| Literature DB >> 29780844 |
Michael Saper1, Joseph Shung2, Stephanie Pearce2, Viviana Bompadre1, James R Andrews3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The number of ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstructions in adolescent athletes has increased over the past 2 decades. Clinical results in this population have not been well studied. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and return to sport after UCL reconstruction in a large group of adolescent baseball players. We hypothesized that excellent clinical outcomes and high rates of return to sport would be observed in this population at a minimum 2-year follow-up. STUDYEntities:
Keywords: UCL reconstruction; adolescent; elbow; ulnar collateral ligament
Year: 2018 PMID: 29780844 PMCID: PMC5954308 DOI: 10.1177/2325967118769328
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Orthop J Sports Med ISSN: 2325-9671
Figure 1.Flow diagram outlining patient selection. UCL, ulnar collateral ligament.
Rehabilitation Protocol
| Phase | Timing | Goals |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Weeks 1-3 | Protect healing tissue, assess and address ROM/stability needs of whole body, retard muscle atrophy, diminish pain and inflammation |
| 2 | Weeks 4-7 | Gradually increase to full ROM, promote healing of repaired tissue, regain and improve muscular strength, restore full function of graft site |
| 3 | Weeks 8-24 | Improve muscular strength, power, and endurance; maintain full elbow ROM; gradually initiate prethrowing drills |
| 4 | Weeks 25-36+ | Increase strength, power, and endurance; restore mobility/stability throughout body; gradually progress to competitive throwing/sports |
| 5 | Months 9-12 | Gradually return to sport activities |
ROM, range of motion.
Patient Characteristics
| Characteristic | Value |
|---|---|
| Age at surgery, mean ± SD, y | 18.0 ± 1.3 |
| Right hand dominance/side | 119 (85.0) |
| Duration of symptoms, mean ± SD, mo | 6.9 ± 9.0 |
| Follow-up, mean ± SD, mo | 57.9 ± 16.3 |
| Level of sport before surgery | |
| High school | 84 (60.0) |
| College | 52 (37.1) |
| Professional | 3 (2.1) |
| Middle school | 1 (0.7) |
| Primary position | |
| Pitcher | 132 (94.3) |
| Infielder | 4 (2.9) |
| Catcher | 2 (1.4) |
| Not applicable | 2 (1.4) |
| Tear characteristics on magnetic resonance imaging | |
| Partial | 81 (57.9) |
| Complete | 52 (37.1) |
| Other | 7 (5.0) |
Data are reported as n (%) unless otherwise indicated.
Surgical Findings
| Characteristic | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Graft type | |
| Ipsilateral palmaris | 108 (77.1) |
| Contralateral gracilis | 30 (21.4) |
| Other | 2 (1.4) |
| Associated lesions | |
| Olecranon tip osteophytes | 22 (15.7) |
| Ulnar collateral ligament calcifications/ossicles | 21 (15.0) |
| Fractures/nonunion | 4 (2.9) |
| Loose bodies | 2 (1.4) |
| Other | 2 (1.4) |
| Other procedures | |
| Osteophyte excision | 18 (12.9) |
| Excision of calcifications/ossicles | 13 (9.3) |
| Loose body removal | 2 (1.4) |
| Other | 9 (6.4) |
Included contralateral semitendinosus and ipsilateral gracilis.
Clinical Outcomes
| Outcome Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Conway | |
| Excellent | 121 (86.4) |
| Good | 5 (3.6) |
| Fair | 8 (5.7) |
| Poor | 6 (4.3) |
| Andrews-Timmerman, mean ± SD | 97.3 ± 6.1 |
| Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic, mean ± SD | 85.2 ± 14.6 |
| Global satisfaction (0- to 100-point subjective scale) | 94.4 |
| Would elect to undergo surgery again | 131 (93.6) |
| Graft reinjury | 5 (3.6) |
Data are reported as n (%) unless otherwise indicated.
Return to Sport
| Outcome Measure | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Did not attempt return | 2 (1.4) |
| Attempted return | 138 (98.6) |
| Able to return | 135 (97.8) |
| Higher level | 86 (63.7) |
| Same level | 38 (28.1) |
| Decreased level | 11 (8.1) |
| Unable to return | 3 (2.2) |
| Reason for no/decreased return to sport | |
| Elbow pain/discomfort | 9 (6.4) |
| Fear of reinjury | 2 (1.4) |
| Reinjury | 2 (1.4) |
| Personal | 2 (1.4) |
| Other medical conditions | 1 (0.7) |