AIM: The aim of the current study was to assess the amount of the distal humerus articular surface exposed through the Newcastle approach, a posterior triceps preserving exposure of the elbow joint. METHOD: Twenty-four cadaveric elbows (12 pairs) were randomized to receive one of the four posterior surgical approaches: triceps reflecting, triceps splitting, olecranon osteotomy and Newcastle approach. The ratio of the articular surface exposed for each elbow was calculated and compared. RESULTS: The highest ratio observed was for Newcastle approach (0.75 ± 0.12) followed by olecranon osteotomy (0.51 ± 0.1), triceps reflecting (0.37 ± 0.08) and triceps splitting (0.35 ± 0.07). The differences between Newcastle approach and other approaches were statistically significant (p = 0.003 vs. osteotomy and <0.0001 vs. triceps reflecting and splitting). CONCLUSION: The Newcastle approach sufficiently exposes the distal humerus for arthroplasty or fracture fixation purposes. Its use is supported by the current study.
AIM: The aim of the current study was to assess the amount of the distal humerus articular surface exposed through the Newcastle approach, a posterior triceps preserving exposure of the elbow joint. METHOD: Twenty-four cadaveric elbows (12 pairs) were randomized to receive one of the four posterior surgical approaches: triceps reflecting, triceps splitting, olecranon osteotomy and Newcastle approach. The ratio of the articular surface exposed for each elbow was calculated and compared. RESULTS: The highest ratio observed was for Newcastle approach (0.75 ± 0.12) followed by olecranon osteotomy (0.51 ± 0.1), triceps reflecting (0.37 ± 0.08) and triceps splitting (0.35 ± 0.07). The differences between Newcastle approach and other approaches were statistically significant (p = 0.003 vs. osteotomy and <0.0001 vs. triceps reflecting and splitting). CONCLUSION: The Newcastle approach sufficiently exposes the distal humerus for arthroplasty or fracture fixation purposes. Its use is supported by the current study.
Authors: Daniëlle Meijering; Alexander L Boerboom; Fred Breukelman; Denise Eygendaal; Sjoerd K Bulstra; Martin Stevens Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 2.362