PURPOSE: To compare radiographically the concavity depth and slope angle of the congruent-arc distal tibial allograft (CA-DTA), harvested from the posterior distal tibia, with the traditional lateral distal tibial allograft (traditional DTA) used for glenoid reconstruction in anterior shoulder instability with bone loss. METHODS: A convenience sample of 32 ankle computed tomography scans from patients ≤35 years old without prior trauma, arthritis, or ankle pathology were retrospectively reviewed. Using standardized coronal (traditional DTA) and sagittal (CA-DTA) reconstructions, 2 independent reviewers measured allograft concavity depth (mm) and slope angle. Paired t tests compared traditional versus CA-DTA measurements. Intraclass correlation coefficients assessed reliability. Significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 25.2 years, with 50% (n = 18) of patients being male. Compared with the traditional DTA, the CA-DTA showed significantly greater glenoid concavity change (2.9 ± 0.65 mm vs -2.3 ± 0.71 mm; P < .001) and slope angle (22.9°± 4.02 vs -9.78°± 4.07; P < .001). All CA-DTAs showed positive concavity and slope, whereas all traditional DTAs produced negative values. CONCLUSIONS: The CA-DTA consistently increased both concavity and slope, whereas the traditional DTA decreased these measures. By leveraging the posterior tibial surface, the CA-DTA more reliably recreates the anatomic "half-pipe" glenoid contour that contributes to bony concavity-compression-based stability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The CA-DTA offers a graft alternative that more reliably restores glenoid concavity in anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss. This has potential implications for improved glenohumeral stability and clinical outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tummala et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: