2019
DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How to measure a Hill–Sachs lesion: a systematic review

Abstract: Quantifying bone loss is important to decide the best treatment for patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. Currently, there is no standard method available to make a precise evaluation of the Hill–Sachs lesion and predict its engagement before the surgical procedure. This literature review was performed in order to identify existing published imaging methods quantifying humeral head bone loss in Hill–Sachs lesions. Searches were undertaken in Scopus and PubMed databases from January 2008 un… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Just as in this study, we have proven that the 3D method allows for more accurate measurement by researchers with different levels of experience. Similar to the measurements of the glenoid defect, different measuring methods of the Hill-Sachs bone loss were described in the literature [31]. Kodali et al positively assessed the reliability of the Hill-Sachs measurement by two-dimensional tomography, measuring the width and depth of the defect in three planes (sagittal, frontal, and transverse) [17].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Just as in this study, we have proven that the 3D method allows for more accurate measurement by researchers with different levels of experience. Similar to the measurements of the glenoid defect, different measuring methods of the Hill-Sachs bone loss were described in the literature [31]. Kodali et al positively assessed the reliability of the Hill-Sachs measurement by two-dimensional tomography, measuring the width and depth of the defect in three planes (sagittal, frontal, and transverse) [17].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 13 Such studies reinforce the importance of quantifying bone loss preoperatively to facilitate the surgical decision-making process. 8 , 46 , 79
Figure 1 Modified classification of glenoid rim lesion types associated with anterior shoulder instability: type I, displaced avulsion fracture with attached capsule; type II, medially displaced fragment malunited to glenoid rim; type III, erosion of glenoid rim with <25% deficiency (type IIIA) or >25% deficiency (type IIIB); and type IV, erosion of glenoid rim with >25% deficiency combined with a stretched inferior glenohumeral ligament (ie, capsular laxity). (From Bois AJ, Miniaci A. Surgical management of instability with bone loss.
…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Precise determination of GBL percentage can be achieved mainly in two ways: 3D-CT scan was used by Shin et al , whereas MRI was used by Shaha et al . Although 3D-CT scan can help establish precise measurement of GBL (usually using the either the Glenoid Index49 or Pico Method50), 3D-MRI shows equivalent accuracy51–54 and allows for HSL evaluation (ie, on-track vs off-track) and soft tissue damage without the burden of high radiation exposure 55. When using CT scans, the contralateral comparison method was more reliable than the best-fit circle method for quantifying the amount of GBL 56…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%