Beside symptoms and clinical signs radiological findings are crucial in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). We investigate which quantitative radiological signs are described in the literature and which radilogical criteria are used to establish inclusion criteria in clincical studies evaluating different treatments in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. A literature search was performed in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane library to identify papers reporting on radiological criteria to describe LSS and systematic reviews investigating the effects of different treatment modalities. 25 studies reporting on radiological signs of LSS and four systematic reviews related to the evaluation of different treatments were found. Ten different parameters were identified to quantify lumbar spinal stenosis. Most often reported measures for central stenosis were antero-posterior diameter (< 10 mm) and cross-sectional area (< 70 mm²) of spinal canal. For lateral stenosis height and depth of the lateral recess, and for foraminal stenosis the foraminal diameter were typically used. Only four of 63 primary studies included in the systematic reviews reported on quantitative measures for defining inclusion criteria of patients in prognostic studies. There is a need for consensus on well-defined, unambiguous radiological criteria to define lumbar spinal stenosis in order to improve diagnostic accuracy and to formulate reliable inclusion criteria for clinical studies.

Background: Accurate glenoid positioning in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is important to achieve satisfying functional outcome and prosthesis longevity. Optimal component placement can be challenging, especially in severe glenoid deformities. The use of patient-specific instruments (PSI) and 3D computer-assisted optical tracking navigation (NAV) are already established methods to improve surgical precision. Augmented reality technology (AR) promises similar results at low cost and ease of use. With AR, the planned component placement can be superimposed to the surgical situs and shown directly in the operating field using a head mounted display. We introduce a new navigation technique using AR via head mounted display for surgical navigation in this feasibility study, aiming to improve and enhance the surgical planning. Methods: 3D surface models of ten human scapulae were printed from computed tomography (CT) data of cadaver scapulae. Guidewire positioning of the central back of the glenoid baseplate was planned with a dedicated computer software. A hologram of the planned guidewire with dynamic navigation was then projected onto the 3D-created models of the cadaver shoulders. The registration of the plan to the anatomy was realized by digitizing the glenoid surface and the base of the coracoid with optical tracking using a fiducial marker. After navigated placement of the central guidewires, another CT imaging was recorded, and the 3D model was superimposed with the preoperative planning to analyze the deviation from the planned and executed central guides trajectory and entry point. Results: The mean deviation of the ten placed guidewires from the planned trajectory was 2.7° ± 1.3° (95% CI 1.9°; 3.6°). The mean deviation to the planned entry point of the ten placed guidewires measured 2.3 mm ± 1.1 mm (95% CI 1.5 mm; 3.1 mm). Conclusion: AR may be a promising new technology for highly precise surgical execution of 3D preoperative planning in RSA.