Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature
Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the ti...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Saltzman, B. M. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2016 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento - Heidelberg : Springer, 2008, 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:100 ; year:2016 ; number:3 ; day:14 ; month:09 ; pages:157-163 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR024885207 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR024885207 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230519164247.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201007s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR024885207 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Saltzman, B. M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2016 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 | ||
| 520 | |a Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Tommy John |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Elbow |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Biomechanical |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic review |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Erickson, B. J. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Frank, J. M. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Harris, J. D. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Nicholson, G. P. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bach, B. R. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Verma, N. N. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Romeo, A. A. |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento |d Heidelberg : Springer, 2008 |g 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 |w (DE-627)559430167 |w (DE-600)2412956-2 |x 1973-2538 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:100 |g year:2016 |g number:3 |g day:14 |g month:09 |g pages:157-163 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_171 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 100 |j 2016 |e 3 |b 14 |c 09 |h 157-163 | ||
| author_variant |
b m s bm bms b j e bj bje j m f jm jmf j d h jd jdh g p n gp gpn b r b br brb n n v nn nnv a a r aa aar |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:19732538:2016----::imcaiatsigfhrcntutdlaclaealgmnaytm |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2016 |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z doi (DE-627)SPR024885207 (SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Saltzman, B. M. verfasserin aut Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tommy John (dpeaa)DE-He213 Elbow (dpeaa)DE-He213 Biomechanical (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Erickson, B. J. aut Frank, J. M. aut Harris, J. D. aut Nicholson, G. P. aut Bach, B. R. aut Verma, N. N. aut Romeo, A. A. aut Enthalten in La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento Heidelberg : Springer, 2008 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 (DE-627)559430167 (DE-600)2412956-2 1973-2538 nnns volume:100 year:2016 number:3 day:14 month:09 pages:157-163 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 AR 100 2016 3 14 09 157-163 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z doi (DE-627)SPR024885207 (SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Saltzman, B. M. verfasserin aut Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tommy John (dpeaa)DE-He213 Elbow (dpeaa)DE-He213 Biomechanical (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Erickson, B. J. aut Frank, J. M. aut Harris, J. D. aut Nicholson, G. P. aut Bach, B. R. aut Verma, N. N. aut Romeo, A. A. aut Enthalten in La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento Heidelberg : Springer, 2008 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 (DE-627)559430167 (DE-600)2412956-2 1973-2538 nnns volume:100 year:2016 number:3 day:14 month:09 pages:157-163 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 AR 100 2016 3 14 09 157-163 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z doi (DE-627)SPR024885207 (SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Saltzman, B. M. verfasserin aut Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tommy John (dpeaa)DE-He213 Elbow (dpeaa)DE-He213 Biomechanical (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Erickson, B. J. aut Frank, J. M. aut Harris, J. D. aut Nicholson, G. P. aut Bach, B. R. aut Verma, N. N. aut Romeo, A. A. aut Enthalten in La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento Heidelberg : Springer, 2008 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 (DE-627)559430167 (DE-600)2412956-2 1973-2538 nnns volume:100 year:2016 number:3 day:14 month:09 pages:157-163 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 AR 100 2016 3 14 09 157-163 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z doi (DE-627)SPR024885207 (SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Saltzman, B. M. verfasserin aut Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tommy John (dpeaa)DE-He213 Elbow (dpeaa)DE-He213 Biomechanical (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Erickson, B. J. aut Frank, J. M. aut Harris, J. D. aut Nicholson, G. P. aut Bach, B. R. aut Verma, N. N. aut Romeo, A. A. aut Enthalten in La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento Heidelberg : Springer, 2008 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 (DE-627)559430167 (DE-600)2412956-2 1973-2538 nnns volume:100 year:2016 number:3 day:14 month:09 pages:157-163 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 AR 100 2016 3 14 09 157-163 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z doi (DE-627)SPR024885207 (SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Saltzman, B. M. verfasserin aut Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tommy John (dpeaa)DE-He213 Elbow (dpeaa)DE-He213 Biomechanical (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Erickson, B. J. aut Frank, J. M. aut Harris, J. D. aut Nicholson, G. P. aut Bach, B. R. aut Verma, N. N. aut Romeo, A. A. aut Enthalten in La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento Heidelberg : Springer, 2008 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 (DE-627)559430167 (DE-600)2412956-2 1973-2538 nnns volume:100 year:2016 number:3 day:14 month:09 pages:157-163 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 AR 100 2016 3 14 09 157-163 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 volume:100 year:2016 number:3 day:14 month:09 pages:157-163 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento 100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163 volume:100 year:2016 number:3 day:14 month:09 pages:157-163 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) Tommy John Elbow Biomechanical Systematic review Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Saltzman, B. M. @@aut@@ Erickson, B. J. @@aut@@ Frank, J. M. @@aut@@ Harris, J. D. @@aut@@ Nicholson, G. P. @@aut@@ Bach, B. R. @@aut@@ Verma, N. N. @@aut@@ Romeo, A. A. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2016-09-14T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
559430167 |
| id |
SPR024885207 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR024885207</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519164247.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR024885207</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Saltzman, B. M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL)</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Tommy John</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Elbow</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Biomechanical</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Systematic review</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR)</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Erickson, B. J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Frank, J. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Harris, J. D.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nicholson, G. P.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bach, B. R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Verma, N. N.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Romeo, A. A.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento</subfield><subfield code="d">Heidelberg : Springer, 2008</subfield><subfield code="g">100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)559430167</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2412956-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1973-2538</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:100</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:14</subfield><subfield code="g">month:09</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:157-163</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">100</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">14</subfield><subfield code="c">09</subfield><subfield code="h">157-163</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Saltzman, B. M. |
| spellingShingle |
Saltzman, B. M. misc Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) misc Tommy John misc Elbow misc Biomechanical misc Systematic review misc Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature |
| authorStr |
Saltzman, B. M. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)559430167 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1973-2538 |
| topic_title |
Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tommy John (dpeaa)DE-He213 Elbow (dpeaa)DE-He213 Biomechanical (dpeaa)DE-He213 Systematic review (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) misc Tommy John misc Elbow misc Biomechanical misc Systematic review misc Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) misc Tommy John misc Elbow misc Biomechanical misc Systematic review misc Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) |
| topic_browse |
misc Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) misc Tommy John misc Elbow misc Biomechanical misc Systematic review misc Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
559430167 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)559430167 (DE-600)2412956-2 |
| title |
Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR024885207 (SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e |
| title_full |
Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature |
| author_sort |
Saltzman, B. M. |
| journal |
La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento |
| journalStr |
La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2016 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
157 |
| author_browse |
Saltzman, B. M. Erickson, B. J. Frank, J. M. Harris, J. D. Nicholson, G. P. Bach, B. R. Verma, N. N. Romeo, A. A. |
| container_volume |
100 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Saltzman, B. M. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z |
| title_sort |
biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature |
| title_auth |
Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature |
| abstract |
Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 |
| abstractGer |
Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice. © Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 |
| container_issue |
3 |
| title_short |
Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Erickson, B. J. Frank, J. M. Harris, J. D. Nicholson, G. P. Bach, B. R. Verma, N. N. Romeo, A. A. |
| author2Str |
Erickson, B. J. Frank, J. M. Harris, J. D. Nicholson, G. P. Bach, B. R. Verma, N. N. Romeo, A. A. |
| ppnlink |
559430167 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z |
| up_date |
2024-07-04T02:43:35.501Z |
| _version_ |
1803614699392073728 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR024885207</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519164247.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR024885207</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12306-016-0426-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Saltzman, B. M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Biomechanical testing of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament: a systematic review of the literature</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose The purpose was to perform a systematic review of the literature investigating biomechanical studies of ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) techniques to summarize the most commonly analyzed methods of fixation (at both the ulna and humerus), the degree of elbow flexion at the time of fixation, graft characteristics, and modes of failure with these techniques. Materials and methods A systematic review was performed. All cadaveric biomechanical studies that tested a reconstruction method for UCLR were included. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each study and parameter/variable analyzed. Results Twenty-three studies were included with a total of 397 elbows in 242 cadavers (mean age 54.8 ± 20 years, range 16–96). The majority of studies (65 %) used a palmaris longus graft. The docking technique (37.2 %) was the most commonly tested reconstruction method. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded assimilation of specific techniques (each of the 23 studies utilized a unique technique). Fixation was performed at 30°–90° of elbow flexion. The most common mode of failure was suture failure (51 %), followed by midsubstance rupture (27.00 %), and bone tunnel fracture (14.00 %). No significant differences were observed amongst techniques for all measures analyzed. Conclusion This study found the docking technique to be the most commonly tested technique, while the mode of reconstruction failure was most commonly at the suture interface. If the graft failed at the bone interface, it was most likely to occur at the ulna. Surgeon preference and comfort level with a specific technique should dictate choice.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL)</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Tommy John</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Elbow</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Biomechanical</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Systematic review</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR)</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Erickson, B. J.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Frank, J. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Harris, J. D.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nicholson, G. P.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bach, B. R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Verma, N. N.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Romeo, A. A.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento</subfield><subfield code="d">Heidelberg : Springer, 2008</subfield><subfield code="g">100(2016), 3 vom: 14. Sept., Seite 157-163</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)559430167</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2412956-2</subfield><subfield code="x">1973-2538</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:100</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">day:14</subfield><subfield code="g">month:09</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:157-163</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-016-0426-z</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">100</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="b">14</subfield><subfield code="c">09</subfield><subfield code="h">157-163</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.3976154 |