Anatomic and Biomechanical Evaluation of Ulnar Tunnel Position in Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction

Biomechanical Comparison of Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction Between Palmaris Longus Autograft and Knee Medial Collateral Ligament Allograft

Background

Medial ulnar collateral ligament (mUCL) injury can cause significant pain and alter throwing mechanics. Common autograft options for mUCL reconstruction (UCLR) include the palmaris longus (PL) and hamstring tendons. Allograft use may reduce donor site morbidity and decrease function related to PL autografts.

Purpose

To compare varus stability and load to failure between a novel allograft for UCLR-knee medial collateral ligament (kMCL)-and a PL autograft in human donor elbow specimens.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

A total of 24 fresh-frozen human elbows were dissected to expose the mUCL. Medial elbow stability was tested with the mUCL intact (native), deficient, and reconstructed utilizing the humeral single-docking technique with either a (1) kMCL allograft (n = 12) or (2) a PL autograft (n = 12). A 3-N·m valgus torque was applied to the elbow, and valgus rotation of the ulna was recorded via motion tracking cameras. The elbow was cycled through a full range of motion 5 times. After kinematic testing, specimens were loaded to failure at 70° of elbow flexion, and failure modes were recorded.

Results

The mUCL-deficient elbows demonstrated significantly greater valgus rotation compared with the intact and reconstructed elbows at every flexion angle tested (10°-120°) (P <.001). Both kMCL- and PL-reconstructed elbows exhibited significantly higher mean valgus rotation compared with the intact state between 10° and 40° of flexion (P < .01). There were no significant differences in valgus rotation at any flexion angle between the kMCL and PL graft groups. When loaded to failure, elbows reconstructed with both kMCL and PL grafts failed at similar torque values (18.6 ± 4 and 18.1 ± 3.4 N·m, respectively; P = .765).

Conclusion

Fresh-frozen and aseptically processed kMCL allografts demonstrated similar kinematic and failure properties to PL tendon autografts in UCL-reconstructed elbows, although neither graft fully restored kinematics between 10° and 40°.

Clinical Relevance

Prepared kMCL ligament allografts may provide a viable graft material when reconstructing elbow ligaments while avoiding the potential complications related to PL autografts- including donor site morbidity.

Biomechanical Properties of Knee Medial Collateral Ligament Compared to Palmaris Longus for Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction

Ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR) is frequently performed among injured overhead-throwing athletes. One of the most common graft choices when performing a UCLR is the ipsilateral palmaris longus tendon (PL). The purpose of this study was to investigate the material properties of aseptically processed cadaveric knee collateral ligaments (kMCL) as a potential graft source for UCLR and compare them to the gold standard PL autograft. Each PL and kMCL cadaveric sample was subjected to cyclic preconditioning, stress relaxation, and load-to-failure testing, and the mechanical properties were recorded. PL samples exhibited a greater average decrease in stress compared to the kMCL samples during the stress-relaxation test (p < 0.0001). PL samples also demonstrated a greater average Young's modulus in the linear region of the stress-strain curve compared to the kMCL samples (p < 0.01). The average yield strain and maximum strain of kMCL samples were significantly greater than the PL, p = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively. Both graft materials had comparable maximum toughness and demonstrated a similar ability to deform plastically without rupture. The clinical significance of our result is that prepared knee medial collateral ligament allografts may provide a viable graft material for use in the reconstruction of elbow ligaments.

Change in humeral anchor position significantly affects isometry in ulnar collateral ligament repair: a 3-dimensional computer modeling study

BACKGROUND

Medial ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) repair utilization is increasing in recent years, bolstered by shorter rehabilitation and satisfactory clinical outcomes. Although previous literature has illustrated the importance of tunnel position on restoring graft isometry in reconstruction, there remains a paucity of literature guiding anchor placement in UCL repair. The purpose of this study is to design a 3-dimensional (3D) elbow model to understand the effect of anchor location on UCL repair isometry.

METHODS

A 3D computer model of an elbow joint was created using computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging MRI scans from a single patient. The humeral and ulnar attachments of the UCL were plotted using 3 methodologies: (1) geometric cloud mapping and (2) quantitative measurements from the anatomic studies by Camp et al and (3) Frangiamore et al. A 3.5-mm-diameter clockface was placed on each attachment site, which allowed for simulation of 12 distinct 1.75-mm deviations in anchor position. The 3 models were ranged through 0°-120° at 10° increments, and the 3D distances were measured between the ligament centroids. The humeral and ulnar anchors were sequentially repositioned around the clockfaces, and construct lengths were again measured to evaluate changes in isometry. A paired Student t test was performed to determine if there was a significant difference in isometry between the humeral and ulnar anchor deviations.

RESULTS

Using method 1, the UCL repair length at 90° of elbow flexion was 26.8 mm. This construct underwent 13.6 mm of total excursion for a 46.4% change in length throughout its arc of motion. Method 2 produced a 19.3-mm construct that underwent 0.8 mm of excursion for a 3.9% length change throughout the arc. Method 3 produced a 24.5-mm construct that underwent 2.3 mm of excursion for a 9.4% length change. Identifying ligament footprints using the quantitative anatomic measurements from Camp et al and Frangiamore et al improved construct isometry through 120° of flexion (length changes of 3.9% and 9.4%, respectively) when compared to using the geometric cloud technique alone (46.4% length change). Humeral anchor deviations produced a significant increase in repair construct excursion compared with ulnar anchor deviations (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

When performing UCL repair, small deviations in humeral anchor position may significantly influence ligament repair isometry. Using quantitative anatomic data may help identify anchor positions with improved repair isometry. Particularly when addressing detachments of the humeral footprint, surgeons should be critical of the humeral anchor position in order to restore native anatomy and optimal biomechanics.

Biomechanical Comparison of Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction With and Without Suture Augmentation

BACKGROUND

A common concern associated with elbow ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction is the amount of time required for recovery and rehabilitation. For example, for Major League Baseball pitchers, the average time to return to competition ranges from 13.8 to 20.5 months. Suture tape augmentation has shown the ability to provide additional soft tissue stability across other joints in the body. By providing an additional checkrein to the UCL reconstruction while the graft is healing, it may be possible to accelerate the rehabilitation process in overhead athletes and thus effect a quicker return to sports.

PURPOSE

To compare elbow valgus stability and load to failure between UCL reconstruction with and without suture tape augmentation.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Fresh-frozen cadaveric elbows (N = 24) were dissected to expose the UCL. Medial elbow stability was tested with the UCL intact, deficient, and reconstructed utilizing the 3-strand docking technique with or without suture augmentation. A 3-N·m valgus torque was applied to the elbow, and valgus rotation of the ulna was recorded via motion-tracking cameras as the elbow was cycled through a full range of motion. After kinematic testing, reconstructed specimens were loaded to failure at 70° of elbow flexion.

RESULTS

UCL-deficient elbows demonstrated significantly greater valgus rotation when compared with intact and internally braced reconstructed elbows at every angle of flexion tested and when compared with unbraced UCL-reconstructed elbows at 50° to 120° of flexion (P < .05). There were no significant differences between intact and UCL-reconstructed elbows with and without suture augmentation at any flexion angle tested. When loaded to failure, unbraced reconstructed elbows failed at a significantly lower torque as compared with elbows with UCL reconstruction with suture tape augmentation (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

In this cadaveric model, 3-strand UCL reconstruction with suture augmentation did not overconstrain the elbow throughout all flexion angles when compared with the native state and UCL reconstruction alone, while providing greater load to failure.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Suture tape augmentation may provide the additional strength necessary to accelerate rehabilitation after UCL reconstruction.

Biomechanical Comparison of Anatomic Restoration of the Ulnar Footprint vs Traditional Ulnar Tunnels in Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Current techniques for ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction do not reproduce the anatomic ulnar footprint of the UCL. The purpose of this study was to describe a novel UCL reconstruction technique that utilizes proximal-to-distal ulnar bone tunnels to better re-create the anatomy of the UCL and to compare the biomechanical profile at time zero among this technique, the native UCL, and the traditional docking technique.

HYPOTHESIS

The biomechanical profile of the anatomic technique is similar to the native UCL and traditional docking technique.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Ten matched cadaveric elbows were potted with the forearm in neutral rotation. The palmaris longus tendon graft was harvested, and bones were sectioned 14 cm proximal and distal to the elbow joint. Specimen testing included (1) native UCL testing performed at 90° of flexion with 0.5 N·m of valgus moment preload, (2) cyclic loading from 0.5 to 5 N·m of valgus moment for 1000 cycles at 1 Hz, and (3) load to failure at 0.2 mm/s. Elbows then underwent UCL reconstruction with 1 elbow of each pair receiving the classic docking technique using either anatomic (proximal to distal) or traditional (anterior to posterior) tunnel locations. Specimen testing was then repeated as described.

RESULTS

There were no differences in maximum load at failure between the anatomic and traditional tunnel location techniques (mean ± SD, 34.90 ± 10.65 vs 37.28 ± 14.26 N·m; P = .644) or when including the native UCL (45.83 ± 17.03 N·m; P = .099). Additionally, there were no differences in valgus angle after 1000 cycles across the anatomic technique (4.58°± 1.47°), traditional technique (4.08°± 1.28°), and native UCL (4.07°± 1.99°). The anatomic group and the native UCL had similar valgus angles at failure (24.13°± 5.86° vs 20.13°± 5.70°; P = .083), while the traditional group had a higher valgus angle at failure when compared with the native UCL (24.88°± 6.18° vs 19.44°± 5.86°; P = .015).

CONCLUSION

In this cadaveric model, UCL reconstruction with the docking technique utilizing proximal-to-distal ulnar tunnels better restored the ulnar footprint while providing valgus stability comparable with reconstruction with the docking technique using traditional anterior-to-posterior ulnar tunnel locations. These results suggest that utilization of the anatomic tunnel location in UCL reconstruction has similar biomechanical properties to the traditional method at the time of initial fixation (ie, not accounting for healing after reconstruction in vivo) while keeping the ulnar tunnels farther from the ulnar nerve. Further studies are warranted to determine if an anatomically based UCL reconstruction results in differing outcomes than traditional reconstruction techniques.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Current UCL reconstruction techniques do not accurately re-create the ulnar UCL footprint. The UCL is a dynamic constraint to valgus loads at the elbow, and a more anatomic reconstruction may afford more natural joint kinematics. This more anatomic technique performs similarly to the traditional docking technique at time zero, and the results of this study may offer a starting point for future in vivo studies.

Elbow valgus stability of the transverse bundle of the ulnar collateral ligament

Background

The purpose of this study was to clarify elbow valgus stability of the transverse bundle (TB). We hypothesized that the transverse bundle is involved in elbow valgus stability.

Methods

Twelve elbows of six Japanese Thiel-embalmed cadavers were evaluated. The skin, subcutaneous tissue and origin of forearm flexors were removed from about 5 cm proximal to the elbow to about 5 cm distal to the elbow, and the ulnar collateral ligament was dissected (intact state). The cut state was defined as the state when the TB was cut in the middle. The joint space of the humeroulnar joint (JS) was measured in the intact state and then in the cut state. With the elbow flexed to 30°, elbow valgus stress was gradually increased to 30, 60 N using the Telos Stress Device, and the JS was measured by ultrasonography under each load condition. Paired t-testing was performed to compare the JS between the intact and cut states under each load.

Results

No significant difference in JS was identified between the intact and cut state at start limb position. The JS was significantly higher in the cut state than in the intact state at both 30 N and 60 N.

Conclusion

The findings from this study suggested that the TB may be involved in elbow valgus stability.

Pie-Crusting Capsulotomy Provides Similar Visualization With Increased Repair Stiffness Compared With a T-Capsulotomy: A Biomechanical Study

PURPOSE

To compare the area of visualization, capsular stiffness, and strength between the pie-crusting capsulotomy technique and the T-capsulotomy technique following repair.

METHODS

Eight matched pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric hips (n = 16) were divided to either T-capsulotomy or pie-crusting capsulotomy followed by subsequent repair. The area of visualization was measured for all capsulotomy states using a digitizing probe. Hips were then distracted along the iliofemoral ligament in the intact, extended capsulotomy, and repair states. Afterwards, specimens were externally rotated to failure.

RESULTS

An average force of 250.1 ± 16.1 N was required to distract intact hips to 6 mm. Both extended capsulotomy techniques reduced the force required to distract the hip 6 mm with no statistical difference between the two (T-capsulotomy [T-cap] = 114.3 ± 63.4 N vs pie-capsulotomy [Pie-cap] = 170.1 ± 38.8 N), P = .07. Subsequent repair of the extended capsulotomies demonstrated the pie-crust capsulotomy required significantly greater force to reach 6 mm of distraction than those with a repaired T-capsulotomy (T-cap = 165.04 ± 40.43N vs Pie-cap = 204.43 ± 10.13N), P = .03. There was no significant difference in ultimate torque to failure between the 2 techniques (T-cap = 22.0 ± 7.41 N·m vs Pie-cap = 27.01 ± 11.13 N·m), P = .28. Visualization significantly increased with each extended capsulotomy, with an average increase of 62% (P < .001) and 48% (P < .001) for the pie- and T-capsulotomies, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The pie-crusting technique maintained similar strength and increased stiffness to the T-capsulotomy following repair while using less suture. Both techniques provided similar visualization. Clinically, the pie-crusting technique provides an alternative to the T-capsulotomy with similar biomechanical and visual outcomes.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Visualization during hip arthroscopy can be difficult with large cam morphology. Techniques to improve visualization while restoring the native biomechanics of the hip as best as possible are important.

Biomechanical Comparison of UCL Repair Using Suspensory Fixation Versus UCL Reconstruction

Background:

Medial ulnar collateral ligament (mUCL) repair is growing in popularity as a treatment for younger athletes with mUCL tears. One of the most recent techniques utilizes a collagen-coated suture tape to augment the repair. The most popular repair technique uses a screw for proximal fixation in the humerus. We present an alternative technique that uses suspensory fixation in the proximal humerus.

Purpose:

To biomechanically compare elbow valgus stability and load to failure of a novel alternative repair technique with suspensory fixation to an mUCL reconstruction.

Study Design:

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods:

Eighteen fresh-frozen cadaveric elbows were dissected to expose the mUCL. Medial elbow stability was tested with the mUCL in an intact, deficient—either repaired or reconstructed—state. The repair technique used a suspensory fixation with suture augmentation, and the docking technique was used on all reconstructions. A 3-N·m valgus torque was applied to the elbow, and valgus rotation of the ulna was recorded via motion tracking cameras as the elbow was cycled through a full range of motion. After kinematic testing, specimens were loaded to failure at 70° of elbow flexion.

Results:

Both ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction and repair restored valgus stability to levels that were not statistically different from intact at all angles of flexion. There was no significant difference in the ultimate torque to failure between repaired and reconstructed mUCLs.

Conclusion:

There was no significant difference in the valgus strength between the mUCL repair with suspensory fixation and the mUCL reconstruction.

Clinical Relevance:

Suspensory fixation is an alternative method for proximal fixation in the mUCL without compromising the strength of the construct.

Morphological Features of the Ulnar Collateral Ligament of the Elbow and Common Tendon of Flexor-Pronator Muscles

Background:

The anterior bundle (AB) of the ulnar collateral ligament is the most important structure for valgus stabilization of the elbow. However, anatomic relationships among the AB, posterior bundle (PB) of the ulnar collateral ligament, and common tendon (CT) of the flexor-pronator muscles have not been fully clarified.

Purpose:

To classify the AB, PB, and CT and to clarify their morphological features.

Study Design:

Descriptive laboratory study.

Methods:

This investigation examined 56 arms from 31 embalmed Japanese cadavers. The CT investigation examined 34 arms from 23 embalmed Japanese cadavers with CTs remaining. Type classification was performed by focusing on positional relationships with surrounding structures. Morphological features measured were length, width, thickness, and footprint for the AB and PB and attachment length, thickness, and footprint for the CT.

Results:

The AB was classified as type I (44 elbows; 78.6%), can be separated as a single bundle, or type II (12 elbows; 21.4%), cannot be separated from the PB and joint capsule. The PB was classified as type I (28 elbows; 50.0%), can be separated as a single bundle; type IIa (6 elbows; 10.7%), posterior edge cannot be separated; type IIb (7 elbows; 12.5%), anterior edge cannot be separated; or type III (15 elbows; 26.8%), cannot be separated from the joint capsule. The CT was classified as type I (18 elbows; 52.9%), can be separated from the AB, or type II (16 elbows; 47.1%), cannot be separated from the AB. Significant differences in frequencies of AB, PB, and CT types were identified between men and women. Morphological features were measured only for type I of each structure, and reliability was almost perfect.

Conclusion:

These results suggest that the AB, PB, and CT each can be classified into an independent form and an unclear form. Presence of the unclear form was suggested as one factor contributing to morphological variation.

Clinical Relevance:

This study may provide basic information for clarifying functional roles of the AB, PB, and CT.

State of the Union on Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in 2020: Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There has been a marked increase in the number of ulnar collateral ligament reconstructions performed annually and an associated increase in the amount of recent literature published. It is paramount that surgeons remain up to date on the current literature, as modern indications and surgical techniques continue to improve clinical outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Our understanding of ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries, treatment indications, and surgical techniques for UCL reconstruction continues to evolve. Despite the rapidly increasing amount of published literature on the topic, a clear and concise surgical algorithm is lacking. Studies have suggested a trend towards improved clinical outcomes and decreased complications with various modifications in UCL reconstruction techniques. Current sport-specific outcome studies have reported conflicting results regarding the effect of UCL reconstruction on an athlete's performance upon returning to sport. With the rising incidence of UCL reconstruction and growing media attention, UCL injuries, reconstruction techniques, and return to sport following UCL surgery are timely topics of interest to clinicians and overhead throwing athletes. Several technique modifications have been reported, and these modifications may lead to improved outcomes and lower complication rates. Studies assessing sport-specific outcome measures will be necessary to provide a more critical and informative analysis of outcomes following UCL reconstruction.