm for the glenoid, 30.3 ± 5.6 mm for the DRA, and 24.5 ± 9.4 mm for the DTA. In the AP plane, the ROC was 30.8 ± 2 mm for the glenoid, 19.1 ± 2.3 mm for the DRA, and 46.7 ± 21.7 mm for the DTA. The BMD was 226.3 ± 79 Hounsfield units (HU) for the glenoid, 228.5 ± 94.7 HU for the DRA, 235 ± 96.2 HU for the coracoid process, and 235.1 ± 84.6 HU for the DTA. Conclusion: Compared with the DTA, the DRA had a greater mean graft length in the SI plane, providing utilization in cases of larger bony defects; the DRA has a more acute ROC in the AP plane (closer to that of the glenoid), providing a greater potential buttress to anterior humeral translation. Compared with currently utilized grafts, the DRA BMD was not significantly diminished. This study presents the DRA as a novel allograft reconstruction option in the setting of anterior glenoid bone loss; further biomechanical and clinical investigation is indicated.
Subject
Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine