Hinchcliff KM, Munaretto N, Dutton LK, Ramazanian T, Kakar S. Wrist Arthroscopy Using the 2R Portal: Is It Safer Than the 1,2 Portal?
Hand (N Y) 2022:15589447221075668. [PMID:
35144498 DOI:
10.1177/15589447221075668]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUD
The purpose of this study was to compare the 1,2 with a novel 2R portal in terms of proximity to critical structures.
METHODS
Wrist arthroscopy was performed on 8 fresh frozen cadavers via the 1,2 and 2R portals. External anatomy was then dissected under loupe magnification. The closest distance between the portals and surrounding anatomical structures was measured in millimeters using digital calipers.
RESULTS
The 1,2 portal was significantly closer to radial artery and first extensor compartment tendons than the 2R portal. The radial artery was on average 1.32 mm from the 1-2 portal and 14.25 mm from the 2R portal. The 2R portal was significantly closer to the second and third extensor compartment tendons. The closest branch of the superficial branch of the radial nerve (SBRN) was on average 2.04 mm from the 1-2 portal and 7.59 mm from the 2R portal, but this was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS
We advocate using the 2R portal preferentially to the 1,2 portal when treating radial sided wrist pathology to decrease the risk of iatrogenic radial artery and SBRN injury.
Collapse