Di Giacomo Giovanni, Piscitelli Luigi, Pugliese Mattia
Concordia Hospital for Special Surgery Rome, Italy.
Università degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza, Dipartimento di Medicina Sperimentale, Trauma and Orthopaedics, Rome, Italy.
EFORT Open Rev. 2018 Dec 20;3(12):632-640. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180028. eCollection 2018 Dec.
Shoulder stability depends on several factors, either anatomical or functional. Anatomical factors can be further subclassified under soft tissue (shoulder capsule, glenoid rim, glenohumeral ligaments etc) and bony structures (glenoid cavity and humeral head).Normal glenohumeral stability is maintained through factors mostly pertaining to the scapular side: glenoid version, depth and inclination, along with scapular dynamic positioning, can potentially cause decreased stability depending on the direction of said variables in the different planes. No significant factors in normal humeral anatomy seem to play a tangible role in affecting glenohumeral stability.When the glenohumeral joint suffers an episode of acute dislocation, either anterior (more frequent) or posterior, bony lesions often develop on both sides: a compression fracture of the humeral head (or Hill-Sachs lesion) and a bone loss of the glenoid rim. Interaction of such lesions can determine 're-engagement' and recurrence.The concept of 'glenoid track' can help quantify an increased risk of recurrence: when the Hill-Sachs lesion engages the anterior glenoid rim, it is defined as 'off-track'; if it does not, it is an 'on-track' lesion. The position of the Hill-Sachs lesion and the percentage of glenoid bone loss are critical factors in determining the likelihood of recurrent instability and in managing treatment.In terms of posterior glenohumeral instability, the 'gamma angle concept' can help ascertain which lesions are prone to recurrence based on the sum of specific angles and millimetres of posterior glenoid bone loss, in a similar fashion to what happens in anterior shoulder instability. Cite this article: 2018;3:632-640. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180028.
肩部稳定性取决于多个因素,包括解剖学因素或功能因素。解剖学因素可进一步细分为软组织(肩盂关节囊、关节盂边缘、盂肱韧带等)和骨性结构(关节盂腔和肱骨头)。正常的盂肱稳定性主要通过与肩胛骨相关的因素来维持:关节盂的形态、深度和倾斜度,以及肩胛骨的动态定位,根据这些变量在不同平面上的方向,可能会导致稳定性下降。正常肱骨解剖结构中似乎没有显著因素在影响盂肱稳定性方面发挥切实作用。当盂肱关节发生急性脱位时,无论是前脱位(更常见)还是后脱位,两侧通常都会出现骨性损伤:肱骨头压缩性骨折(或希尔-萨克斯损伤)和关节盂边缘骨质流失。这些损伤的相互作用可决定“重新接合”和复发情况。“关节盂轨迹”的概念有助于量化复发风险的增加:当希尔-萨克斯损伤与前关节盂边缘接合时,定义为“脱轨”;如果未接合,则为“在轨”损伤。希尔-萨克斯损伤的位置和关节盂骨质流失的百分比是确定复发性不稳定可能性和管理治疗的关键因素。就盂肱后不稳定而言,“γ角概念”有助于根据特定角度之和以及关节盂后缘骨质流失的毫米数确定哪些损伤容易复发,这与前肩不稳定的情况类似。引用本文:2018;3:632 - 640。DOI:10.1302/2058 - 5241.3.180028。