Deficiency in the ligamentous restraints of the central band leads to positive ulnar variance, which could be a factor (among others) that contributes to idiopathic ulnar impaction syndrome.

Purpose A complete ulnar head replacement may be indicated in cases of distal radial ulnar joint (DRUJ) dysfunction to address bony pathology in lieu of using a constrained total DRUJ prosthesis. Complete ulnar head implants are simple, but they may be unstable if soft tissue tension is not adequately restored. We hypothesized that incorporating an increased offset in the complete ulnar head replacement would lead to increased tension on the distal oblique interosseous ligament, increased contact force at the DRUJ, and improved joint stability.Methods Using a specially designed jig, we measured instability by comparing displacement under load (stiffness) of the DRUJ in 10 cadaveric specimens under 4 different conditions: (1) intact, (2) native head after excision of the triangular fibrocartilage complex, (3) replacement of the ulnar head with a standard offset ulnar head, and (4) replacement of the ulnar head with an increased offset ulnar head. No soft tissue repair was done. We measured anteroposterior displacement under load with maximum translation of 10 mm or maximum loads of 50 N. We tested all specimens with the forearm positioned in neutral, supination, and pronation.Results Excising the triangular fibrocartilage complex decreased the average stiffness of the DRUJ to 46% of the intact state, creating a simulated state of DRUJ instability. Replacing the ulnar head with the standard offset head increased average stiffness to 54% of the intact state. Increasing the ulnar head offset with the simulated total ulnar head replacement increased average stiffness to 77% of the intact state.Conclusions An increased offset ulnar head replacement improves DRUJ stability compared with a standard anatomic offset ulnar head replacement.Clinical relevance Understanding DRUJ morphology and offset is important in the treatment of DRUJ arthritis and instability.

Hypothesis: The proximal radius is asymmetrical, is mostly articular, and rotates through a large arc of motion. Because of these anatomic factors, there is limited space for hardware. This is magnified in the setting of complex fractures. The portion of the radial head where a radial head plate can be placed without compromising forearm motion has been termed the ''safe zone.'' We hypothesized that the bicipital tuberosity could be used as a reproducible intraoperative fluoroscopic landmark to confirm radial head plate position in the safe zone. Methods: Seventeen cadaveric radii were evaluated. First, the anatomic safe zone was identified using the method previously described by Caputo et al. A proximal radial plate was then placed in the center of this safe zone. The relationship of the plate to the tuberosity was evaluated, and the angle from the point of the greatest tuberosity profile to the center of the safe zone was measured. Results: The maximum profile of the bicipital tuberosity is 166 AE 10 from the center of the safe zone as described by Caputo et al. By use of radiographic imaging, a radial head plate placed directly opposite the bicipital tuberosity will be within the safe zone. This position can be ascertained fluoroscopically with an anteroposterior view of the proximal forearm, in which the surgeon rotates the forearm into full supination. The plate should be placed opposite the bicipital tuberosity as seen on the greatest profile at maximum supination. With this method, the plate will be consistently placed within the safe zone. Conclusion: The bicipital tuberosity can be used as a consistent radiographic anatomic landmark to ensure proximal radial plate placement within the safe zone. If the proximal radial head plate is placed 166 AE 10 opposite the bicipital tuberosity, a landmark easily identified on intraoperative imaging, the implant will be in the safe zone and will not impinge on the ulna in rotation.

No abstract