Toshiyuki Kataoka1, Hisao Moritomo2, Junichi Miyake3, Tsuyoshi Murase3, Kazuomi Sugamoto4. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan. Electronic address: kataoka@qk9.so-net.ne.jp. 2. Department of Physical Therapy, Osaka Yukioka College of Health Science, Osaka, Japan. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan. 4. Department of Orthopedic Biomaterial Science, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteochondral autografts with use of the olecranon tip, lateral radial head, or proximal radial head have been employed for coronoid process reconstruction. However, it is unclear which autograft is most suitable for coronoid articular configuration. We assessed 3-dimensional articular facet suitability of 3 osteochondral autografts for coronoid process reconstruction. METHODS: We performed 3-dimensional computed tomography of 20 elbows to compare the articular facet configuration between the coronoid process and the ipsilateral olecranon tip, lateral radial head, and proximal radial head. We measured the area of the proximity region (≤2.0 mm) between the articular facets of the coronoid process and 3 osteochondral autografts, the covering rate defined as the percentage area of the coronoid articular facet occupied by the proximity region, the location of the proximity region center, and the percentage of the removed ulnohumeral articular facet. RESULTS: The covering rate was significantly higher with an olecranon graft than with radial head grafts. The regional center of a proximal radial head graft was significantly medial compared with that of olecranon and lateral radial head grafts. The olecranon graft used an average of 13.8% of the ulnohumeral articular facet. CONCLUSIONS: An olecranon graft was most suitable for defects of the coronoid process involving the tip, and a proximal radial head graft was most suitable for defects of the coronoid process involving the anteromedial rim. The use of an olecranon graft for reconstruction of 50% of the height of the coronoid process does not cause concern for gross elbow instability.
BACKGROUND: Osteochondral autografts with use of the olecranon tip, lateral radial head, or proximal radial head have been employed for coronoid process reconstruction. However, it is unclear which autograft is most suitable for coronoid articular configuration. We assessed 3-dimensional articular facet suitability of 3 osteochondral autografts for coronoid process reconstruction. METHODS: We performed 3-dimensional computed tomography of 20 elbows to compare the articular facet configuration between the coronoid process and the ipsilateral olecranon tip, lateral radial head, and proximal radial head. We measured the area of the proximity region (≤2.0 mm) between the articular facets of the coronoid process and 3 osteochondral autografts, the covering rate defined as the percentage area of the coronoid articular facet occupied by the proximity region, the location of the proximity region center, and the percentage of the removed ulnohumeral articular facet. RESULTS: The covering rate was significantly higher with an olecranon graft than with radial head grafts. The regional center of a proximal radial head graft was significantly medial compared with that of olecranon and lateral radial head grafts. The olecranon graft used an average of 13.8% of the ulnohumeral articular facet. CONCLUSIONS: An olecranon graft was most suitable for defects of the coronoid process involving the tip, and a proximal radial head graft was most suitable for defects of the coronoid process involving the anteromedial rim. The use of an olecranon graft for reconstruction of 50% of the height of the coronoid process does not cause concern for gross elbow instability.