Literature DB >> 31351903

Biomechanical comparison of docking ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction with and without an internal brace.

David L Bernholt1, Spencer P Lake2, Ryan M Castile2, Christopher Papangelou3, Oliver Hauck3, Matthew V Smith4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Current ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction techniques are substantially less stiff and demonstrate lower load to failure compared with the native UCL. UCL repair with the addition of an internal brace has demonstrated superior biomechanical performance compared with docking UCL reconstruction, but internal bracing has not yet been used in UCL reconstruction. HYPOTHESIS/
PURPOSE: To evaluate the time-zero biomechanical performance of a UCL docking technique reconstruction with and without an internal brace compared with native UCL properties.
METHODS: Twelve matched pairs of cadaveric elbows were dissected and fixed at 90° for biomechanical testing. A cyclic valgus torque protocol was used to test the anterior band of the UCL in native specimens. After native specimens were failed, palmaris grafts were used for a docking reconstruction with or without internal brace and were subjected to the same valgus torque test protocol. Torsional stiffness, ultimate failure torque, and ulnohumeral gapping were determined.
RESULTS: Stiffness in UCL reconstructions using a standard docking technique (3.0 ± 0.4 N m/deg) were significantly less stiff (P < .001) than native UCL (4.0 ± 0.8 N m/deg), whereas reconstructions using an internal brace (3.6 ± 0.6 N m/deg) were not different (P = .120) compared with native. Ultimate failure torque for standard docking (18.3 ± 4.1 N m) was significantly lower (P < .001) than native UCL (36.9 ± 10.1 N m), whereas the internal brace samples (35.3 ± 9.8 N m) were not different (P = .772) than native.
CONCLUSION: UCL reconstruction with an internal brace augmentation provides superior stiffness and time-zero failure strength when compared with the standard docking technique.
Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Elbow; UCL reconstruction; internal brace

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31351903     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.04.061

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


  4 in total

1.  Locking suture repair versus ligament augmentation-a biomechanical study regarding the treatment of acute lateral collateral ligament injuries of the elbow.

Authors:  Nadine Ott; Arne Harland; Fabian Lanzerath; Tim Leschinger; Michael Hackl; Kilian Wegmann; Lars Peter Müller
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  Biomechanical assessment of lateral ulnar collateral ligament repair and reconstruction with or without internal brace augmentation.

Authors:  Craig Melbourne; James L Cook; Gregory J Della Rocca; Christopher Loftis; John Konicek; Matthew J Smith
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-05-04

Review 3.  Comparison of Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction Techniques in the Elbow of Sports Players.

Authors:  Jun-Gyu Moon; Hee-Dong Lee
Journal:  Clin Shoulder Elb       Date:  2020-02-28

4.  Normal Kinematics of the Syndesmosis and Ankle Mortise During Dynamic Movements.

Authors:  Veronica Hogg-Cornejo; Kenneth J Hunt; Jonathan Bartolomei; Paul J Rullkoetter; Casey Myers; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  Foot Ankle Orthop       Date:  2020-08-26
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.