Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 2, 2026

Measuring 3D In-vivo Shoulder Kinematics using Biplanar Videoradiography
06:09

Measuring 3D In-vivo Shoulder Kinematics using Biplanar Videoradiography

Published on: March 12, 2021

3.2K

A glenoid reaming study: how accurate are current reaming techniques?

Anne Karelse1, Steven Leuridan2, Alexander Van Tongel1

  • 1Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.

Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
|March 4, 2014
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Incidence of radiographic humeral bone remodeling after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty and its impact on clinical outcome.

Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty·2026
Same author

The clinical relevance of single-photon emission CT/CT after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

The bone & joint journal·2026
Same author

Unlocking the mechanics of valgus-impacted proximal humeral fractures: A 3D analysis of rotational deformities and tuberosity displacement.

Shoulder & elbow·2025
Same author

Anatomical explanation of the screw motion of the elbow joint.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2025
Same author

Management of a first time anterior shoulder dislocation: the decision-making process of a surgeon.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2025
Same author

Biplanar radiography for in-vivo assessment of six degrees of freedom glenohumeral kinematics in shoulder osteoarthritis: an intra- and inter-observer reliability study.

Journal of biomechanics·2025
Same journal

Corrigendum to 'Navigated augmented reality through a head-mounted display leads to low deviation between planned, intra- and postoperative parameters during glenoid component placement of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a proof-of-concept case series'.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Evaluation of Radiograph Parameters Used to Assess Prosthetic Overlengthening in Radial Head Arthroplasty.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Assistant Experience Enhances the Learning Curve in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Comparative CUSUM Analysis of Three Surgeons.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Prediction of Acromial and Scapular Spine Fractures After Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty using Machine Learning: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Simultaneous versus Staged Bilateral Shoulder Replacement: A Matched Cohort Study.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

The Humeral Bone Loss (HUMBL) Classification Identifies Patterns of Humeral Bone Loss Associated with Various Revision, Instability, and Humeral Loosening Rates in Primary and Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
See all related articles

Glenoid reaming accuracy is most affected by bone erosion, not surgeon experience. Biconcave glenoids are harder to ream accurately, suggesting a need for improved surgical guidance.

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic surgery
  • Shoulder arthroplasty
  • Anatomical reconstruction

Background:

  • Accurate glenoid reaming is crucial for shoulder arthroplasty success.
  • Degenerative glenoid erosion presents challenges in achieving precise reaming.
  • Factors influencing reaming quality require further investigation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the impact of different reamer types on glenoid surface quality.
  • To assess the influence of surgeon experience on reaming accuracy.
  • To determine the effect of glenoid erosion patterns on reaming outcomes.

Main Methods:

  • Three surgeons performed reaming on uniconcave and biconcave glenoids using various reamer types.
  • Reaming reproducibility and surface congruity were measured.
Keywords:
Glenoiderosionprosthesisreamingshoulderversion

More Related Videos

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
10:10

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Published on: July 5, 2011

43.4K
Rat Model of Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder
04:46

Rat Model of Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder

Published on: September 28, 2018

7.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 2, 2026

Measuring 3D In-vivo Shoulder Kinematics using Biplanar Videoradiography
06:09

Measuring 3D In-vivo Shoulder Kinematics using Biplanar Videoradiography

Published on: March 12, 2021

3.2K
Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
10:10

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Published on: July 5, 2011

43.4K
Rat Model of Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder
04:46

Rat Model of Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder

Published on: September 28, 2018

7.1K
  • The effects of reamer design and glenoid morphology were analyzed.

    • Main Results:

    • Flat reamers produced better surface congruity than convex reamers.
    • Biconcave glenoid reaming showed significant variability between surgeons.
    • Surgeon experience did not impact reaming congruity; reamer guidance systems had no significant effect.

    Conclusions:

    • Glenoid reaming accuracy is primarily influenced by erosion and deformity.
    • Reaming biconcave glenoids is more challenging and less reproducible.
    • Guidance systems are needed for accurate reaming of deformed biconcave glenoids.