PURPOSE: To evaluate whether characteristics such as age, height, weight, sex, or body mass index affected the distal tibial dimensions and radius of curvature (ROC) of a potential donor for anterior glenoid augmentation. METHODS: A retrospective review of magnetic resonance imaging of ankles without bony trauma was performed, and the anteroposterior (AP) and medial-lateral (ML) distances and ROC of the tibial plafond articular surface were measured. Demographic characteristics, including age, sex, height, weight, and body mass index, were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 141 imaging studies were included (73 men and 68 women; average age, 38.2 ± 12.65 years). All potential specimens accommodated harvest of a 10 × 22-mm distal tibial allograft bone block. Men had greater ML (42.74 cm [95% confidence interval (CI), 42.09-43.39 cm] vs 38.01 cm [95% CI, 37.30-38.72 cm]; P < .001) and AP (38.16 cm [95% CI, 37.47-38.85 cm] vs 34.57 cm [95% CI, 33.97-35.17 cm]; P < .001) dimensions. Significant moderately positive correlations were found for AP dimensions with height (r = 0.584, P < .001) and weight (r = 0.383, P < .001) and for ML dimensions with height (r = 0.711, P < .001) and weight (r = 0.467, P < .001). ROC was positively correlated with height (r = 0.509, P < .001) and weight (r = 0.294, P < .001). Patient age was not related to either the AP or ML distal tibial dimensions or ROC. CONCLUSIONS: After magnetic resonance imaging analysis, all potential donors permitted harvest of a standard-sized distal tibial allograft irrespective of sex or common anthropometric measures, and 85.8% showed distal tibial morphology acceptable for glenoid augmentation. AP and ML graft dimensions and ROC correlated significantly with height and weight. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, diagnostic study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parada et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: