Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2025
Measuring 3D In-vivo Shoulder Kinematics using Biplanar Videoradiography
Published on: March 12, 2021
Effect of intraarticular pressure on glenohumeral kinematics during a simulated abduction motion: a cadaveric study
Patrick M Williamson1,2, Kaveh Momenzadeh1, Philip Hanna1
1Musculoskeletal Translational Innovation Initiative, Carl J. Shapiro Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, RN115, USA.
Background:
The current understanding of glenohumeral joint stability is defined by active restrictions and passive stabilizers including naturally-occurring negative intraarticular pressure. Cadaveric specimens have been used to evaluate the role of intraarticular pressure on joint stability, although, while the shoulder's negative intraarticular pressure is universally acknowledged, it has been inconsistently accounted for.
Hypothesis:
During continuous, passive humeral abduction, releasing the native intraarticular pressure increases joint translation, and restoring this pressure decreases joint translations.
Study Design:
Descriptive Laboratory Study.
Methods:
A validated shoulder testing system was used to passively abduct the humerus in the scapular plane and measure joint translations for seven (n = 7) cadaveric specimens. The pressure within the glenohumeral joint was measured via a 25-gauge needle during passive abduction of the arm, which was released and subsequently restored. During motion, the rotator cuff muscles were loaded using stepper motors in a force feedback loop and electromagnetic sensors were used to continuously measure the position of the humerus and scapula. Joint translation was defined according to the instant center of rotation of the glenohumeral head according to the recommendations by the International Society of Biomechanics.
Results:
Area under the translation versus abduction angle curve suggests that releasing the pressure within the capsule results in significantly less posterior translation of the glenohumeral head as compared to intact (85-90˚, p < 0.05). Posterior and superior translations were reduced after 70˚ of abduction when the pressure within the joint was restored.
Conclusion:
With our testing system employing a smooth continuous passive motion, we were able to show that releasing intraarticular pressure does not have a major effect on the path of humeral head motion during glenohumeral abduction. However, both violating the capsule and restoring intraarticular pressure after releasing alter glenohumeral translations. Future studies should study the effect of simultaneous external rotation and abduction on the relationship between joint motion and IAP, especially in higher degrees of abduction.
Clinical Relevance:
Thoroughly simulating the glenohumeral joint environment in the cadaveric setting may strengthen the conclusions that can be translated from this setting to the clinic.
