Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine  
  Home   |   Site Map   |   Contact Us   |   Links   |   News  
Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine  
Advanced Search
Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine
HomeIntroductionLaws of glenohumeral stabilityThe net humeral joint reaction forceThe balance stability angle and the stability ratiThe effective glenoid arcGlenoid versionScapular positioningGlenoid versionLigamentsProperties of ligamentsLigamentous stabilizationFootnotesStability at restAdhesion/cohesionThe glenohumeral suction cupLimited joint volumeSuperior stability: The same plus a unique additio

Print Print Complete Article
View article with questions Hide Questions



Mechanics of Glenohumeral Instability.

Last updated Friday, February 04, 2005

<< Previous Page Next Page >>

Figure 27
Figure 27

Figure 28
Figure 28

Figure 29
Figure 29

Figure 30
Figure 30

Figure 31
Figure 31

Figure 32
Figure 32

Figure 33
Figure 33

Figure 34
Figure 34

Figure 35
Figure 35

Figure 36
Figure 36

Ligaments

Properties of ligaments

Each glenohumeral ligament has clinically important properties which can be characterized by the relationship of the distance between its origin and insertion and its tension. (Frank, 1996) These properties include:

  1. Its resting length (how far can its origin and insertion be separated with minimal force),
  2. Its elastic deformability (how much additional separation of the origin and insertion can be achieved by the application of larger forces without permanently changing the ligament's properties), and
  3. Its plastic deformability (beyond the ligament's elastic limit, how much additional separation between the origin and insertion can be achieved by the application of larger forces which permanently deform the ligament up to the point where the ligament fails).

These properties can be demonstrated as a plot of the ligament's tension versus the distance between the ligament's origin and insertion. The same relationship pertains whether the ligament's origin and insertion are separated by translation of the humeral head or by rotation (see figure 27).

At point "A", the origin and insertion of the ligament are closely approximated. At point "B", the origin and insertion have been separated enough to initiate tension in the ligament. Thus, the resting length of the ligament is shown as A-B. Stefko et al (Stefko et al, 1995) measured the length of the anterior band of the IGHL to be 37 millimeters.

Additional separation of the origin and insertion causes increasing ligament tension. Up to point "C", this separation is elastic (i.e. it does not result in permanent change in the ligament). Further separation of the origin and insertion plastically deform the ligament up to the point "D" where the ligament fails at a tension of "S". The midsubstance strain to failure has been measured from 7 per cent - 11 per cent. (Stefko et al, 1995)

Such graphs are helpful in describing the properties of ligaments:

  • The strength of a ligament is the amount of tension it can take before failure (S).
  • The laxity of a ligament is the amount of translation (see figure 28) or rotation (see figure 29) it allows from a specified starting position when a small load is applied. Ligaments with long A-B distances demonstrate substantial laxity if the starting point for laxity testing is close to "A." Laxity is diminished when the joint is positioned near the extremes of motion; that is when the starting point for the axity measurement is close to "B" (see figure 27).
  • Ligaments with small A-B distances are short or contracted.
  • Translational and rotational laxity are equivalent: they both reflect the ability to separate the attachment points of the ligament.
  • A typical relationship between humeroscapular position and torque (capsular tension X humeral head radius) is shown in figure 30. (Matsen, Lippitt, Sidles et al, 1994) Note that the greatest part of glenohumeral motion and function takes place in the area where there is no tension in the capsule (corresponds to zone A-B in figure 27). Also note that at the limits of motion (corresponds to zone B-C), the torque increases rapidly with changes in position as suggested by the rapid increase in tension shown in figure 27.

These diagrams help distinguish laxity from instability. Normally stable shoulders may demonstrate substantial laxity; consider the very lax but very stable glenohumeral joints of gymnasts. In a most important study, Emery and Mullaji (Emery and Mullaji, 1991) found that of 150 asymptomatic shoulders in school children, 50 per cent demonstrated positive signs of "increased laxity".

Some investigators have measured increased laxity in patients with glenohumeral instability. (Cofield et al, 1993; Jerosch et al, 1991; Jerosch et al, 1991; Jorgensen and Bak, 1995; Marquardt and Jerosch, 1991) However, recent evidence indicates that these differences are not always significant. (Harryman et al, 1992; Lippitt et al, 1994; Matsen, Lippitt, Sidles et al, 1994) Starting in a neutral position, the translational laxities of eight normal living subjects were found to be 8 ± 4, 8 ± 6, and 11 ± 4 mm, in the anterior, posterior and inferior directions, respectively. Interestingly, virtually identical laxities were measured in sixteen patients requiring surgery because of symptomatic recurrent instability (see figure 31), indicating that in these subjects, the measured laxity was not the determinant of glenohumeral stability. (Lippitt, Harris, Harryman et al, 1994; Matsen, Lippitt, Sidles et al, 1994) Sperber and Wredmark (Sperber and Wredmark, 1994) found no differences in joint volume or capsular elasticity between healthy and unstable shoulders. These results indicate the amount of laxity cannot be used to distinguish clinically stable shoulders from those which are unstable.

The stretchiness of a ligament is its elasticity. Ligaments with long B-C distances (see figure 27) are stretchy and have "soft" end points on clinical laxity tests. Ligaments with short B-C distances are stiff and have "firm" endpoints on clinical laxity tests.

Biochemical composition (as in Ehlers Danlos), anatomical variation (anomalies of attachment), use (or disuse), age, disease (e.g. diabetes, frozen shoulder) injury, and surgery (e.g. capsulorrhaphy) can affect the strength, laxity and stretchiness of glenohumeral ligaments.

Ligamentous stabilization

The glenohumeral ligaments exert two stabilizing effects:

  1. They serve as check reins, restricting the range of joint positions to those which can be stabilized by muscle balance. This is important because at extreme glenohumeral positions, the net humeral joint reaction force becomes increasingly difficult to balance within the glenoid (see figure 32). For example, excessive abduction, extension and external rotation of the shoulder may allow the net humeral joint reaction force to exceed the anterior-inferior balance stability angle. Similarly, excessive posterior capsular laxity allows the net humeral joint reaction force to achieve large angles with the glenoid center line, angles which may exceed the posterior balance stabilityangle. Furthermore, at the extremes of motion, the muscles tend to be near their maximal extension, a position in which their force-generating capacity is diminished. (Lieber, 1992)

    The patient can modify the check rein function by altering the position of the scapula (see figure 33). Surgeons can modify the check rein function: capsular tightening moves points B, C and D closer to point A, reducing laxity (see figure 27). The check rein function is inoperant when the ligament is not under tension (i.e. when the humeroscapular position is within the tension free zone (A-B in figure 27, see also figure 30).
  2. When torque is applied to the humerus so that a ligament come under tension, this ligament applies a force to the proximal humerus. Because of the attachments of the ligament this countervailing force both compresses the humeral head into the glenoid fossa and also resists displacement in the direction of the tight ligament (see figure 34).

    An analysis of ligament function (footnote 1) demonstrates the limits of the stability provided by ligaments acting alone. For example, it suggests that if the torque resulting from a force of a modest 10 pounds applied to the arm at a distance of 40 inches from the center of a humeral head with a one inch radius was resisted only by the tension in the inferior glenohumeral ligament (IGHL), the IGHL would need to be able to withstand a tension of 400 lbs (see figure 34).

If tension in the ligament exceeds the strength of the ligament (S), the ligament breaks. A few investigations have attempted to measure the strength of the glenohumeral capsular ligaments. Kaltsas (Kaltsas, 1983) has studied some of the material properties of the shoulder capsule and found it to be more elastic and stronger than the capsule of the elbow. He noted that the entire glenohumeral capsule ruptured at 2000 Newtons of distraction (450 lbs). Stefko et al (Stefko et al, 1995) found the average load to failure of the entire IGHL to be 713 N or 160 lbs. Bigliani et al (Bigliani et al, 1992) noted in sixteen cadaver shoulders that the IGHL could be divided into three anatomical regions: a superior band, an anterior axillary pouch, and a posterior axillary pouch, of which the thickest was the superior band (2.8 mm). With relatively low strain rates, the stress at failure was found to be nearly identical for the three regions of the ligament, averaging 5.5 MPa, which is 5.5 Newtons (1.2 lbs) per square millimeter. Thus to function as the primary stabilizer for a load of 300 lbs as in the example above, the IGHL's of these cadavers would need to be 250 square millimeters in cross section. Thus no experimental measurements have demonstrated that the IGHL alone is sufficiently strong to balance the torque resulting from a load of 10 pounds applied to the arm at a distance of 30 inches from the center of a humeral head.

Excessive ligament tension can produce obligate translation of the humeral head. Harryman et al (Harryman, Sidles, Clark et al, 1990) demonstrated that certain passive motions of the glenohumeral joint forced translation of the humeral head away from the center of the joint. This obligate translation occurs when the displacing force generated by ligament tension (quantity "P" in figure 34), overwhelms the concavity compression stability mechanism (see figure 36).

In Harryman's study anterior humeral translation occurred at the extremes of flexion and cross body adduction while posterior humeral translation occurred at the extremes of extension and external rotation. Operative tightening of the posterior portion of the capsule increased the anterior translation on flexion and cross-body adduction and caused it to occur earlier in the arc of motion compared with the intact joint. Operative tightening of the posterior part of the capsule also resulted in significant superior translation with flexion of the glenohumeral joint. These data indicate that glenohumeral translation may occur in sports when the joint is forced to the extremes of its motion, such as at the transition between late cocking and early acceleration. Such obligate translations may account for the posterior labral tears and calcifications seen at the posterior glenoid in throwers. In addition, these results point to the hazard of overtightening the glenohumeral capsule, which may result in a form of secondary osteoarthritis known as capsulorrhaphy arthropathy. Hawkins and Angelo (Hawkins and Angelo, 1990b) pointed to these complications of obligate translation in overtightened capsular repairs.


Footnotes

Footnote 1: The magnitude of the countervailing force is determined by the applied torque and limited by the strength of the ligament. The direction of this force is tangent to the humeral head at the point of its contact with the glenoid rim.

The countervailing force mechanism operates in the arc B-C where the ligament is elastically deformed. If the ligament behaves perfectly elastically, the tension in the ligament provides a stabilizing force (T) where:

T = (Angular position - angle B) diameter of humeral head Pi/360° * spring constant of the ligament.

This relationship predicts that until angle B is reached, no force is generated by the ligament, the larger the angle past position B, the more force is generated (up to the elastic limit), stiffer ligaments generate more force for a given angular displacement, and larger humeral heads generate more force for each degree of angular displacement.

Ligament tension results from applied torque. When an externally applied force B acts at a distance E from the center of the humeral head it creates a torque (Q) which is the product of B and E (see figure 9). If this torque is resisted by a ligament closely applied to the humeral head (i.e. the effective moment arm equals the head radius(R)), the tension in the ligament (T) is

T = Q/ R = B * E/R


<< Previous Page Next Page >>


How useful was this page or article?

This article is rated ** out of 5 stars (312 ratings).

Not useful at all Not very useful Useful Very useful Extremely useful
* ** *** **** *****
Team Physicians to the UW Huskies Varsity Athletes...And You!
Copyrights and disclaimer  | Privacy statement | Editorial policy
Problems or questions? Contact the webmaster.
Copyright © 2008 University of Washington - Seattle, WA. All rights reserved.