BackgroundBetter knowledge of the suprascapular notch anatomy may help to prevent and to assess more accurately suprascapular nerve entrapment syndrome. Our purposes were to verify the reliability of the existing data, to assess the differences between the two genders, to verify the correlation between the dimensions of the scapula and the suprascapular notch, and to investigate the relationship between the suprascapular notch and the postero-superior limit of the safe zone for the suprascapular nerve.MethodsWe examined 500 dried scapulae, measuring seven distances related to the scapular body and suprascapular notch; they were also catalogued according to gender, age and side. Suprascapular notch was classified in accordance with Rengachary’s method. For each class, we also took into consideration the width/depth ratio. Furthermore, Pearson's correlation was calculated.ResultsThe frequencies were: Type I 12.4%, Type II 19.8%, Type III 22.8%, Type IV 31.1%, Type V 10.2%, Type VI 3.6%. Width and depth did not demonstrate a statistical significant difference when analyzed according to gender and side; however, a significant difference was found between the depth means elaborated according to median age (73 y.o.). Correlation indexes were weak or not statistically significant. The differences among the postero-superior limits of the safe zone in the six types of notches was not statistically significant.ConclusionsPatient’s characteristics (gender, age and scapular dimensions) are not related to the characteristics of the suprascapular notch (dimensions and Type); our data suggest that the entrapment syndrome is more likely to be associated with a Type III notch because of its specific features.

No abstract

Purpose Objective of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic values of the Arm Squeeze Test. The test consists in squeezing the middle third of the upper arm. Methods 1,567 patients were included in this study. Diagnosis of cervical nerve root compression or shoulder disease was clinically formulated and confirmed with imaging before performing test. 350 healthy volunteers were recruited as controls. The test was positive when score on a VAS Scale was 3 points or higher on squeezing the middle third of the upper arm compared to acromioclavicular (AC) joint and anterolateral-subacromial area. Results Patients were subdivided as follows: 903 with rotator cuff tear, 155 with shoulder adhesive capsulitis, 101 with AC joint arthropathy, 55 with calcifying tendonitis, and 48 affected by glenohumeral arthritis. The study sample included 305 patients with cervical nerve root compression from C5 to T1 with shoulder radicular pain. The test was positive in 295/305 (96.7 %) of patients with cervical nerve root compression, compared to 35/903 (3.87 %), 3/155 (1.93 %), 0/101 (0 %), 1/55 (1.81 %) and 4/48 (8.33 %) of those with rotator cuff tear, adhesive capsulitis, AC arthropathy, calcifying tendonitis and glenohumeral arthritis, respectively. A positive result was obtained in 14/350 asymptomatic subjects (4 %). If patients with cervical nerve root compression were compared to controls and patients with shoulder diseases, the test had sensitivity of 0.96 and specificity from 0.91 to 1.Conclusions The Arm Squeeze Test may be useful to distinguish cervical nerve root compression from shoulder disease in case of doubtful diagnosis. A positive result to this test may lead to cervical etiology of the shoulder pain.

No abstract

No abstract