Posterior shoulder stability depends on acromial anatomy: a cadaveric, biomechanical study.

BACKGROUND

Failure rates in the management of recurrent posterior shoulder instability remain a concern. Cadaveric studies have established that posterior capsulolabral tears, glenoid retroversion, and posterior glenoid bone loss result in increased posterior humeral head translation in the setting of a posteriorly directed force. A high and flat acromion has recently been associated with posterior instability. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate a potential stabilizing effect of the acromion against posterior humeral head displacement.

METHODS

Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders were biomechanically tested in a shoulder simulator in the load-and-shift and Jerk test positions. Prior to testing, computed tomography scans were performed to measure native glenoid width, glenoid retroversion, posterior acromial coverage (PAC), sagittal acromial tilt (SAT), and posterior acromial height (PAH). Each specimen underwent 4 testing conditions using preplanned and 3D printed cutting and reduction guides: (1) Intact joint, native acromion; (2) Intact joint, severe acromial malalignment (SAT 69°, PAC 47°, PAH 26 mm); (3) Intact joint, moderate acromial malalignment (SAT 59°, PAC 57°, PAH 20 mm); (4) Intact joint, corrected acromial alignment (SAT 48°, PAC 70°, PAH 11 mm). The degree of acromial malalignment and acromial reorientation was chosen based on a previous study that defined acromial anatomy in patients with posterior instability. The humeral head was translated posteriorly until reaching either (1) a peak force of 150N or (2) a maximum posterior displacement of 50% of the glenoid width. Forces (N), displacement (mm), and acromiohumeral contact pressures (kPA) were simultaneously recorded.

RESULTS

The force needed to displace the humeral head by 50% of the glenoid width decreased between 23% and 60% in moderate to severe acromial malalignment (high and flat acromion) and increased up to 122% following surgical correction of acromial alignment (low and steep acromion) when compared to the native condition. Correction of acromial alignment significantly increased stability compared to all other scenarios after ≥5% of displacement (P < .05 for all comparisons). Furthermore, it increased acromiohumeral contact pressures compared with severe malalignment in 30° flexion and with moderate and severe acromial malalignment in 60° flexion (P < .05 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

The acromion acts as a mechanical buttress to posterior humeral head displacement. Surgical correction of acromial malalignment cannot only effectively restore but increase glenohumeral joint stability. Future studies are needed to define the quantitative relevance of the different factors contributing to posterior shoulder instability and assist in defining the optimal amount of correction needed in an individual situation.