Study on Shoulder Joint Parameters and Available Supraspinatus Outlet Area Using Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography Reconstruction

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

he aim of this study is to report the reference value of supraspinatus outlet area (SOA) and available supraspinatus outlet area (ASOA) in a sample from normal population. First, the article does not present any clear hypothesis. Furthermore, the sample analyzed is too small to establish reference values. It is also intended to relate these parameters directly with the diagnosis of rotator cuff tear, and to relate the lower measurements of SOA and ASOA in women compared to men with the higher incidence of this pathology in the female gender. However, since only healthy people were studied, no such relationship can be established.

Although the work may provide some useful data for evaluating RCT, it is only an approximation to the topic. I think the paper is not suitable for publication under these conditions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors investigated the spatial relationships between the coracoacromial arch and the humeral head utilizing CT 3D reconstruction to precise measure the subacromial space and other related dimensions in the Chinese population, aiming to enhance our understanding of shoulder joint anatomy. The exclusion and inclusion criteria are sound.

Their results indicated significant differences between males and females in several parameters. Males exhibited larger values for these parameters compared to females, indicating potential anatomical gender differences.

The authors propose that the actual available supraspinatus outlet area is a semi-oval area that conforms to the surface of the acromion below the coracoacromial ligament. I agree.

The research has been carefully done. A small problem is that it unfortunately has a lot of different quantities, the meaning of which is not immediately clear to the reader who is less familiar with the subject. On the other hand, this research could not have been done thoroughly without all these figures.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Interesting study that merits to be published.

Minor revisions are necessary 

• Which was the main reason that the patients underwent CT scan of the shoulder joint?
• The authors report “1) The most lateral aspect of the acromion.” However in the images the most posterolateral point of the acromion is selected. Please clarify better 
• Which software did you use to make automatic measurements of the AHD and CHD?
• Why did you perform reliability evaluation only with one observer ?
• The limitation is that you did not have another group of patients with torn rc

Comments on the Quality of English Language

no specific comments 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think the article is suitable for publication.