Anatomic relationship of the radial nerve to the elbow joint: clinical implications of safe pin placement

Quantifying the Positional Deviation Between the True Flexion-Extension and Epicondylar Axes of the Elbow: A 3D Computational Study

Background and objective The epicondyles are commonly used surgical reference landmarks for elbow arthroplasty and external fixator application. This study aimed to investigate whether the epicondylar axis differed from the elbow's true flexion-extension (F-E) axis in terms of both rotational difference and translational offset. Methods Three-dimensional (3D) models of 15 cadaver elbows were created. The epicondylar, true F-E, and distal humeral axes were defined using the medial and lateral epicondyles and the normal vector through the trochlear groove's center respectively. Rotational difference along internal-external, varus-valgus, and flexion-extension rotation plane and translational offset in the anterior-posterior (A-P), medial-lateral (M-L), and inferior-superior (I-F) direction with reference to the distal humerus's long axis were measured. Results Minimal rotational differences of 1.9 ± 4.5, 2.1 ± 3.4, and 0.5 ± 2.7 degrees for flexion-extension, varus-valgus, and internal-external rotation were obtained respectively. Considerable translational offsets greater than 10 mm were found for the absolute medial and lateral translational offset with a statistically significant difference recorded in the M-L direction. Conclusions Small rotational differences exist between the epicondylar and true F-E axes. Significant differences are observed in the translational offset in the M-L direction and should be considered during implant alignment in order to reduce malalignment and prevent failure.

Three-dimensional corrective osteotomy for cubitus varus deformity using patient-matched instruments

Background

Various methods of two or three-dimensional (3D) corrective osteotomy for cubitus varus deformity have been reported. However, whether 3D correction of cubitus varus deformity is necessary is controversial because of technical difficulties and surgical complications. This study introduced 3D simulations and printing technology for corrective osteotomy against cubitus varus deformities. Moreover, recent studies on the application of these technologies were reviewed.

Methods

The amount of 3D deformity was calculated based on the difference in 3D shape between the affected side and the contralateral normal side. Patient-matched instruments were created to perform the actual surgery as simulated. Further, a 3D corrective osteotomy was performed using patient-matched instruments for cubitus varus deformity in pediatric and adolescent patients. The humerus-elbow-wrist angle, tilting angle, and elbow ranges of motion were evaluated.

Results

Humerus-elbow-wrist angle and tilting angle were corrected from -21° to 14° and from 30° to 43°, respectively, in the pediatric patient and from -18° to 10° and from 20° to 40°, respectively, in the adolescent patient. The elbow flexion and extension angles changed from 130° to 140° and from 20° to 10°, respectively, in the pediatric patient and from 120° to 130° and from 15° to 0°, respectively, in the adolescent patient.

Conclusion

The 3D computer simulations and the use of patient-matched instruments for cubitus varus deformity are reliable and can facilitate an accurate and safe correction. These technologies can simplify the complexity of 3D surgical procedures and contribute to the standardization of treatment for cubitus varus deformity.

Comprehensive analysis and classification of retrocondylar ulnar groove morphology using CT imaging in an average population of adults

PURPOSE

Anatomical variations of the concave shaped retrocondylar ulnar groove (RUG) can contribute to ulnar nerve instability. However, there are currently limited available standardized data describing the anatomy of the RUG based on radiologic imaging, such as computed tomography (CT). This study aims to provide a comprehensive description and classification of RUG anatomy based on RUG angle measurements.

METHODS

400 CT scans of the elbows of adults showing no signs of osseous damage were evaluated. RUG angles were measured in four anatomically defined axial planes that spanned from the proximal to the distal end of the RUG. Furthermore, distance measurements at the medial epicondyle were conducted. A classification system for the RUG is proposed based on the acquired RUG angles, aiming to categorize the individual angles according to the 25th and 75th percentiles.

RESULTS

RUG angles were significantly larger in males compared to females (p < 0.001) accompanied by larger distances including the off-set and height of the medial epicondyle (p < 0.001). RUG angles decreased from proximal to distal locations (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that men exhibited larger RUG angles compared to women, indicating a less-concave shape of the RUG in men. Introducing an objective RUG classification system can improve our understanding of anatomical variations and potentially find application in diagnostics and preoperative planning.

Distal locking technique affects the rate of iatrogenic radial nerve palsy in intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures

BACKGROUND

Intramedullary humeral nailing is a common and reliable procedure for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Radial nerve palsy is a common complication encountered in the treatment of this pathology. The radial nerve runs from posterior to anterior at the lateral aspect of the distal humerus. Hence, there is reason to believe that due to the anatomic vicinity of the radial nerve in this area, lateral-medial distal locking in intramedullary nailing of the humerus may be associated with a greater risk for iatrogenic radial nerve injury compared to anterior-posterior locking.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSE

To assess whether the choice of distal locking (lateral-medial versus anterior-posterior distal locking) in intramedullary humeral nailing of humeral shaft fractures affects the risk for iatrogenic radial nerve injury.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Overall, 203 patients (116 females, mean age 64.3 ± 18.6 years), who underwent intramedullary nailing of the humerus between 2000 and 2020 at a single level-one trauma center, met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this retrospective case-control study. Patients were subdivided into two groups according to the distal locking technique.

RESULTS

Anterior-posterior locking was performed in 176 patients versus lateral-medial locking in 27 patients. We observed four patients with iatrogenic radial nerve palsy in both groups. Risk for iatrogenic radial nerve palsy was almost 7.5 times higher for lateral-medial locking (OR 7.48, p = 0.006). There was no statistically significant difference regarding intraoperative complications, union rates or revision surgeries between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Lateral-medial distal locking in intramedullary nailing of the humerus may be associated with a greater risk for iatrogenic radial nerve palsy than anterior-posterior locking. Hence, we advocate for anterior-posterior locking.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III retrospective comparative study.

Anatomic consideration of the radial nerve in relation to humeral length for unilateral external fixation: a retrospective study using magnetic resonance imaging findings in korean

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to present a safe zone for distal pin insertion for external fixation using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images.

METHODS

All patients who took at least one upper arm MRI from June 2003 to July 2021 were searched via a clinical data warehouse. For measuring the humerus length, proximal and distal landmarks were set as the highest protruding point of the humeral head and lowermost margin of ossified bone of the lateral condyle, respectively. For children or adolescents with incomplete ossification, the uppermost and lowermost ossified margin of the ossification centers were set as proximal and distal landmarks respectively. The anterior exit point (AEP) was defined as the location of the radial nerve exiting the lateral intermuscular septum to the anterior humerus and distance between the distal margin of the humerus and AEP was measured. The proportions between the AEP and full humeral length were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients were enrolled for final analysis. The mean humerus length was 29.4 cm (range 12.9-34.6 cm). The mean distance between the ossified lateral condyle and AEP was 6.6 cm (range 3.0-10.6 cm). The mean ratio of the anterior exit point and humeral length was 22.5% (range 15.1-30.8%). The minimum ratio was 15.1%.

CONCLUSION

A percutaneous distal pin insertion for humeral lengthening with an external fixator may be safely done within 15% length of the distal humerus. If pin insertion is required more proximal than distal 15% of the humeral shaft, an open procedure or preoperative radiographic assessment is advised to prevent iatrogenic radial nerve injury.

Two fingerbreadths, one finger's width: on the proximity of the radial nerve to the deltoid tuberosity

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to find a convenient technique to evaluate the location of the radial nerve (RN) with reference to the deltoid tuberosity (DT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-eight upper extremities, embalmed using a modified version of Thiel's method, were included in the study. The interval between the tip of the greater tubercle of the humerus and the distal tip of the lateral humeral epicondyle (LE) was defined as humeral length (HL). The most prominent point of the DT was used as the point of reference. Through this point, a horizontal reference line which met the humeral axis at the dorsal side of the humeral shaft was simulated. The longitudinal distance between the crossing point of the horizontal line and the humeral axis and the RN was measured (distance 1). The interval between the intersection point and the reference point at the DT was measured (distance 2). Data were evaluated in centimeters.

RESULTS

For the whole sample, the HL averaged 31.0 cm (SD: 2.3; range 26.2-36.9). Distance 1 averaged 2.2 cm (SD: 0.3; range 1.6-3.1), and distance 2 averaged 1.2 cm (SD: 1.0; range 0-2.8). The HL was larger in the male group when compared to females (p < 0.001; males mean: 32.2 cm; females mean 29.5 cm). There was no difference regarding distance 2 (p = 0.59; males mean: 1.2 cm; females mean: 1.3 cm) between the sexes. Distance 1 was significantly (p = 0.02) larger in the male group (mean: 2.3 cm) when compared to females (mean: 2.1 cm). Concerning sides, there were no differences regarding all evaluated parameters (HL: p = 0.6; Distance 1: p = 0.6; distance 2: p = 0.8).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an easily applicable technique to localize the RN with reference to the DT.

Transient Exertional Compressive Radial Neuropathy in a Collegiate Baseball Pitcher: A Case Report

CASE

A 21-year-old collegiate baseball pitcher presented with transient lateral arm pain and wrist extension weakness after pitching more than 1 inning. Physical examination was unremarkable at rest. Ultrasound-guided injection of the radial nerve at the level of the lateral intramuscular septum improved his symptoms. After decompression of the radial nerve, the patient noted resolution of his symptoms while pitching.

CONCLUSION

Atraumatic radial neuropathy is a rare but documented phenomenon. As far as we know, this is the first reported case of a transient exertional radial neuropathy in an athlete at the level of the lateral intermuscular septum.

Estimating the location of the posterior interosseus nerve during an extensor digitorum communis-splitting approach: a comparison of methods using the transepicondylar distance

Background

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

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

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; R² = 0.266). The median difference between the estimated and actual distances was -5.6 mm (-19.3 mm to 7.6 mm). In method B, the mean TED was 68.4 ± 8.7 mm, and the mean measured distance from the LE in pronation was 68.7 ± 9.4 mm. The TED closely correlated with the measured distance to the PIN (R² = 0.95, P < .001). The mean difference between the estimated and actual distances was ±2.0 mm (range -4.0 mm to 2.0 mm), significantly more precise than method A (P = .007).

Conclusion

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.

Apex of Triceps Aponeurosis: A Reliable Landmark to Localize the Radial Nerve

The posterior approach to the humerus is an extensile approach, which provides excellent access to the distal aspect of the humerus. The approach is traditionally utilized for internal fixation of fractures of the distal third of the humerus, to perform sequestrectomy, and for radial nerve exploration. The radial nerve is susceptible to damage when utilizing this approach^1-3. Hence, accurate localization of the radial nerve is required to aid in identification during dissection and to minimize the risk of palsy. Various anatomical landmarks have been described in the literature that can help locate the radial nerve intraoperatively.

Description

The patient is anesthetized and placed in the lateral decubitus position with the elbow of the operative limb hanging freely over a bolster. A posterior midline incision centered over the fracture is made on the posterior aspect of the arm. The superficial and deep fascia are incised. The triceps aponeurosis is formed by the convergence and fusion of the lateral and long heads of the triceps. The most proximal confluence can be termed the "apex of the triceps aponeurosis." The radial nerve can be isolated approximately 2.5 cm proximal to the apex by developing an intramuscular plane. The remainder of the intramuscular dissection for plate fixation can then be performed safely without risking injury to the radial nerve.

Alternatives

Numerous studies have established the relationship of the radial nerve to a fixed osseous point such as the medial epicondyle, lateral epicondyle, and angle of the acromion^4-9. Additionally, the wide range of measurements of these anatomic relationships, as reported in various studies, makes it difficult for the operating surgeon to locate the radial nerve, especially in the setting of a fractured humeral shaft. For example, the reported distance of the radial nerve from the lateral epicondyle ranges from 6 to 16 cm and the distance from the angle of the acromion ranges from 10 to 19 cm. Even identification of the superficial branch of the radial nerve has been shown to help intraoperative localization of the radial nerve¹⁰. However, these studies have been conducted on cadavers with intact humeri, and their accuracy has not been demonstrated on the patients in the clinical milieu of trauma.

Rationale

The described soft-tissue landmark, which lies approximately 2.5 cm proximal to the apex of the triceps aponeurosis, reliably locates the radial nerve intraoperatively¹¹. It is based on the anatomical fact that the origins of the lateral head (oblique ridge corresponding to the lateral lip of the spiral groove) and long head (infraglenoid tubercle of the scapula) are well above fractures of the middle and distal thirds of the humerus. Hence, the relationship of the radial nerve to the soft point represented by the apex of the aponeurosis is not likely to be disturbed in the setting of fractures distal to it, in sharp contrast with previously described osseous landmarks.

Expected Outcomes

Employing this anatomical understanding resulted in early localization of the radial nerve (within 6 ± 1.5 minutes of skin incision) and less blood loss (188 ± 13 mL)¹¹. Patients are likely to retain their ability to perform active dorsiflexion of the wrist and fingers and have sensory preservation in the distribution of autonomous zone of the radial nerve after the procedure.

Important Tips

The relationship of the radial nerve to the soft point represented by the apex of the aponeurosis is not likely to be disturbed in the setting of typical fractures distal to it; however, this may differ in cases of severely displaced or comminuted fractures, and the surgeon should be aware of this fact.The surgeon should remain careful to protect the vena comitans.

Anatomic relations of the median nerve to the ulnar insertion of the brachialis muscle: safety issues and implications for medial approaches to the elbow joint

INTRODUCTION

Preventing nerve injury is critical in elbow surgery. Distal extension of medial approaches, required for coronoid fracture fixation and graft-replacement, may endanger the median nerve. This study aims to describe an easily identifiable and reproducible anatomical landmark to localize the median nerve distal to the joint line and to delineate how its relative position changes with elbow flexion and forearm rotation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The median nerve and the ulnar insertion of the brachialis muscle were identified in eleven fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens after dissection over an extended medial approach. The elbow was brought first in full extension and then in 90° flexion, and the shortest distance between the two structures was measured while rotating the forearm in full pronation, neutral position and full supination.

RESULTS

The distance between the median nerve and the brachialis insertion was highest with the elbow flexed and the forearm in neutral position. All distances measured in flexion were larger than those in extension, and all distances measured from the most proximal point of the brachialis insertion were larger than those from the most distal point. Distances in pronation and in supination were smaller than to those in neutral forearm position.

CONCLUSIONS

The ulnar insertion of the brachialis is a reliable landmark to localize and protect the median nerve at the level of the coronoid base. Elbow flexion and neutral forearm position increase significantly the safety margins between the two structures; this information suggests some modifications to the previously described medial elbow approaches.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Basic Science Study.

The radial nerve at revision/redo surgery - using the lower lateral cutaneous nerve to prevent a postoperative radial nerve deficit

Background

The posterior approach to the humeral shaft is commonly used for surgical procedures on the humeral shaft. We present our experiences using the modification of the surgical exposure described by Gerwin M. which we have found useful at the time of revision surgery.

Methods

Between 2014 and 2019, six patients who underwent a revision surgical procedure for a nonunion of the humeral shaft where a prior surgical procedure was performed through a posterior incision were included. The approach used a modification of the posterior approach described by Gerwin M. where the lower lateral cutaneous nerve branch of the radial nerve is used to identify trace, mobilize, retract, and protect the radial nerve to achieve adequate exposure of the humeral shaft.

Results and Discussion

None of the patients had a postoperative nerve deficit.Adequate exposure to aid hardware removal, osteosynthesis, and bone grafting was achieved in all patients.

Conclusion

The modification of the posterior approach described by Gerwin M. is useful at the time of revision or redo surgery on the humeral shaft where other bony and soft tissue landmarks are altered to prevent an iatrogenic injury to the radial nerve while providing adequate exposure to treat a nonunion.

Three-dimensional mapping of distal humerus fracture

Background

Distal humerus fractures (DHFs) constitute one-third of elbow fractures approximately. In this study, we aim to define and analyze the fracture lines and morphological features of DHFs using mapping technique.

Methods

One hundred and two DHFs were retrospectively reviewed. All the computed tomography (CT) data were used to manually reconstruct and virtually reduce the DHF fragments to fit a standard 3D model. Smooth curves were depicted accurately onto the surface of the template to represent the fracture lines. All the curves were overlapped onto the model to create the 3D fracture map and heat map.

Results

Our analysis was based on 102 CT images of DHFs, contributed by 59 male and 43 female patients (mean age, 46 years; range, 18-93 years), and included 15 type A, 25 type B, and 62 type C fractures. On mapping, the hot zones were located in the radial fossa, coronoid fossa, olecranon fossa, and the external part of the trochlear. Conversely, the cold zones were noted in medial condyle, the medial side of the trochlear, and the anterolateral area on the supracondylar ridge.

Conclusions

Our study firstly shows the fracture lines and morphological features of distal humeral fractures by three-dimensional mapping technology. Distal humerus fracture lines are characteristic and highly related to the micro-architecture difference of distal humerus, which may provide some guidance for the treatment plan selection and surgical fixation design.

Location of the radial nerve along the humeral shaft between the prone and lateral decubitus positions at different elbow positions

Identification of the radial nerve is important during the posterior approach to a humerus fracture. During this procedure, the patient can be placed in the prone or lateral decubitus position depending on the surgeon’s preference. The distance from the radial nerve to the osseous structures will be different in each position. The purpose of this study was to identify the safety zones in various patient and elbow flexion positions. The distances from the olecranon to the center of the radial groove and intermuscular septum and lateral epicondyle to the lateral intermuscular septum were measured using a digital Vernier caliper. The measurements were performed with cadavers in the lateral decubitus and prone positions at different elbow flexion angles. The distance from where the radial nerve crossed the posterior aspect of the humerus measured from the upper part of the olecranon to the center of the radial nerve in both positions at different elbow flexion angles varied from a mean maximum distance of 130.00 mm with the elbow in full extension in the prone position to a minimum distance of 121.01 mm with the elbow in flexion at 120° in the lateral decubitus position. The mean distance of the radial nerve from the upper olecranon to the lateral intermuscular septum varied from 107.13 to 102.22 mm. The distance from the lateral epicondyle to the lateral edge of the radial nerve varied from 119.92 to 125.38 mm. There was not significant contrast in the position of the radial nerve with osseous landmarks concerning different degrees of flexion, except for 120°, which is not significant, as this flexion angle is rarely used.

Interposition arthroplasty: Current indications, technique and expectations

The ultimate means of functional restoration of joints with end stage arthritis is prosthetic replacement. Even though there is reluctance to replace the joint of a younger individual, the mean age of joint replacement continues to decrease. This is due to three factors: 1) social expectations, 2) uncertainty with many joint preservation procedures and 3) the ever-increasing reliability and longevity of prosthetic replacement. Unfortunately, the elbow does not share in these advantageous trends to the extent as is the case for the hip, knee and shoulder. Social pressure for restoration of normal or near normal function is certainly present, but the desired improvement of longevity and fewer restrictions of activity have not been documented. Hence, possibly somewhat disproportionately to other joints, there is great need for a reliable and functional non replacement joint reconstruction option. For most other joints, fusion is the ultimate non replacement option. Further, for most joints an optimum position has been defined to allow the greatest chance of normal function of the individual. Unfortunately, there is no truly 'optimum' functional position of elbow fusion, and the recommended 90° of flexion is considered the 'least worse' position. Further, unfortunately, elbow fusion dysfunction cannot be mitigated by compensated shoulder motion. Hence, while there is little experience in general with interposition arthroplasty of the elbow, in the authors' opinion it remains the treatment of choice in some individuals and in certain circumstances for the reasons explained above. In our judgment, the reason for avoiding this procedure is that it is technically difficult, the absolute frequency of need is not great, and outcomes do appear to be a function of experience and technique. Based on these considerations, in this chapter we review the current indications and assessment and selection considerations. Emphasis is placed on our current technique with technical tips to enhance the likelihood of success and longevity. We conclude with a review of expectations based on current literature.

Three-dimensional measurement of the course of the radial nerve at the posterior humeral shaft: An in vivo anatomical study

PURPOSE

Iatrogenic radial nerve injury caused by surgical exposure of the humerus is a serious complication. We aimed to describe the course of the radial nerve at the posterior humeral shaft using a three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction technique by utilizing computed tomography (CT) images of living subjects. We hypothesized that the course of the radial nerve in the posterior aspect of the humeral shaft would be reliably established using this technique and the measurements would have satisfactory intraobserver/interobserver reliabilities.

METHODS

This in vivo anatomical study utilized 652 upper extremity CT angiography images from 326 patients. A 3D modeling of the humerus and radial nerve was performed. We evaluated the segment of the radial nerve that lays directly on the posterior aspect of the humeral shaft and measured its proximal point, mid, and distal points. The shortest distances from the olecranon fossa to these points were defined as R1, R2, and R3, respectively. The relationships between these parameters and humeral length (HL) and transcondylar length (TL) were evaluated, and the intraobserver/interobserver reliabilities of these parameters were measured.

RESULTS

The HL was 293.6 mm, and TL was 58.64 mm on average. The R1 measured 159.2 (range 127.1-198.2) mm, R2 was 136.6 (105.7-182.5), and R3 was 112.8 (76.8-150.0) mm on average (p < .001). The intraobserver/interobserver reliabilities ranged from 0.90 to 0.98.

CONCLUSION

The course of the radial nerve at the posterior aspect of the humeral shaft can be reliably established using the 3D reconstruction technique, and all measurements had excellent intraobserver/interobserver reliability.

Identification of most consistent and reliable anatomical landmark to locate and protect radial nerve during posterior approach to humerus: a cadaveric study

The location of the radial nerve (RN) is described with various bony landmarks, but such may be disturbed in the setting of fracture and dislocation of bone. Alternative soft tissue landmarks would be helpful to locate the nerve in such setting. To recognize certain anatomic landmarks to identify, locate and protect RN from any iatrogenic injury during surgical intervention such as open reduction and internal fixation. Forty arms belonging to 20 adult cadavers were used for this study. We measured the distance of RN from the point of confluence of triceps aponeurosis (TA), tip of the acromion and tip of the lateral epicondyle along the long axis of the humerus. These distances were correlated with the upper arm length (UAL). The average UAL was 32.64±0.64 cm. The distance of the RN from the point of confluence of TA (tricepso-radial distance, TRD), tip of acromion (acromion-radial distance) and tip of lateral epicondyle of humerus (condylo-radial distance, CRD) was 3.59±0.16 cm, 14.27±0.59 cm, and 17.14±1.29 cm respectively. No correlation was found with UAL. Statistically, TRD showed the least variability and CRD showed maximum variability. The minimum TRD was found to be 3.00 cm. So this should be considered as the maximum permissible length of the triceps split. The point of confluence of the TA appears to be the most stable and reliable anatomic landmark for localization of the RN during the posterior approach to the humerus.

Lateral External-fixation Adjacent to Radial Nerve

Introduction The aim of our study was to describe the injury pattern and outcomes of active-duty subjects that underwent humeral external fixation and to determine if the placement of external fixator pins outside of the radial nerve safe zones is correlated with injury to the radial nerve. Materials and methods We examined all US Service members treated with humeral external fixation at our facility from June 2005 through June 2015. The mechanism of injury, injury pattern, location of external fixation application, pre- and postoperative radial nerve function, presence or absence of radial nerve transection from injury or external fixation, anatomic location of pins in relation to the radial nerve safe zone, and final radial nerve outcomes were recorded. We defined the proximal safe zone as 5 cm distal to the acromion to 14.8 cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle, and we defined the distal safe zone as the proximal 70% of the transepicondylar width of the humerus when projected proximally from the lateral epicondyle. Results  For our study, 123 patients were identified over our date range, and 16 subjects were included with documentation regarding nerve function/injury characteristics, appropriate radiographs, and active duty status. Around 80% of injuries resulted from a blast mechanism, and 80% of injury patterns included either an intraarticular or open fracture. The radial nerve safe zone was violated in 15 of the 16 subjects (94%). The one subject with a safe construct did not sustain a nerve injury. Complete preoperative documentation on nerve function was only available for half of the subjects. Two of five subjects known to have intact function prior to external fixation had a postoperative neurologic deficit (40%). Of eight subjects with unknown radial nerve function prior to external fixation, seven subjects had full nerve function at the final follow up, and one subject had partial sensory function only. Of the three subjects with impaired preoperative radial nerve function, two made a full recovery, and the third recovered sensory function only. Around 50% of all subjects required medical retirement. Conclusion External fixation of upper extremity injuries in combat is rarely absolutely indicated, often results in the placement of pins outside of the radial nerve safe zone, and is associated with up to a 40% incidence of radial nerve injury.

Validation of the registration accuracy of navigation-assisted arthroscopic débridement for elbow osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The identification and precise removal of bony impingement lesions during arthroscopic débridement arthroplasty for elbow osteoarthritis is technically difficult. Surgical navigation systems, combined with preoperative 3-dimensional (3D) assessment of bony impingements, can provide real-time tracking of the surgical instruments and impingement lesions. This study aims to determine the registration accuracy of the navigation system for the humerus and ulna during elbow arthroscopy.

METHODS

We tested the registration procedure using resin bone models of 3 actual patients with elbow osteoarthritis. We digitized bone surface points using navigation pointers under arthroscopy. We initially performed paired-point registration, digitizing 6 preset anatomical landmarks, and then refined the initial alignment with surface matching registration, digitizing 30 points. The registration accuracy for each trial was evaluated as the mean target registration error in each reference marker. Three observers repeated the registration procedure 5 times each with the 3 specimens (total, 45 trials). The median of the registration accuracy was evaluated in total (45 trials) as the accuracy of the registration procedure. The differences in the registration accuracy among the 3 observers (median of 15 trials) were also examined.

RESULTS

The total registration accuracies were 0.96 mm for the humerus and 0.85 mm for the ulna. No significant differences were found in the registration accuracy for the humerus and ulna among the 3 observers.

CONCLUSIONS

This arthroscopic-assisted registration procedure is sufficiently feasible and accurate for application of the navigation system to arthroscopic débridement arthroplasty in clinical settings.

Safe zone for lateral pin placement for external fixation of the distal humerus

External fixation is a common, efficient technique used for humeral shaft stabilization and elbow fractures. There are reports of radial nerve injuries associated with this procedure. In this study, we investigated the course and variability of the radial nerve along the lateral humerus in relation to the elbow joint to determine a relatively safe zone for lateral pin placement in external fixation. Twenty upper extremities from 10 cadavers were studied. The nerve branches and course of the radial nerve along the lateral humerus were carefully dissected. Straight lines (a, b, and c) were made connecting three landmarks (the acromion, coracoid process, and anterior wall of the axilla) in the proximal upper extremity to the lateral condyle (LC) of the humerus; their intersections with the radial nerve (A, B, and C) were marked. We analyzed whether the intersection positions were correlated with the connecting line lengths. The mean lengths of the connecting lines were (a) 27.24 ± 2.57, (b) 26.18 ± 2.79, and (c) 20.95 ± 1.44 cm; the distance between the intersection points and the LC of the humerus were (Aa) 7.56 ± 1.31, (Bb) 6.90 ± 2.27, and (Cc) 5.01 ± 0.83 cm; and the measured intersection points of the radial nerve in the lateral aspect of the humerus were (A) 18.48%-34.82%, (B) 13.48%-40.00%, and (C) 19.27%-28.05% of the lengths of lines a, b, and c, respectively. Our data provide a more reliable reference to predict the course of the radial nerve on the lateral humerus and define a safe zone for pin placement. Clin. Anat., 33:637-642, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Fingerbreadths Rule in Determining the Safe Zone of the Radial Nerve and Posterior Interosseous Nerve for a Lateral Elbow Approach: An Anatomic Study

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a safe zone rule could be applied to prevent iatrogenic injuries to the radial nerve (RN); and determine whether there is a relationship between the diameter of the radial head and capitellum and the distance of the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) to the radiocapitellar joint.

Methods

Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were used to measure the distances between the RN and the lateral epicondyle; the PIN and the radiocapitellar joint; the lateral epicondyle and the PIN as it crossed the ulnohumeral joint; the diameter of the radial head; the width of the capitellum; and the fingerbreadths of the specimens.

Results

Four fingerbreadths determined a safe zone between the lateral epicondyle and the RN proximally at the point at which it pierced the intermuscular septum and the mid-lateral portion of the humeral shaft. Two fingerbreadths provided a safe zone for the PIN from the radiocapitellar joint to the midpoint of the axis of the radius only with the forearm in pronation.

Conclusion

A four-finger rule, two-finger rule, and radial head diameter or capitellum size may predict a safe zone for the RN and PIN except for the segment of the nerve where it crosses the anterior cortex of either the humerus or radius.

Level of Evidence

Preclinical cadaveric study.

CT Analysis of a Potential Safe Zone for Placing External Fixator Pins in the Humerus

BACKGROUND

Iatrogenic radial nerve injures are a common complication during the placement of external fixator pins at the lateral aspect of the humeral shaft. This study uses a three-dimensional measurement technique to locate a safe entry point for humeral pins when externally fixating the elbow. Methods: We fixed a guide wire to the radial nerve by a suture string, and used computed tomography (CT) to scan the upper limbs of cadaver specimens. Then, we measured the deviation angles of the radial nerve on the CT scans, and the distance from the radial nerve to the "elbow rotation center" (ERC). Result: The average distance from the radial nerve to the ERC was 87.3 ± 8.5 mm (range: 68-100 mm), 58.3 ± 11.3 mm (range: 32.12-82.84 mm), 106.3 ± 5.8 mm (range: 86.93-115.08 mm), and 113.9 ± 4.8 mm (range: 97.93-120.22 mm) at radial nerve deviation angles of 0°, -30°, 30°, and 45°, respectively. The average radial nerve deviation angle was -37.7° ± 7.7° and 123.9° ± 19.9° at 50 and 150 mm, respectively. Relative to 0°, the distance between the radial nerve and the ERC at radial nerve deviation angles of -30°, 30°, and 45° showed a significant difference (t = 18.20, p < 0.05; Z = 6.07, p < 0.001; Z = 6.40, p < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Pins inserted into the proximal humerus should be about 150 mm from the ERC with a radial nerve deviation angle of 30° anteriorly, and 50 mm from the ERC with a deviation angle of 30°-45° posteriorly.

The posterior interosseous nerve crosses the radial head midline and increases its distance from bony structures with supination of the forearm

BACKGROUND

This study investigated whether forearm movements change the relative position of the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) with respect to the midline of the radial head (Rh) under direct arthroscopic observation.

METHODS

The PIN was identified in 10 fresh frozen cadaveric specimens dissected under arthroscopy. The forearm was moved first in full pronation and then in full supination, and the displacement of the PIN from medial to lateral with respect to the midline of the Rh was recorded. The shortest linear distance between the nerve and the most anterior part of the Rh was measured with a graduated calliper inserted via the midlateral portal with the forearm in neutral position, full pronation, and full supination.

RESULTS

The PIN was identifiable in all specimens. In all cases the PIN crossed the Rh midline with forearm movements, moving from medial in full pronation to lateral in full supination. The distance between the PIN and Rh is significantly greater in supination than in the neutral position and pronation (P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that the PIN movement described in open surgery (medialization with pronation) also occurs during arthroscopy. The role of pronation in protecting the PIN in extra-articularprocedures is therefore confirmed. Supination, however, increases the linear distance between the PIN and Rh and should therefore be considered to increase the safe working volume whenever intra-articular procedures are performed on the anterolateral aspect of the elbow.

Effects of the Elbow Flexion Angle on the Radial Nerve Location around the Humerus: A Cadaver Study for Safe Installation of a Hinged External Fixator

Background: This study aimed to investigate whether the distance between the radial nerve and rotational center of the elbow joint when observing from the lateral surface of the humerus changes according to passive elbow joint flexion for safe external fixation with a hinged fixator of the elbow joint.

Methods: Twenty fresh-frozen cadaveric arms were dissected. The points where the radial nerve crosses over the posterior aspect of the humerus, crosses through the lateral center, and crosses over the anterior aspect of the humerus were defined in the lateral view of the elbow joint, using fluoroscopy, as R1, R2, and R3, respectively. The distances between the rotational center and each point on the radial nerve were measured when the flexion angle of the elbow joint was 10°, 50°, 90°, and 130°.

Results: The distances between the rotational center and R1, R2, and R3 were 118 mm, 94 mm, and 65 mm, respectively, when the flexion angle was 10°; 112 mm, 93 mm, and 74 mm, respectively, for 50°; 108 mm, 93 mm, and 77 mm, respectively, for 90°; and 103 mm, 94 mm, and 83 mm, respectively, for 130°. The distance between the rotational center and R2 was constant regardless of the flexion angle. With elbow joint extension, the distances between R1 and R3 increased; the safe zone, a region where the radial nerve would not be located on the humerus, was the smallest in extension. When the elbow joint was flexed, the distances between R1 and R3 decreased; the safe zone was the largest in flexion.

Conclusions: This study showed that the radial nerve location on the humerus varied based on the flexion angle of the elbow joint; the safe zone may change. A half-pin can be likely inserted safely, avoiding the elbow joint extension position.

Standards for external fixation application: national survey under the auspices of the German Trauma Society

INTRODUCTION

External fixation is widely accepted as a provisional or sometimes definitive treatment for long-bone fractures. Indications include but are not limited to damage control surgery in poly-traumatized patients as well as provisional bridging to definite treatment with soft tissue at risk. As little is known about surgeon's habits in applying this treatment strategy, we performed a national survey.

METHODS

We utilized the member database of the German Trauma Society (DGU). The questionnaire encompassed 15 questions that addresses topics including participants' position, experience, workplace, and questions regarding specifics of external fixation application in different anatomical regions. Furthermore, we compared differences between trauma centre levels and surgeon-related factors.

RESULTS

The participants predominantly worked in level 1 trauma centres (42.7%) and were employed as attendings (54.7%). There was widespread consensus for planning and intra-operative radiographical control of external fixation. Surgeons appointed at a level I trauma centre preferred significantly more often supra-acetabular pin placement in external fixation of the pelvis rather than the utilization of iliac pins (75.8%, p = 0.0001). Moreover, they were more likely to favor a mini-open approach to insert humeral pins (42.4%, p = 0.003). Overall, blunt dissection and mini-open approaches seemed equally popular (38.2 and 34.1%). Department chairmen indicated more often than their colleagues to follow written pin-care protocols for minimization of infection (16.7%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Despite the fact that external fixation usage is widespread and well established among trauma surgeons in Germany, there are substantial differences in the method of application.

Quantifying the Location of the Radial Nerve in Children for Intraoperative Use

BACKGROUND

In adults, a relative "safe zone" for lateral approaches to the elbow has been well described in efforts to reduce iatrogenic injury, typically a minimum of 6 cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle. To avoid iatrogenic injury to the radial nerve intraoperatively, we investigated the distance of the nerve from the distal humeral physis in children.

METHODS

All patients who had axial and coronal T1-weighted magnetic resonance imagings of the humerus and elbow between 2005 and 2015 were eligible. Patients were excluded if there was any pathology causing significant alteration to the normal anatomy of the distal humerus or surrounding soft tissue. The axial cut in which the radial nerve was positioned along a line passing through the center of the humerus in the transverse plane was identified, and the location of the nerve was marked. This axial cut was cross-referenced with the corresponding coronal view. The distance along the lateral edge of the humerus in a straight line from the marked location of the radial nerve to the distal humeral physis was measured.

RESULTS

In total, 21 magnetic resonance imagings of 20 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean distance of the radial nerve proximally from the distal humeral physis was as follows by age group: below 1-year old=1.7 cm (range, 1.2 to 2.5 cm); 1 to 2-years old=2.8 cm (range, 1.8 to 3.2 cm); 4 to 5-years old=5.3 cm (range, 5.1 to 5.5 cm); 6-years old and above=7.3 cm (range, 6.0 to 9.2 cm). For below 6-years old, when age was multiplied by 1 cm to define a predicted safe zone all radial nerves were found proximal to this. All patients 6 years and above had measurements that fell into the adult range of >6 cm, whereas no patients below 6-years old had measurements in this range.

CONCLUSIONS

The distance of the radial nerve proximally from the distal humeral physis can be safely approximated for children below 6 years of age by multiplying patient age in years by 1 cm. By the age of 6 the distance of the radial nerve falls within the adult range (>6 cm).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Radial nerve injury following elbow external fixator: report of three cases and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Radial nerve palsy is a rare but serious complication following elbow external fixation. Only 11 cases have been reported in the literature to date, but the incidence may be underreported. We present three new cases of this complication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed the three cases of radial palsy seen in our center following the application of an external fixator as treatment for complex elbow injuries.

RESULTS

Mean patient age at surgery was 50 years. Two patients were female and one was male. In the three cases, the initial lesion was a posterior elbow dislocation, associated with a fracture of the radial shaft in one and a radial head fracture and coronoid fracture, respectively, in the other two. Due to persistent elbow instability, an external fixator was applied in all three cases. The fixator pins were introduced percutaneously in two cases and under direct vision in an open manner in the third case. Radial palsy was noted immediately postoperatively in all cases. It was permanent in two cases and temporary in the third.

CONCLUSION

Radial nerve palsy after placement of an external elbow fixator was resolved in only 1 of our 3 cases and in 6 of the 11 cases in the literature to date. Although the event is rare, these alarming results highlight the need for recommendations to avoid this complication.

Posterior interosseous nerve localization within the proximal forearm - a patient normalized parameter

AIM

To provide a “patient-normalized” parameter in the proximal forearm.

METHODS

Sixty-three cadaveric upper extremities from thirty-five cadavers were studied. A muscle splitting approach was utilized to locate the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) at the point where it emerges from beneath the supinator. The supinator was carefully incised to expose the midpoint length of the nerve as it passes into the forearm while preserving the associated fascial connections, thereby preserving the relationship of the nerve with the muscle. We measured the transepicondylar distance (TED), PIN distance in the forearm’s neutral rotation position, pronation position, supination position, and the nerve width. Two individuals performed measurements using a digital caliper with inter-observer and intra-observer blinding. The results were analyzed with the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for paired samples.

RESULTS

In pronation, the PIN was within two confidence intervals of 1.0 TED in 95% of cases (range 0.7-1.3 TED); in neutral, within two confidence intervals of 0.84 TED in 95% of cases (range 0.5-1.1 TED); in supination, within two confidence intervals of 0.72 TED in 95% of cases (range 0.5-0.9 TED). The mean PIN distance from the lateral epicondyle was 100% of TED in a pronated forearm, 84% in neutral, and 72% in supination. Predictive accuracy was highest in supination; in all cases the majority of specimens (90.47%-95.23%) are within 2 cm of the forearm position-specific percentage of TED. When comparing right to left sides for TEDs with the signed Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for paired samples as well as a significance test (with normal distribution), the P-value was 0.0357 (significance - 0.05) indicating a significant difference between the two sides.

CONCLUSION

This “patient normalized” parameter localizes the PIN crossing a line drawn between the lateral epicondyle and the radial styloid. Accurate PIN localization will aid in diagnosis, injections, and surgical approaches.

Anatomic cadaveric study of the extensile extensor digitorum communis splitting approach for exposing the ulnar coronoid process

BACKGROUND

The extensile extensor digitorum communis (EDC) splitting approach can access the ulnar coronoid process (UCP), which can be used to treat terrible triad injuries. The present study anatomically examined the extensile EDC splitting approach for exposing the UCP.

METHODS

Twenty fresh frozen cadaveric upper limbs were dissected. The splitting length of the EDC and detachment length of the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB)-extensor carpi radialis longus (ECRL)-brachioradialis (BR) origin were measured to expose the UCP. The distance between the most distal site of the EDC splitting and the point at which the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) crosses the anterior aspect of the radial shaft, and the distance between the most proximal site of the ECRB-ECRL-BR origin detachment and the point at which the radial nerve crosses the anterior aspect of the humeral shaft were measured.

RESULTS

The splitting length of the EDC was 45.4 ± 4.8 mm, the detachment length of the ECRB-ECRL-BR origin was 30.2 ± 4.7 mm, the distance between the distal site of the EDC splitting and PIN was 10.6 ± 6.1 mm (minimum distance, 1.1 mm), and the distance between the proximal site of the ECRB-ECRL-BR origin detachment and the radial nerve was 49.5 ± 9.7 mm (minimum distance, 31.7 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

The extensile EDC splitting approach can sufficiently expose the UCP. However, splitting must be performed carefully because the most distal site of the EDC splitting is close to the point at which the PIN crosses the anterior aspect of the radial shaft (average distance, 10 mm; minimum distance, 1 mm).

Causes of Secondary Radial Nerve Palsy and Results of Treatment

Background

The aim of this study was to analyze the causes that lead to secondary damage of the radial nerve and to discuss the results of reconstructive treatment.

Material/Methods

The study group consisted of 33 patients treated for radial nerve palsy after humeral fractures. Patients were diagnosed based on clinical examinations, ultrasonography, electromyography, or nerve conduction velocity. During each operation, the location and type of nerve damage were analyzed. During the reconstructive treatment, neurolysis, direct neurorrhaphy, or reconstruction with a sural nerve graft was used. The outcomes were evaluated using the Medical Research Council (MRC) scales and the quick DASH score.

Results

Secondary radial nerve palsy occurs after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) by plate, as well as by closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) by nail. In the case of ORIF, it most often occurs when the lateral approach is used, as in the case of CRIF with an insertion interlocking screws. The results of the surgical treatment were statistically significant and depended on the time between nerve injury and revision (reconstruction) surgery, type of damage to the radial nerve, surgery treatment, and type of fixation. Treatment results were not statistically significant, depending on the type of fracture or location of the nerve injury.

Conclusions

The potential risk of radial nerve neurotmesis justifies an operative intervention to treat neurological complications after a humeral fracture. Adequate surgical treatment in many of these cases allows for functional recovery of the radial nerve.

The tricipital aponeurosis--a reliable soft tissue landmark for humeral plating

This study aims to identify the relationship of the radial nerve as it descends across the humerus with reference to a reliable soft tissue landmark, the tricipital aponeurosis. Following cadaveric dissection of 10 adult humerii, the radial nerve was located as it crossed the lateral midsagittal point of the humeral diaphysis. A horizontal line was then subtended medially from this point to another line subtended vertically from the lateral border of the tricipital aponeurosis. The vertical distance from this intersection to the lateral apex of the aponeurosis was recorded in three positions (full flexion, 90° of flexion and full extension). The location of the radial nerve on the posterior aspect of the humeral diaphysis to the medial apex of the tricipital aponeurosis was also noted. In 90° of flexion the radial nerve at the lateral midsagittal point of the humerus was 0.9 mm proximal to the lateral apex of the tricipital aponeurosis. Flexion and extension of the elbow changed the interval to 16.3 mm (nerve proximal) in full flexion and 7.1 mm in full extension (nerve distal). On the posterior aspect of the humerus the radial nerve was 21.8 mm proximal to the medial aspect of the tricipital aponeurosis. The aponeurosis provides a reference point from which the nerve can be easily located on the lateral aspect of the humerus intraoperatively in a range of positions, whilst the medial apex provides a guide to the location of the nerve on the posterior aspect of the arm.

Safe zone for superolateral entry pin into the distal humerus in children: an MRI analysis

BACKGROUND

The radial nerve is at risk for iatrogenic injury during placement of pins, screws, or wires around the distal humerus. Unlike adults, detailed anatomic information about the relationship of the nerve to the distal humerus is lacking in children.

QUESTION/PURPOSES

This study evaluates the relationship of the radial nerve to the distal humerus in a pediatric population on conventional MRI and proposes an anatomic safe zone using easily identifiable bony landmarks on an AP elbow radiograph.

METHODS

To determine the course of the radial nerve at the lateral distal humerus, we reviewed 23 elbow radiographs and MRIs of 22 children (mean age, 9 ± 4 years; range, 3-12 years) obtained as part of their workup for various elbow conditions. We described a technique using distance ratios calculated as a percentage of the patient's own transepicondylar distance, defined as the distance measured between the apices of the medial and lateral epicondyles, on the AP elbow radiograph and the midcoronal MR image. The cross-reference tool on a Picture Archiving and Communication System was then used to identify axial MR image at the level where the transepicondylar distance was measured. On this axial image, a line was drawn connecting the medial and lateral epicondyles (the transepicondylar axis) and its midpoint was determined. The radial nerve angle was measured by a line from the radial nerve to the midpoint of the transepicondylar axis and a line along the lateral half of the transepicondylar axis. On this axial slice, the closest distance from the nerve to the underlying cortex of the distal humerus was measured. To further localize the nerve along the distal humerus, predetermined percentages of the transepicondylar distance were projected proximally from the level of the transepicondylar axis along the longitudinal axis of the humerus on the midcoronal MR image. At these designated heights, the corresponding axial MR image was identified using the cross-reference tool and the nerve was mapped in a similar fashion. We then proposed a simpler method using a best-fit line drawn along the lateral supracondylar ridge on the AP radiograph to define the safe zone for lateral pin entry.

RESULTS

On axial MR images, the radial nerve was located in the anterolateral quadrant with a mean radial nerve angle of 54° (range, 35°-87) at 0% transepicondylar distance (23 MRIs), 41° (range, 24°-63°) at 50% transepicondylar distance (23 MRIs), and ≥ 10° at 75% transepicondylar distance (on the 13 MRIs that extended this far cephalad). The mean closest distance between the radial nerve and the underlying humeral cortex was 10 mm (range, 3-26 mm) at 0% transepicondylar distance and 7 mm (3-16 mm) at 50% transepicondylar distance. On the AP elbow radiograph, the height of the lateral supracondylar ridge, determined by a best-fit line drawn along the lateral cortex of the ridge, diverged from the most proximal extent of the ridge at a point located at 60% transepicondylar distance (range, 51%-76%). At the corresponding location on the axial MR image, the nerve was located anterolaterally with a mean radial nerve angle of 39° (range, 15°-61°) and a mean distance of 6 mm (range, 2-10 mm) from the underlying humerus.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that percutaneous direct lateral entry Kirschner wires and half-pins can be safely inserted in the distal humerus in children along the transepicondylar axis, either at or slightly posterior to the lateral supracondylar ridge, when placed caudal to the point located where the lateral supracondylar ridge line diverges from the proximal extent of the supracondylar ridge on AP elbow radiograph.

Radial nerve safety in Dorgan's lateral cross-pinning of the supracondylar humeral fracture in children: a case report and cadaveric study

We encountered an iatrogenic radial nerve injury following Dorgan's lateral cross-pinning in a 5-year-old girl with a supracondylar fracture of the humerus. This prompted a cadaveric study to define a safe entry point for the proximal lateral Kirschner -wire. A child's cadaveric humerus was pinned laterally in three coronal planes, simulating the proximal entry pin. The radial nerve lay farthest from the wire in the posterolateral plane, 1 and 2 cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle. We report the first incidence of radial nerve injury with lateral cross-pinning and suggest that the wire should be placed posterolaterally within 2 cm from the lateral epicondyle.

Course of the radial nerve in relation to the center of rotation of the elbow--the need for a rational safe zone for lateral pin placement

PURPOSE

To investigate the course and variability of the radial nerve along the lateral humerus in relation to the center of rotation of the elbow joint in the context of lateral pin placement for hinged external fixation.

METHODS

A total of 95 formalin-fixed upper extremities were dissected. The course of the radial nerve along the lateral aspect of the humerus was measured at 3 landmarks with respect to the center of rotation of the elbow. We analyzed the data and the landmark positions correlated with the length of the humerus.

RESULTS

The measured positions of 3 landmarks of the radial nerve in the lateral aspect of the humerus ranged from 19% to 43% of the length of the humerus and were located, on average, 6.0, 9.7, and 13.5 cm from the lateral center of rotation.

CONCLUSIONS

These data help predict the humeral course of the radial nerve and define a safe zone for pin implantation. However, because of variability in the course of the radial nerve, a safe zone cannot fully ensure prevention of iatrogenic injury to the nerve. The safest method of pin application remains mini-open dissection and visual implantation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Based on this cadaveric study, it is not possible to define a rational safe zone. The safest method of pin application for dynamic external fixation of the elbow is to perform a mini-open dissection with direct visualization.

A method to localize the radial nerve using the 'apex of triceps aponeurosis' as a landmark

BACKGROUND

The relationship of the radial nerve is described with various osseous landmarks, but such relationships may be disturbed in the setting of humerus shaft fractures. Alternative landmarks would be helpful to more consistently and reliably allow the surgeon to locate the radial nerve during the posterior approach to the arm.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We investigated the relationship of the radial nerve with the apex of triceps aponeurosis, and describe a technique to locate the nerve.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed dissections of 10 cadavers and gathered surgical details of 60 patients (30 patients and 30 control patients) during the posterior approach of the humerus. We measured the distance of the radial nerve from the apex of the triceps aponeurosis along the long axis of the humerus in cadaveric dissections and patients. This distance was correlated with the height and arm length. For all patients, we recorded time until first observation of the radial nerve, blood loss, and postoperative radial nerve function.

RESULTS

The mean distance of the radial nerve from the apex of the triceps aponeurosis was 2.5 cm, which correlated with the patients' height and arm length. The mean time until the first observation of the radial nerve from beginning the skin incision was 6 minutes, as compared with 16 minutes in the control group. Mean blood loss was 188 mL and 237 mL, respectively. With the numbers available, we observed no difference in the incidence of patients with postoperative nerve palsy: none in the study group and three in the control group.

CONCLUSION

The apex of the triceps aponeurosis appears to be a useful anatomic landmark for localization of the radial nerve during the posterior approach to the humerus.