Scapular Spine Dimensions and Suitability as a Glenoid Bone Graft Donor Site

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (10) ◽  
pp. 2469-2477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Rohman ◽  
Kyle Gronbeck ◽  
Marc Tompkins ◽  
Marcus Mittelsteadt ◽  
James A. Kirkham ◽  
...  

Background: Current structural bone graft options used for glenoid augmentation in glenohumeral instability have known drawbacks. The scapular spine may be a possible alternative graft choice, but its dimensions and anatomy are not fully reported. Hypothesis: The scapular spine’s harvestable graft dimensions will be similar to harvestable dimensions of the coracoid and iliac crest. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: The scapular spine, coracoid, and iliac crest dimensions were recorded and compared bilaterally in 50 patients with 3-dimensional computed tomography imaging. The portion of the scapular spine with the largest harvestable dimensions was quantified and its location defined. Measurements were independently taken by 2 investigators and averaged for the final result. Results: The scapular spine has 81.5 mm of harvestable length and a “flare” located approximately 49.6 mm lateral to the medial scapular border, where the widest harvestable cross section is located (mean harvestable dimensions: 10.9-mm height, 11.5-mm width). Mean coracoid dimensions were 24-mm length, 14.2-mm height, and 10.6-mm width. Mean iliac crest width was 14.7 mm. In sum, 96% of scapular spines, 85% of coracoids, and 100% of iliac crests exceeded minimum dimensions of 8 mm × 8 mm × 20 mm. The coronal radius of curvature of the glenoid was significantly different from the corresponding plane of all measured structures. Conclusion/Clinical Relevance: The scapular spine has dimensions similar to the coracoid and iliac crest in the majority of patients and is therefore appropriate for further investigation as a potential graft choice in glenohumeral instability. A harvest location 49.6 mm lateral to the medial scapular border will provide the largest cross-sectional graft while avoiding the acromial base.

Spine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (8) ◽  
pp. 527-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Mechteld Lehr ◽  
F. Cumhur Oner ◽  
Eric A. Hoebink ◽  
Diederik H.R. Kempen ◽  
Job L.C. van Susante ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 347-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Constantinides ◽  
P. Chhabra ◽  
P. J. Turner ◽  
B. Richard

Objective: To compare the postoperative donor site morbidity and alveolar bone graft results following two different techniques for iliac crest bone graft harvest: a closed (Shepard's osteotome) and an open (trapdoor flap) technique. Design: A retrospective review of two cohorts of alveolar bone grafts performed from 1998 to 2004 in Birmingham Children's Hospital by two surgeons using different harvest techniques. Medical and nursing anesthetic notes and medication charts were reviewed. Alveolar bone graft results were assessed using preoperative and postoperative radiographic studies. Patients: A total of 137 patients underwent an operation. Of these, 109 patients were compatible with the inclusion criteria (data available, first operation, no multiple comorbidities). Sixty-four patients had iliac bone harvested using the open trapdoor technique, while 45 had the same procedure using the closed osteotomy technique. Results: Maximum bone graft volumes harvested were similar with both techniques. The mean length of hospital stay was 50.9 hours for the osteotome and 75.5 hours for the open technique group (p < .0001). The postoperative analgesia requirement was higher and the postoperative mobilization was delayed and more difficult for the open technique patients (p < .0005). Kindelan scores performed by two independent orthodontists were similar for both techniques. Conclusion: The findings demonstrate that harvesting bone from the iliac crest using an osteotome technique reduces time in hospital, analgesia requirements, and postoperative donor site morbidity with no detrimental outcome.


2004 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dean Chou ◽  
Phillip B. Storm ◽  
James N. Campbell

Object. Autologous bone graft harvesting from the iliac crest remains the gold standard for fusion surgery. One disadvantage of autologous bone harvesting is the patient's enduring postoperative pain at the donor site. Nerve injury is one of the postulated mechanisms that may account for this pain. The object of this study was to determine whether the lateral cutaneous branch of the subcostal nerve is vulnerable to injury in the process of obtaining grafts from the anterior iliac crest. Methods. Anatomical dissections were performed on 10 cadaveric specimens to ascertain the size of the T-12 subcostal nerve and its position in relation to the iliac crest. Conclusions. The lateral cutaneous branch of the subcostal nerve may lie as close as 6 cm from the anterior superior iliac spine. This nerve is very vulnerable to injury when harvesting bone from the anterior iliac crest. Knowledge of the anatomy may decrease the risk of injury to this nerve.


Author(s):  
Nazmuddin Jetaji ◽  
Zubair Sorathia

<p>The Iliac crest is considered gold standard among all types of bone graft available-natural or synthetic. There are many reported complications of bone graft harvestation but one of the rarely reported ones is hernia from the donor site. Not more than 15-20 cases have been reported in the last 10 years. We hereby report a case of hernia from the iliac crest used to harvest bone graft for a case of Femur shaft non-union and also review the relevant literature. The risk factors for this particular complication to occur are morbid obesity, female sex and old age. Bone graft substitutes should therefore be strongly considered in these patients. When harvested, the periosteum and soft tissue should be meticulously closed and repaired. CT scan is a fairly conclusive investigation for diagnosis.</p>


1999 ◽  
Vol 69 (10) ◽  
pp. 726-728 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola M. Hill ◽  
J. Geoffrey Horne ◽  
Peter A. Devane

Spine ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 17 (12) ◽  
pp. 1474-1480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey C. Fernyhough ◽  
Jeffrey J. Schimandle ◽  
Margaret C. Weigel ◽  
Charles C. Edwards ◽  
Alan M. Levine

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document