Table 2.

Imaging modalities in quantifying humeral head and glenoid bone loss

Study	Year	Sample size	Study purpose	Conclusions
Kodali et al. [17]	2011	6 (anatomic bone substitutes)	Assess the accuracy of CT scan in measuring Hill–Sachs lesions	Hill–Sachs width is underestimated in all planes with CT scans; sagittal and axial plane measurements are the most accurate in evaluating defects
Sugimoto [27]	2004	6 (cadaver study)	Clarify the reliability of ultrasound in evaluating a Bankart lesion	Ultrasound with axillary approach is useful in diagnosing Bankart lesions
Cho et al. [5]	2011	107 (prospective cohort)	Judge the diagnostic validity of three-dimensional CT to predict engagement of Hill–Sachs lesions	Engaging lesions were larger in size and horizontally orientated to the humeral shaft than non-engaging lesions on three-dimensional CT scan
Richards et al. [21]	1994	8 (cadaver study)	Can MRI be used to differentiate Hill–Sachs lesions from the anatomic groove on the posterior humerus?	Hill–Sachs are best differentiated by means of a more cephalic position along the longitudinal humeral axis