Literature DB >> 31647881

Anatomic and Biomechanical Evaluation of Ulnar Tunnel Position in Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction.

Pascual H Dutton1, Michael B Banffy1, Trevor J Nelson2,3, Melodie F Metzger2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although numerous techniques of reconstruction of the medial ulnar collateral ligament (mUCL) have been described, limited evidence exists on the biomechanical implication of changing the ulnar tunnel position despite the fact that more recent literature has clarified that the ulnar footprint extends more distally than was appreciated in the past.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the size and location of the native ulnar footprint and assess valgus stability of the medial elbow after UCL reconstruction at 3 ulnar tunnel locations. STUDY
DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.
METHODS: Eighteen fresh-frozen cadaveric elbows were dissected to expose the mUCL. The anatomic footprint of the ulnar attachment of the mUCL was measured with a digitizing probe. The area of the ulnar footprint and midpoint relative to the joint line were determined. Medial elbow stability was tested with the mUCL in an intact, deficient, and reconstructed state after the docking technique, with ulnar tunnels placed at 5, 10, or 15 mm from the ulnotrochlear joint line. A 3-N·m valgus torque was applied to the elbow, and valgus rotation of the ulna was recorded via motion-tracking cameras as the elbow was cycled through a full range of motion. After kinematic testing, specimens were loaded to failure at 70° of elbow flexion.
RESULTS: The mean ± SD length of the mUCL ulnar footprint was 27.4 ± 3.3 mm. The midpoint of the anatomic footprint was located between the 10- and 15-mm tunnels across all specimens at a mean 13.6 mm from the joint line. Sectioning of the mUCL increased elbow valgus rotation throughout all flexion angles and was statistically significant from 30° to 100° of flexion as compared with the intact elbow (P < .05). mUCL reconstruction at all 3 tunnel locations restored stability to near intact levels with no significant differences among the 3 ulnar tunnel locations at any flexion angle.
CONCLUSION: Positioning the ulnar graft fixation site up to 15 mm from the ulnotrochlear joint line does not significantly increase valgus rotation in the elbow. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A more distal ulnar tunnel may be a viable option to accommodate individual variation in morphology of the proximal ulna or in a revision setting.

Entities:  

Keywords:  UCL reconstruction; anatomy; biomechanics; elbow; medial ulnar collateral ligament

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31647881     DOI: 10.1177/0363546519880182

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  3 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Morphological Features of the Ulnar Collateral Ligament of the Elbow and Common Tendon of Flexor-Pronator Muscles.

Authors:  Masahiro Ikezu; Mutsuaki Edama; Kanta Matsuzawa; Fumiya Kaneko; Sohei Shimizu; Ryo Hirabayashi; Ikuo Kageyama
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-09-21

3.  Biomechanical Comparison of UCL Repair Using Suspensory Fixation Versus UCL Reconstruction.

Authors:  R Nelson Mead; Trevor J Nelson; Orr Limpisvasti; Neal S ElAttrache; Melodie F Metzger
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-09-22
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.