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 Concept Videos

Bones of the Upper Limb: Humerus01:19

Bones of the Upper Limb: Humerus

6.6K
The upper limb consists of the arm, forearm, wrist, and hand bones. The humerus is the single bone of the upper arm region. Proximally, it has a large, spherical, smooth head that articulates with the glenoid cavity of the scapula to form the glenohumeral or shoulder joint. The margin of the head is the anatomical neck, a residual epiphyseal plate. Laterally it extends to form bony projections called the greater tubercle and the lesser tubercle. Next to the tubercles is the surgical neck, a...
6.6K
Bones of the Upper Limb: Radius01:09

Bones of the Upper Limb: Radius

4.3K
The radius is longer of the two bones that make up the human antebrachium or forearm. At the proximal end, the radius articulates with the capitulum of the humerus and the radial notch of the ulna to form the elbow joint. At the distal end, the radius articulates with the ulna via the ulnar notch, forming the distal radioulnar joint. Distally, the radius also attaches to the carpal wrist bones (scaphoid and lunate) to form the radiocarpal joint.
The radius has a nail-shaped head, and a...
4.3K
Bones of the Upper Limb: Ulna01:15

Bones of the Upper Limb: Ulna

4.0K
The ulna and radius are parallel bones of the antebrachium or the forearm. The ulna lies medially and consists of a bony tip called the olecranon process at its proximal end. This hook-like projection articulates with the olecranon fossa of the humerus and forms the "hinged" ulnohumeral part of the elbow joint. This joint facilitates forearm extension and flexion while preventing its hyperextension. Similarly, the coronoid process, another bony projection on the proximal/anterior side...
4.0K
Overview of the Axial Skeleton01:09

Overview of the Axial Skeleton

8.7K
The skeleton is subdivided into two major divisions—the axial skeleton and the appendicular skeleton. The axial skeleton forms the vertical, central axis of the body. It includes all of the bones of the head, neck, chest, and back. It protects the brain, spinal cord, heart, and lungs. It also serves as the attachment site for muscles that move the head, neck, and back and for muscles that act across the shoulder and hip joints to move their corresponding limbs.
The axial skeleton of the...
8.7K
The Hyoid Bone01:12

The Hyoid Bone

4.4K
The hyoid bone is a small U-shaped bone located in the upper neck at the level of the inferior mandible, with its tips pointing posteriorly. It does not directly articulate with any other bone in the body. The hyoid acts as the attachment site for the tongue, the larynx, and the pharynx. It is held in position by a series of small muscles attached from above or below. These muscles help to move the hyoid up/down or forward/back in coordination with movements of the tongue, larynx, and pharynx...
4.4K
Bone Markings01:26

Bone Markings

7.7K
Bones have various surface features that help form joints and attach to other soft tissues. Depending on the function, bone markings are categorized into articulating projections, processes for attachment, depressions, and openings.
Articulating Projections
Articulating projections are found where two bones meet to form a joint. These structures are usually found at the ends of bones. The largest articulation is a rounded projection called the head, supported by a narrow neck at the ends of...
7.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

The impact of a medial displacement calcaneal osteotomy and posterior tibial tendon repair on multi-segment foot kinematics and kinetics in patients suffering from posterior tibial tendon dysfunction.

Journal of biomechanics·2026
Same author

Highly variable proximal tibia anatomy causes controversies for proper tibial component rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty: A current concept review.

Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA·2026
Same author

A stiffness-dependent method to estimate spine kinematics and loading reveals the impact of nonlinear mechanics during lifting tasks.

European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society·2026
Same author

Description and validation of a portable system for biomechanical ex vivo knee kinematics and laxity assessment in simulated intra-operative scenarios.

Journal of experimental orthopaedics·2026
Same author

Changes in kinematic behavior and collateral ligament strain after medially stabilized TKA using a novel intraoperative navigation platform: a cadaveric study.

Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery·2026
Same author

Editorial: Assessment of biomechanical mechanism in the context of sports injury prevention or rehabilitation.

Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology·2026
Same journal

LETTER TO THE EDITOR REGARDING: Torrens C, González-García C, Díez-Izquierdo M, Santana F. Three-week immobilization vs. no immobilization in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2025 Nov;34(11):2543-2549. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2025.02.015.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Factors Associated With Poor Outcomes For Female Patients Undergoing Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Is There a Long-Term Benefit to use Patient-Specific Guides for Glenoid Implant Positioning in aTSA? A comparative study at minimum 10 years.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

''The Global Glenoid Component Inclination: why scapulothoracic orientation should be considered when defining glenoid component inclination in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty''.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Morphological analysis of the scapula in healthy and osteoarthritic subjects.

Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery·2026
Same journal

Impact of Severity of Allergy to Beta-lactam Antibiotics on the Perioperative Use of Cephalosporins and Revision Rates following Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

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

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 25, 2025

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
10:10

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Published on: July 5, 2011

43.7K

How much bone support does an anatomic glenoid component need?

Filip Verhaegen1, Emma Campopiano2, Philippe Debeer1

  • 1Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Division of Orthopaedics, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
|March 22, 2020
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Maximizing backside bone support is crucial for anatomic glenoid components to reduce fixation and bone failure risks. Metal-backed components show increased failure with less bone support compared to polyethylene.

Keywords:
Finite element modelbackside bone supportglenoid componentlooseningmetal backed vs. all polyethylene

More Related Videos

Biomechanical Testing of Murine Tendons
10:09

Biomechanical Testing of Murine Tendons

Published on: October 15, 2019

14.0K
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

3.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Dec 25, 2025

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
10:10

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Published on: July 5, 2011

43.7K
Biomechanical Testing of Murine Tendons
10:09

Biomechanical Testing of Murine Tendons

Published on: October 15, 2019

14.0K
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

3.6K

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic surgery
  • Biomechanical engineering
  • Materials science in implants

Background:

  • Glenoid component loosening is a primary cause of failure in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.
  • Understanding the biomechanical impact of backside bone support is vital for improving implant longevity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate how varying degrees of backside bone support affect the failure risk of glenoid components.
  • To compare the failure modes between cemented all-polyethylene (PE) and metal-backed (MB) glenoid components under different bone support conditions.

Main Methods:

  • Development of a finite element model simulating virtual surgery on glenoid components with reduced bone support.
  • Analysis of both bone failure and fixation failure using critical cement volume (CCV) for PE and micromotion-threshold percentage ratio (MTPR) for MB components.
  • Comparative analysis of failure percentages between PE and MB components across a spectrum of bone support.

Main Results:

  • The reference PE model exhibited 17% bone failure and 34% fixation failure (CCV).
  • The MB component under eccentric loading showed lower failure rates: 6% bone failure and 3% fixation failure (MTPR).
  • Decreasing bone support globally increased failure; fixation failure increased more significantly for MB components (136% vs. 128% relative increase).

Conclusions:

  • Reduced backside bone support elevates the risk of fixation and bone failure for anatomic glenoid components.
  • Polyethylene components tolerate decreased support down to 95% bone support with limited adverse effects.
  • Metal-backed components demonstrate increased micromotion and bone failure risk starting at 97% bone support, emphasizing the need for maximal bone support during implantation.