Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41179479›Full record

ReviewJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2025

Elbow ulnar collateral ligament repair: a systematic review of trends and outcomes.

Troy B Puga, McKenna W Box, Ben Pautler, Tyler Perleberg, Mason Poffenbarger, John T Riehl

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2025. 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. Elbow Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair Versus Reconstruction Versus Augmented Reconstruction: Where Do We Stand?HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2026
    Review
  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

6 authors.

Troy B PugaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Medical City Denton, Denton, TX, USA.
McKenna W BoxDepartment of Orthopaedics, Medical City Denton, Denton, TX, USA.
Ben PautlerCollege of Medicine, Kansas City University, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Tyler PerlebergCollege of Medicine, Kansas City University, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Mason PoffenbargerDepartment of Orthopaedics, Medical City Denton, Denton, TX, USA.
John T RiehlDepartment of Orthopaedics, Medical City Denton, Denton, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries of the elbow have rapidly risen among high-level baseball players. These injuries have led to the rise of the UCL repair for partial tears. This technique has been theorized to allow for an earlier return to sport. This review aims to evaluate the current literature regarding UCL repair to help guide surgeons in managing UCL injuries. Methods: A search was conducted across MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases to evaluate for UCL repair. The search used a combination of keywords and Medical Subject Heading terms. Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility for inclusion criteria. Full texts were screened and included if they met eligibility criteria. Demographics and results of the studies were extracted from the articles that met inclusion criteria. Results: Thirteen relevant studies were found and included in this scoping review. Five studies found that the incidence of UCL repair surgery has increased in recent years. One study found that the incidence of UCL repair surgery increased at a 5.4% faster rate than UCL reconstruction surgery. Repair with suture augmentation was used as the UCL repair technique in four studies. UCL repair showed a return to sport of 86.7% or higher in studies that evaluated return to sport. Four studies reported return to sport at same level or higher, with four studies not specifying return to sport level or return to sport metrics. The most common complication reported was postoperative ulnar nerve neuropathy or paresthesias. Overall, there was a low rate of return to the operating room for complications. Conclusion: This scoping review found that UCL repair surgery continues to rise in popularity. It also found that UCL repair is safe and effective, with patients having low complication rates and high rates of return to sport.

Indexed as

ElbowSuture augmentationThrowing athletesUCL injuriesUCL repairUlnar collateral ligament

Identifiers

PMID41179479
PMCPMC12573511

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.