2025 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster
The Coraco-Gleno-Scapular Line: A Simple Novel Tool For Assessing Glenoid Bone Defects
Subramanian K.N, MBBS,MS,MRCSEd,M.ChOrth,FRCS Orth,CCTOrth(UK), Madurai, Tamil Nadu INDIA
Saseendar Shanmugasundaram, MBBS, MS, DNB, MNAMS, Dip SICOT, Pondicherry, Puducherry INDIA
Vale Hospital , Madurai, Tamil Nadu, INDIA
FDA Status Not Applicable
Summary
The Coraco-Gleno-Scapular line is a reliable and straightforward tool for assessing glenoid bone loss, offering valuable guidance in managing shoulder instability.
ePosters will be available shortly before Congress
Abstract
Background
Treatment decisions in cases of shoulder instability often require surgical measures, with the glenoid bone loss being the critical factor.Current methods for assessing bone loss are complex and do not provide clear guidelines for surgical planning.This study introduces the Coraco-Gleno-Scapular (CGS) line as a novel tool for evaluating significant glenoid bone defects. The aim is to define the CGS line and assess its utility in guiding clinical decisions regarding bone loss, proposing that defects beyond this line indicate significant bony involvement necessitating surgical intervention.
Methods
The study analyzed 50 normal right shoulders from individuals aged 18-40 years. Using the 3D enface views of glenoid,The CGS line was defined from the base of the coracoid process across the anterior glenoid to the antero-inferior pole. The Best Fit Circle Area Method and Glenoid Index Linear Method were used to calculate the percentage of bone defect.
Results
The Best Fit Circle Area Method revealed a mean bone defect of 21%, while the Glenoid Index Linear Method indicated a mean defect of 24%. Of 50 patients, 14 had defects <20% using the Best Fit Circle Method, with no cases below 17.5%, while 36 patients had defects >20%.
Conclusion
The Coraco-Gleno-Scapular line is a reliable and straightforward tool for assessing glenoid bone loss, offering valuable guidance in managing shoulder instability. Its ease of use supports its potential as a standard tool in clinical practice.Further validation is recommended to confirm its utility and establish it as a routine assessment tool.