Repair and InternalBrace Augmentation of the Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament

Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair With Suture Augmentation Is Biomechanically Equivalent to Reconstruction and Clinically Demonstrates Excellent Outcomes: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review (1) biomechanical properties of augmented elbow ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) repair compared with reconstruction and (2) clinical efficacy and complication rates of UCL repair with and without augmentation.

METHODS

A systematic review was completed August 15, 2023, identifying articles that (1) biomechanically compared suture augmented UCL repair and reconstruction and (2) clinically evaluated medial elbow UCL repairs. Search terms included: "UCL repair" OR "internal brace" OR "suture augmentation" AND "UCL reconstruction." For inclusion, biomechanical studies compared augmented repair with reconstruction; clinical studies required clinical outcomes with minimum 6-month follow-up. Biomechanical data included torsional stiffness, gap formation, peak torque, and failure torque. Clinical data included return to previous level of play, time to return, functional outcomes, and complications.

RESULTS

In total, 8 biomechanical and 9 clinical studies were included (5 with and 4 without augmentation). In most biomechanical studies, augmented repairs demonstrated less gap formation, with equivalent torsional stiffness, failure load, and peak torque compared with reconstruction. Clinical outcomes in 104 patients without augmentation demonstrated return to previous level of 50% to 94% for nonprofessional athletes and 29% for professional baseball pitchers. Suture augmented repairs in 554 patients demonstrated return to previous level from 92% to 96%, at 3.8 to 7.4 months, with Kerlan Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic scores of 86 to 95. The overall complication rate for augmented UCL repair was 8.7%; most commonly ulnar neuropraxia (6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Biomechanically, UCL repair with augmentation provided less gapping with equivalent torsional stiffness and failure compared with reconstruction. Clinically, augmented UCL repair demonstrated excellent return to previous level of play and Kerlan Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic scores with modest complications and time to return. Augmented UCL repair is biomechanically equivalent to reconstruction and may be a viable alternative to reconstruction in indicated athletes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

UCL repair with suture augmentation is biomechanically equivalent to reconstruction and clinically demonstrates excellent outcomes.

Intersurgeon Consistency of Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair With Internal Brace: A Biomechanical Analysis

BACKGROUND

Injury to the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) of the medial elbow has been treated successfully with ligament repair augmented with internal brace. Previous work has shown that this procedure does not overconstrain the ulnohumeral joint; however, the procedures were conducted by a single surgeon, which controlled for anchor placement and graft tensioning.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

Our purpose was to evaluate the reproducibility of contact mechanics and joint torque after UCL repair with internal brace as performed by different surgeons compared with repair by a single surgeon. It was hypothesized that there would be no significant difference in elbow contact mechanics, valgus torque, or torsional stiffness between the 2 groups.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Nine pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric elbows were tested biomechanically under 3 conditions: UCL-intact (UCL-I), UCL-deficient (UCL-D), and UCL-repaired with internal brace augmentation (UCLR-IB). For each pair, 1 elbow was repaired by a single surgeon, and the contralateral elbow was repaired by 1 of 9 other surgeons. Testing consisted of valgus torsion between 0° and 5° with the elbow positioned at 90° of flexion. Ulnohumeral contact mechanics and overall joint torque and stiffness were measured and compared between surgeon groups.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the single-surgeon and multiple-surgeon groups regarding contact area (P = .83), contact force (P = .27), peak pressure (P = .26), or peak force (P = .30); however, contact pressure was significantly affected (P = .02) by surgeon group. Compared with UCL-I, both UCL-D and UCLR-IB conditions had a significant overall effect on contact area (P = .004) and contact force (P = .05); however, contact pressure (P = .56), peak pressure (P = .27), and peak force (P = .24) were not affected by injury condition. Measurements of elbow torque (P = .28) and stiffness (P = .98) were not significantly different between surgeon groups.

CONCLUSION

UCL repair with internal brace provided consistent results among several surgeons when compared with a single surgeon. The procedure did not lead to joint overconstraint while also returning the ligament to near-intact levels of resisting valgus stress.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

UCL repair with internal brace augmentation is a reproducible surgical technique that has good clinical outcomes in the literature.