Estimating the location of the posterior interosseus nerve during an extensor digitorum communis-splitting approach: a comparison of methods using the transepicondylar distance.
EDC splitting approach
Elbow injury
PIN
Posterior interosseous nerve
TED
Transepicondylar distance
Journal
JSES international
ISSN: 2666-6383
Titre abrégé: JSES Int
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101763461
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2023
Jan 2023
Historique:
entrez:
23
2
2023
pubmed:
24
2
2023
medline:
24
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The posterior interosseus nerve (PIN) may be encountered when using the extensile extensor digitorum communis (EDC)-splitting approach to the elbow. An accurate means of estimating its location remains elusive. The purpose of this investigation is to identify whether the methods described in previous studies can be improved upon to more accurately estimate the PIN's location using the transepicondylar distance (TED). Forty-five fresh-frozen cadavers were dissected using the EDC-splitting approach. Method A (N = 39) used an electronic caliper measuring along the midlateral border of the radius from the lateral epicondyle (LE) and radiocapitellar joint in supination, neutral position, and pronation. Method B (N = 16) used a sterile tape measure, measuring from the LE in pronation only along an axis from the LE to Lister's tubercle passing through the center capitellum. In method A, the mean TED was 63.4 ± 6.1 mm. Of the 6 measurements, the TED was most correlated to the actual distance to the PIN from the LE in pronation (68.3 ± 7.3 mm; R Using a tape measure, the TED predicted the PIN's location within a mean ±2 mm in pronation along an axis from the LE to Lister's tubercle, using an EDC-splitting approach. This technique is simple and comparatively more accurate than those used previously.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The posterior interosseus nerve (PIN) may be encountered when using the extensile extensor digitorum communis (EDC)-splitting approach to the elbow. An accurate means of estimating its location remains elusive. The purpose of this investigation is to identify whether the methods described in previous studies can be improved upon to more accurately estimate the PIN's location using the transepicondylar distance (TED).
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Forty-five fresh-frozen cadavers were dissected using the EDC-splitting approach. Method A (N = 39) used an electronic caliper measuring along the midlateral border of the radius from the lateral epicondyle (LE) and radiocapitellar joint in supination, neutral position, and pronation. Method B (N = 16) used a sterile tape measure, measuring from the LE in pronation only along an axis from the LE to Lister's tubercle passing through the center capitellum.
Results
UNASSIGNED
In method A, the mean TED was 63.4 ± 6.1 mm. Of the 6 measurements, the TED was most correlated to the actual distance to the PIN from the LE in pronation (68.3 ± 7.3 mm; R
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Using a tape measure, the TED predicted the PIN's location within a mean ±2 mm in pronation along an axis from the LE to Lister's tubercle, using an EDC-splitting approach. This technique is simple and comparatively more accurate than those used previously.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36820435
doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2022.09.006
pii: S2666-6383(22)00193-1
pmc: PMC9937808
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
171-177Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors.
Références
World J Orthop. 2017 Apr 18;8(4):310-316
pubmed: 28473958
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997 Dec;(345):215-8
pubmed: 9418643
J Hand Surg Am. 2021 Mar;46(3):245.e1-245.e7
pubmed: 33308903
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 26;12(10):e0186890
pubmed: 29073240
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Jan 5;93(1):81-90
pubmed: 21209272
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007 Jul-Aug;16(4):502-7
pubmed: 17321155
J Hand Surg Am. 1993 Jan;18(1):107-12
pubmed: 8423293
Clin Anat. 2009 Sep;22(6):684-8
pubmed: 19637299
J Hand Surg Am. 2009 Sep;34(7):1252-5
pubmed: 19700073
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Jun;82(6):809-13
pubmed: 10859100
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019 Feb;477(2):424-431
pubmed: 30444757
J Hand Surg Am. 2000 Sep;25(5):936-41
pubmed: 11040309
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Jun;(315):199-208
pubmed: 7634668