Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36911780›Full record

ArticleJSES international2023

Biomechanical comparison of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction with single-tunnel proximal suspensory fixation versus modified docking technique.

Matthew L Vopat, Bradley W Fossum, Justin Hollenbeck, Justin R Brown, Richard L Vopat, Kathrin Kaeppler, David L Bernholt, Charles A Su, Thomas R Hackett, Randall W Viola

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JSES international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Matthew L VopatSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Bradley W FossumThe Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.
Justin HollenbeckThe Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.
Justin R BrownThe Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.
Richard L VopatIrwin Army Community Hospital, Fort Riley, KS, USA.
Kathrin KaepplerSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
David L BernholtSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Charles A SuSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Thomas R HackettSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Randall W ViolaSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite technical advancement, elbow ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction is a challenging procedure due to the limitations regarding the challenging tunnel placement and potential injury to the ulnar nerve. Furthermore, current techniques for reconstruction and repair are inferior functionally and biomechanically when compared to native UCL tissue. A modified docking technique using a single-tunnel proximal suspensory fixation may reduce complications and potentially provide a technique for UCL reconstruction that is biomechanically superior. Decreasing the number of bone tunnels decreases the number of places that bone tear through could occur. The purpose was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical performances for 2 elbow UCL reconstruction techniques: (1) standard docking technique (SD) and (2) a proximal single tunnel (PST) technique using a suspensory fixation. We hypothesized that the PST technique would be biomechanically superior to the SD technique. Methods: Twelve matched pairs of cadaveric elbows were dissected and fixed at 70 degrees for biomechanical testing. Gracilis grafts were used for a docking reconstruction and the modified reconstruction with a PST suspensory fixation. A cyclic valgus torque protocol was used to precondition specimens for either reconstruction technique and the ulnohumeral gapping was then assessed. Following gapping measurements, postsurgical specimens underwent a valgus rotation applied at a rate of 5°/s until the anterior band of the UCL failed or fracture occurred. Ultimate load to failure, stiffness, and mode of failure were recorded. Results: There were no statistical differences between the two groups. Mean rotational stiffness of the SD (2.3 ± 0.6 Nm/deg) compared to the PST (1.9 ± 0.7 Nm/deg) ( Conclusions: This study compares the biomechanical strength of elbow UCL reconstructions performed using the SP technique to that of a PST technique. Among all tested parameters, including ultimate failure torque, stiffness, and ulnohumeral gapping, there were no statistically significant differences between the 2 techniques.

Indexed as

Biomechanical studyElbowEndobuttonSports medicineUCL reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID36911780
PMCPMC9998889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.