Literature DB >> 19046641

The role of the elbow musculature, forearm rotation, and elbow flexion in elbow stability: an in vitro study.

Kenneth Seiber1, Ranjan Gupta, Michelle H McGarry, Marc R Safran, Thay Q Lee.   

Abstract

The goal of this study was to define the relative passive contributions of the major muscle groups about the elbow to varus-valgus stability and to determine whether these contributions vary with forearm rotation and elbow flexion. Fourteen cadaveric upper extremities were tested with a custom elbow testing device. The biceps, brachialis, and triceps muscles were loaded to simulate passive tension. The origins and insertions of the remaining muscles that cross the elbow were left intact to assess the contributions of their passive tension to elbow stability. For each specimen, varus-valgus laxity was measured at 30 degrees , 50 degrees , and 70 degrees of elbow flexion with the forearm in full supination, pronation, and neutral rotation, yielding 9 total positions of assessment. Six specimens (series 1) were tested for varus-valgus laxity after the following sequence of conditions: (1) unloaded biceps, brachialis, and triceps; (2) loaded biceps, brachialis, and triceps; (3) release of lateral elbow muscle tension; (4) release of medial elbow muscle tension; and (5) transection of the anterior bundle of the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL). Eight specimens (series 2) were assessed under the same conditions, only with the order of the last 2 conditions reversed for further comparison. Release of the lateral muscles alone increased varus-valgus laxity by a mean of 0.6 degrees to 1.4 degrees , but this was statistically significant only at positions of forearm pronation in series 1 (P < .012) and only at 2 of 9 positions in series 2 (30 degrees of flexion in pronation and 50 degrees of flexion in neutral rotation, P < .049). Release of the medial muscles alone caused a further increase in varus-valgus laxity by a mean of 0.5 degrees to 1.2 degrees , but this was only statistically significant at 30 degrees , 50 degrees , and 70 degrees of flexion in supination (P < .014) and 70 degrees of flexion in pronation (P = .044) in series 1 and only at 30 degrees , 50 degrees , and 70 degrees of flexion in supination in series 2 (P < .046). Release of the anterior bundle of the UCL resulted in a statistically significant increase in elbow varus-valgus laxity at all elbow and forearm positions by a mean of 1.8 degrees to 3.2 degrees (P < .001). Unloading the biceps, triceps, and brachialis caused significant increases in varus-valgus laxity at most elbow testing positions, independent of the position of forearm rotation (P < .046). Thus, the medial elbow musculature and lateral elbow musculature affect total elbow varus-valgus stability to roughly equal magnitudes, and the anterior bundle of the UCL affects stability to over twice the magnitude of either muscle group. The medial elbow musculature mostly affects elbow stability with the arm in supination and the lateral musculature in pronation, where the passive tension in the respective muscles is increased. Furthermore, the medial elbow musculature provided stability to the elbow when the forearm was supinated even with a deficient anterior bundle of the UCL, emphasizing its role as a secondary stabilizer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19046641     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2008.08.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  13 in total

1.  Percutaneous lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Jens Dargel; Klaus Burkhart; Dietmar Pennig; Gregor Stein; Peer Eysel; Lars Peter Müller
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Simple elbow dislocation.

Authors:  Paul M Robinson; Emmet Griffiths; Adam C Watts
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2017-01-01

Review 3.  State of the Union on Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in 2020: Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Cort D Lawton; Joseph D Lamplot; Joshua I Wright-Chisem; Evan W James; Christopher L Camp; Joshua S Dines
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2020-06

Review 4.  Traumatic instability of the elbow - anatomy, pathomechanisms and presentation on imaging.

Authors:  Christoph Schaeffeler; Simone Waldt; Klaus Woertler
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Computing muscle, ligament, and osseous contributions to the elbow varus moment during baseball pitching.

Authors:  James H Buffi; Katie Werner; Tom Kepple; Wendy M Murray
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2014-10-04       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 6.  The ulnar collateral ligament loading paradox between in-vitro and in-vivo studies on baseball pitching (narrative review).

Authors:  Bart Van Trigt; Liset W Vliegen; Ton Ajr Leenen; DirkJan Hej Veeger
Journal:  Int Biomech       Date:  2021-12

7.  Effects of realistic sheep elbow kinematics in inverse dynamic simulation.

Authors:  Baptiste Poncery; Santiago Arroyave-Tobón; Elia Picault; Jean-Marc Linares
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Medial elbow anatomy: A paradigm shift for UCL injury prevention and management.

Authors:  Shota Hoshika; Akimoto Nimura; Reiko Yamaguchi; Hisayo Nasu; Kumiko Yamaguchi; Hiroyuki Sugaya; Keiichi Akita
Journal:  Clin Anat       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 2.414

Review 9.  Complications of Open Elbow Arthrolysis in Post-Traumatic Elbow Stiffness: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jiangyu Cai; Wei Wang; Hede Yan; Yangbai Sun; Wei Chen; Shuai Chen; Cunyi Fan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The column procedure preserves elbow stability on biomechanical testing.

Authors:  Andrzej P Podgórski; Bartłomiej Kordasiewicz; Stanisław Pomianowski
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.