ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Early Results of a Novel Method to Treat Bidirectional Elbow Instability: A Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To describe a novel reconstructive technique for bidirectional elbow instability using a cylindrical ligament retention device in the distal humerus and toothed metal plates for graft fixation to the proximal ulna and to report early outcomes in the first four patients treated with this technique. Methods: Patients who underwent this procedure exhibited either preoperative or anticipated intraoperative bidirectional elbow instability. Preoperative, postoperative, and intraoperative examination findings were obtained. Results: All patients were stabilized with this bilateral ligament reconstruction. Three patients required an interposition arthroplasty. One patient, who underwent interposition arthroplasty, required use of his operated arm for transfers, which necessitated an external fixator that was removed at 6 weeks. Despite subsequent splinting, he developed lateral widening on examination at 12 weeks after surgery and underwent a revision, which became infected requiring the removal of both the ligament reconstruction and interposition arthroplasty. The mean preoperative Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score was 73.3and Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 26.3. After surgery, in the three patients who remained stable, the mean Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score improved to 51 at 3 months and the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved to 85 at 3 months. Conclusions: Three patients have remained stable at their elbow status post bilateral ligament reconstruction. One patient developed elbow subluxation and had a second procedure performed, which led to an infection and removal of all hardware. A contraindication to this procedure may be need for early force application to the elbow in the postoperative period. Future patients will clarify the clinical utility of this bilateral ligament reconstruction. Type of study/level of evidence: Therapeutic IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.