Publication: Transcending Patient Morphometry: Acromiohumeral Interval to Glenoid Ratio as a Universal Diagnostic Tool for Massive Rotator Cuff Tears
3
0
Issued Date
2024-08-01
Resource Type
ISSN
2005291X
eISSN
20054408
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85200345880
Pubmed ID
39092296
Journal Title
CiOS Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery
Volume
16
Issue
4
Start Page
578
End Page
585
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
CiOS Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Vol.16 No.4 (2024) , 578-585
Suggested Citation
Sakdapanichkul C., Chantarapitak N., Kasemwong N., Suwanalai J., Wimolsate T., Jirawasinroj T., Sakolsujin T., Kongmalai P. Transcending Patient Morphometry: Acromiohumeral Interval to Glenoid Ratio as a Universal Diagnostic Tool for Massive Rotator Cuff Tears. CiOS Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Vol.16 No.4 (2024) , 578-585. 585. doi:10.4055/cios23381 Retrieved from: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14740/20089
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: Morphological differences among various ethnicities can significantly impact the reliability of acromiohumeral interval (AHI) measurements in diagnosing massive rotator cuff tears. This variation raises questions about the generalizability of AHI studies conducted in Western populations to the Asian population. Consequently, the primary objective of this study was to develop a novel parameter that can enhance the diagnosis of massive rotator cuff tears, irrespective of morphometric disparities between individuals of different ethnic backgrounds. Methods: A 10-year retrospective analysis of shoulder arthroscopic surgery patients was conducted, categorizing them into 3 groups based on intraoperative findings: those without rotator cuff tears, those with non-massive tears, and those with massive tears. AHI-glenoid ratio (AHIGR) was measured by individuals with varying academic backgrounds, and its diagnostic performance was compared to AHI. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and intra-and inter-rater reliability were evaluated. Results: AHIGR exhibited significantly improved sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy as a diagnostic tool for massive rotator cuff tears, compared to AHI. A proposed cut-off point of AHIGR ≤ 0.2 yielded comparable results to AHI < 7 mm. Intra-and inter-rater reliability was excellent among different observers. Conclusions: AHIGR emerges as a promising diagnostic tool for massive rotator cuff tears, offering improved sensitivity and specificity compared to AHI. Its reproducibility among diverse observers underscores its potential clinical utility. While further research with larger and more diverse patient cohorts is necessary, AHIGR offers significant potential as a reference for enhancing the assessment of massive rotator cuff tears.