Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4056
ISSN (Online): 1875-6603

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Short Communication

MRI Findings of Periarticular Lesions with Isolated Greater Tubercle Fractures and Dislocation

Author(s): Yu Sung Yoon and Jang Gyu Cha*

Volume 19, Issue 12, 2023

Published on: 14 February, 2023

Article ID: e230123213026 Pages: 11

DOI: 10.2174/1573405619666230123141247

Price: $65

Abstract

Purpose: To identify MRI findings for injuries to periarticular soft tissue structures that were related to isolated greater tubercle fracture.

Materials and Methods: 16 patients (mean age: 53.8, range 30-71 yrs) were enrolled and diagnosed with isolated greater tubercle (GT) fracture with CT and MRI and underwent shoulder arthroscopy from September 2009 to April 2019. Two musculoskeletal radiologists were blinded to the patient history and arthroscopic surgical findings and reviewed patient’s CT and MRI. Fracture displacement, fracture center, and presence of bony Bankart lesion with Hill sachs lesion were checked on shoulder CT. Soft tissue injuries, including rotator cuff injury, deltoid muscle injury, long head of biceps tendon injury, capsular injury, glenoid injury, and injury location of the subscapularis and infraspinatus were checked on shoulder MRI.

Results: MRI showed supraspinatus injury (56.3%), subscapularis injury (56.3%), deltoid muscle injury (25%), infraspinatus injury (25%), teres minor muscle injury (37.5%), injury of the long head of the biceps tendon (43.8%), inferior glenohumeral ligament tear (87.5%), superior labral anterior-toposterior lesion (25%), Bankart lesion (18.8%), and Hill-Sachs lesion (6.3%). 88.9% of subscapularis injuries and 75% of infraspinatus injuries showed caudal predominance. All of the patients with infraspinatus injuries showed concomitant teres minor muscle injuries. In order of frequency, the fracture centers were anterior (25%), posterior (31.3%), and all (43.8%). For patients with Bankart and Hill- Sachs lesions, the fracture center included the posterior portion in all cases.

Conclusion: MRI and active arthroscopic examinations may be valuable when an isolated GT avulsion fracture is identified on X-ray examination.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Rose SH, Melton LJ III, Morrey BF, Ilstrup DM, Riggs BL. Epidemiologic features of humeral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982; (168): 24-30.
[PMID: 7105548]
[2]
Horak J, Nilsson B. Epidemiology of fracture of the upper end of the humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1975; 112(1): 250-3.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003086-197510000-00032] [PMID: 1192641]
[3]
DeBottis D, Anavian J, Green A. Surgical management of isolated greater tuberosity fractures of the proximal humerus. Orthop Clin North Am 2014; 45(2): 207-18.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2013.12.007] [PMID: 24684914]
[4]
Kim E, Shin HK, Kim CH. Characteristics of an isolated greater tuberosity fracture of the humerus. J Orthop Sci 2005; 10(5): 441-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00776-005-0924-6] [PMID: 16193353]
[5]
Court-Brown CM, Garg A, McQueen MM. The epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Scand 2001; 72(4): 365-71.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/000164701753542023] [PMID: 11580125]
[6]
Kristiansen B, Barfod G, Bredesen J, et al. Epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Scand 1987; 58(1): 75-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453678709146347] [PMID: 3577743]
[7]
White EA, Skalski MR, Patel DB, et al. Isolated greater tuberosity fractures of the proximal humerus: anatomy, injury patterns, multimodality imaging, and approach to management. Emerg Radiol 2018; 25(3): 235-46.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10140-018-1589-8] [PMID: 29453500]
[8]
Rapariz J, Martin-Martin S, Pareja-Bezares A, Ortega-Klein J. Shoulder dislocation in patients older than 60 years of age. Int J Shoulder Surg 2010; 4(4): 88-92.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-6042.79792] [PMID: 21655003]
[9]
Kumar S, Mishra A, Singh H, Clark D, Espag M, Tambe A. Surgical fixation of isolated greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus- systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2021; 23101670
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101670] [PMID: 34790560]
[10]
Cuéllar R, Ruiz-Ibán MA, Cuéllar A. Anatomy and Biomechanics of the Unstable Shoulder. Open Orthop J 2017; 11(1): 919-33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874325001711010919] [PMID: 28979600]
[11]
Woodward TW, Best TM. The painful shoulder: part II. Acute and chronic disorders. Am Fam Physician 2000; 61(11): 3291-300.
[PMID: 10865925]
[12]
Bahrs C, Lingenfelter E, Fischer F, Walters EM, Schnabel M. Mechanism of injury and morphology of the greater tuberosity fracture. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2006; 15(2): 140-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.07.004] [PMID: 16517355]
[13]
Krug DK, Vinson EN, Helms CA. MRI findings associated with luxatio erecta humeri. Skeletal Radiol 2010; 39(1): 27-33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0786-7] [PMID: 19730855]
[14]
Habermeyer P, Magosch P, Pritsch M, Scheibel MT, Lichtenberg S. Anterosuperior impingement of the shoulder as a result of pulley lesions: a prospective arthroscopic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2004; 13(1): 5-12.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2003.09.013] [PMID: 14735066]
[15]
Mao SC, Han XD, Tian YB, et al. In situ EBSD investigations of the asymmetric stress-induced martensitic transformation in TiNi shape memory alloys under bending Mater Sci Eng A Struct Mater 2008; 498: 278-82.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2008.07.072]

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy