Surgeon experience and measurement method influence consistency of glenoid bone loss assessment: a three-dimensional printing, computed tomography, and arthroscopy comparison

To evaluate the accuracy of arthroscopic glenoid bone loss (GBL) assessment and its influencing factors, and to compare the consistency of three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) and 3D printed measurements. 3D printed models were created from the 3D CT images. Experts reviewed arthroscopic images to assess GBL, and a questionnaire was used to correlate assessment accuracy with surgeon age, experience, and annual surgical volume. Separately, ten residents measured each model three times using three methods: the linear method and best-fit circle method on 3D CT, and a manual method with vernier calipers on the physical models. Agreement was calculated using intra-group correlation coefficients (ICC). A statistically significant difference in assessment accuracy was found among surgeons with different annual surgical volumes (p = 0.029). Comparisons between the three measurement methods showed that the best-fit circle method yielded significantly higher values than both the linear and manual methods (p < 0.001). The manual method demonstrated the highest consistency across different times and observers (ICC 0.998 and 0.995, respectively), suggesting it is the most stable technique. The accuracy of arthroscopic GBL judgment varies with the surgeon’s annual surgical volume. While all three measurement methods show excellent agreement, the best-fit circle method provides significantly larger GBL measurements compared to the linear and manual methods. Level II, Cross-Sectional Study.