Comparison Of Different Measurement Methods For Quantifying The Proportion Of Glenoid Bone Defect Of Shoulder Joint

Objective:In this study,we compared the ratio of the area of the shoulder and tibia defect by comparing different measurement methods,and obtained a better measurement method to guide the treatment of scapular defect in the forward instability of the shoulder joint.Methods:The fitting circle method is to make the lower edge of the normal joint sacrum a circle with the curvature of the joint and the edge of the joint,and then directly superimpose the circle on the affected side,so that the contour of the joint defect can be directly drawn,and the area and proportion can be calculated.The Mimics 3D reconstruction method is a DICOM file obtained by scanning the CT scan of the shoulder joint,and the 3D reconstruction of the shoulder joint model is performed.The surface area data and the ratio are directly extracted by selecting the area of the joint surface;the 3D printing method is built by the 3D reconstruction software.The shoulder joint squat model is printed,the 1:1 model is printed in the input 3D printing device,and the area and proportion are calculated by the rubbing method;the arthroscopic measurement method is to determine the bare point of the glenoid under arthroscopy,and then use the probe respectively.The degree of joint defect was measured by measuring the distance from the bare point to the anterior and posterior edge of the glenoid.Results:1.Fitting the circle method to measure the average diameter of the upper and lower sides of the healthy side:(37.17± 1.73)mm,the mean value of the anteroposterior diameter is(27.85±2.09)mm,and the mean value of the upper and lower diameters of the affected side:(34.96±2.18)mm.The value is(23.06±1.99)mm;Mimics three-dimensional reconstruction method measures theaverage of the upper and lower diameters of the healthy side:(35.22±2.89)mm,the mean value of the anteroposterior diameter is(26.31±2.55)mm,and themean value of the upper and lower diameters of the affected side:(32.61± 1.78)mm,the average value of the anteroposterior diameter is(19.92±1.43)mm;the mean value of the upper and lower diameter of the healthy side of the 3Dprinting method:(35.37±1.75)mm,the mean value of the anteroposterior diameter is(26.95±1.89)mm,and the mean diameter of the affected side Value:(32.78±2.09)mm,the average value of the anteroposterior diameter is(20.58± 1.63)mm,the average value of the upper and lower diameters under the microscopeis(32.98±2.23)mm,and the average value of the anteroposterior diameter is(20.03±1.65)mm.The upper and lower diameters of the shoulder blade and the anteroposterior diameter measured by the above four methods were statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no statistical difference between the other three measurement methods.The significance of the study(P<0.05),but the mimics three-dimensional reconstruction method is closer to the measured value under the microscope.2.The mean value of the bone defect was measured by the fitted circle method:18.53±1.98.The mean value of the bone defect was measured by Mimics three-dimensional reconstruction method:25.86±2.16;the average value of the bone defect was measured by 3D printing method:24.08±2.76;the proportion of bone defect was measured under the microscope.Average:21.96 ± 1.98.The mean proportion of bone defects measured by the above four methods,the difference between the fitted circle method and other groups was statistically significant(P<0.05),and the difference between the other groups was not statistically significant(P>0.05).Conclusion:According to our proposed method,the measurement of the bone defect of the shoulder joint by Mimics three-dimensional reconstruction method and 3D printing method is accurate and its repeatability is high.The Mimics three-dimensional reconstruction method is more convenient and efficient,and the shoulder is accurately evaluated for clinical work.The humeral defect is of great significance.