Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2019
Arthroscopic visualization of the medial collateral ligament of the elbow.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kwak Jae-Man, Kholinne Erica, Sun Yucheng, Park Jin-Young, Koh Kyoung-Hwan, Jeon In-Ho
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the extent to which the medial collateral ligament (MCL) can be visualized during a standard posterior arthroscopic view of the elbow.
METHODS: Eight fresh human cadaveric elbows were placed in a simulated lateral decubitus position. Standard elbow arthroscopy was performed on each specimen using a standard posterior portal for visualization with a 30° arthroscope. The most distal borders of the visible part of the MCL were marked using a spinal needle and tagged using nylon sutures. Subsequently, the elbow was dissected. The overall surface area of the entire MCL and that defined by the suture tags were calculated for each specimen.
RESULTS: The mean area of the visible part of the MCL represented 48% of the mean overall area. The arthroscopically tagged part of the posterior band of the MCL represented <50% of the entire MCL. Arthroscopic visualization was not available for most of the posterior bands of the MCL.
CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of the MCL is visible with a 30° arthroscope from standard posterior portal. Thus, sole reliance on arthroscopic visualization with this manner is not enough to release of the MCL. The variable effort is required to improve the limited visualization during the procedure. Moreover, the individual attention is essential to protect the ulnar nerve because the ulnar nerve is very close to the MCL especially to the anterior band.
METHODS: Eight fresh human cadaveric elbows were placed in a simulated lateral decubitus position. Standard elbow arthroscopy was performed on each specimen using a standard posterior portal for visualization with a 30° arthroscope. The most distal borders of the visible part of the MCL were marked using a spinal needle and tagged using nylon sutures. Subsequently, the elbow was dissected. The overall surface area of the entire MCL and that defined by the suture tags were calculated for each specimen.
RESULTS: The mean area of the visible part of the MCL represented 48% of the mean overall area. The arthroscopically tagged part of the posterior band of the MCL represented <50% of the entire MCL. Arthroscopic visualization was not available for most of the posterior bands of the MCL.
CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of the MCL is visible with a 30° arthroscope from standard posterior portal. Thus, sole reliance on arthroscopic visualization with this manner is not enough to release of the MCL. The variable effort is required to improve the limited visualization during the procedure. Moreover, the individual attention is essential to protect the ulnar nerve because the ulnar nerve is very close to the MCL especially to the anterior band.