Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37378277›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2023

Dual Bracing for Ulnar Collateral Ligament Injuries Restores Native Valgus Laxity and Native Medial Joint Gapping of the Elbow.

Alexander Otto, Lukas N Muench, Julian Mehl, Joshua B Baldino, Matthew Murphy, Elifho Obopilwe, Mark P Cote, Bastian Scheiderer, Andreas B Imhoff, Augustus D Mazzocca and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexander OttoDepartment of Sports Orthopedics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Lukas N MuenchDepartment of Sports Orthopedics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Julian MehlDepartment of Sports Orthopedics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Joshua B BaldinoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UConn Musculoskeletal Institute, University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
Matthew MurphyBeaumont Orthopedic Institute Royal Oak, Royal Oak, Michigan, USA.
Elifho ObopilweDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UConn Musculoskeletal Institute, University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
Mark P CoteDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Bastian ScheidererDepartment of Sports Orthopedics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Andreas B ImhoffDepartment of Sports Orthopedics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Augustus D MazzoccaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Sebastian SiebenlistDepartment of Sports Orthopedics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Technical University of Munich · DEMassachusetts General Hospital · USUConn Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite growing evidence on the role of the posterior ulnar collateral ligament (pUCL) in elbow stability, current ligament bracing techniques are mainly focused on the anterior ulnar collateral ligament (aUCL). A dual-bracing technique combines the repair of the pUCL and aUCL with a suture augmentation of both bundles. Purpose: To biomechanically assess a dual-bracing approach addressing aUCL and pUCL for humeral-sided complete UCL lesions to restore medial elbow laxity without overconstraining. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 21 unpaired human elbows (11 right, 10 left; 57.19 ± 11.7 years) were randomized into 3 groups to compare dual bracing with aUCL suture augmentation and aUCL graft reconstruction. Laxity testing was performed with 25 N applied 12 cm distal to the elbow joint for 30 seconds at randomized flexion angles (0°, 30°, 60°, 90°, and 120°) for the native condition and then for each surgical technique. A calibrated motion capture system was used for assessment, allowing the 3-dimensional displacement during the complete valgus stress cycle between the optical trackers to be quantified as joint gap and laxity. The repaired constructs were then cyclically tested through a materials testing machine starting with 20 N for 200 cycles at a rate of 0.5 Hz. The load was increased stepwise by 10 N for 200 cycles until displacement reached 5.0 mm or complete failure occurred. Results: Dual bracing and aUCL bracing resulted in significantly ( Conclusion: Dual bracing restored native valgus joint laxity and medial joint gapping without overconstraining and provided similar primary stability regarding failure outcomes as established techniques. Furthermore, it was able to restore joint gapping in 120° of flexion significantly better than aUCL reconstruction. Clinical Relevance: This study provides biomechanical data on the dual-bracing approach that may help surgeons to consider this new method of addressing acute humeral UCL lesions.

Indexed as

anterior ulnar collateral ligamentaUCLdual bracingelbowligament bracingposterior ulnar collateral ligamentpUCLUCLulnar collateral ligament

Identifiers

PMID37378277
PMCPMC10291402
OpenAlexW4381800093

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.