Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29619502›Full record

ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2018

Safe zone for the posterior interosseous nerve with regard to the lateral and posterior approaches to the proximal radius.

Gloria Maria Hohenberger, Angelika Maria Schwarz, Marco Johannes Maier, Peter Grechenig, Jan Dauwe, Christoph Grechenig, Renate Krassnig, Axel Gänsslen, Andreas Heinrich Weiglein

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Gloria Maria Hohenberger *Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 5, 8036, Graz, Austria. hohenberger.gloria@gmail.com.
Angelika Maria Schwarz *AUVA Trauma Hospital Graz, Göstinger Straße 24, 8020, Graz, Austria.
Marco Johannes Maier, Vienna, Austria.
Peter GrechenigMedical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 5, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Jan DauweDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Campus Pellenberg, Weligerveld 1, 3212, Pellenberg, Belgium.
Christoph GrechenigMedical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 5, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Renate KrassnigDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 5, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Axel GänsslenTrauma Department, Klinikum Wolfsburg, Sauerbruchstraße 7, 38440, Wolfsburg, Germany.
Andreas Heinrich WeigleinInstitute of Anatomy, Medical University of Graz, Harrachgasse 21, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Medical University of Graz · ATFraunhofer Project Centre Wolfsburg · DEGraz University Hospital · ATKU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) is at risk during the posterior and lateral approaches to the proximal radius. We aimed to define a safe zone for these approaches to avoid injury of the PIN and to evaluate their close and changing relationship to the nerve during forearm rotation.

methodsThe study collective consisted of 50 upper limbs. After performance of the lateral approach, the distance between the tip of the radial head and the PIN's exit point from the supinator (= distance 1) and the shortest interval between the nerve's exit to the radial margin of the ulna (= distance 2) were measured in maximum pronation and supination. Then, the dorsal approach was conducted and again distance 1 and the interval between the distal margin of the anconeus and the nerve's exit point (distance 2) were evaluated (pronation and supination).

resultsThere were significantly shorter distances during supination in comparison to pronation. Regarding the lateral approach, distance 1 changed from a mean of 60.3 mm (supination) to 62.7 mm in pronation (p < 0.001). For the dorsal approach, distance 1 decreased significantly (p < 0.001) from 62.9 mm (pronation) to 60.2 mm (supination).

conclusionSupination during the lateral and dorsal approaches to the proximal radius needs to be avoided to protect the PIN. Furthermore, the nerve appeared at an interval between 45 and 84.1 mm (lateral approach) and 47.5-93.8 mm (dorsal approach), respectively. Therefore, care must be taken at this height during extension of the approaches in a distal direction.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCadaverDissectionElbow JointFemaleForearmFracture FixationFractures, BoneHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscle, SkeletalPeripheral Nerve InjuriesPronationRadial NerveLateral approach radiusPosterior approach radiusPosterior interosseous nerveProximal radius fracture

Identifiers

PMID29619502
OpenAlexW2795911779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.