Abstract
Introduction and Objective
Scapholunate instability is the most common cause of carpal instability. When this instability is left untreated, the mechanical relationship between the carpal bones is permanently disrupted, resulting in progressive degenerative changes in the radiocarpal and midcarpal joints. Different tenodesis methods are used in the treatment of acute or early chronic reducible scapholunate instability, where arthritis has not developed yet and the scapholunate ligament cannot be repaired. Although it has been reported that pain is reduced in the early follow up in clinical studies with these methods, radiological results differ between studies. The deterioration of these radiological parameters is associated with wrist osteoarthritis as previously stated. Therefore, more studies are needed to determine the tenodesis method that will improve the wrist biomechanics better and will last longer. In our study, two new tenodesis methods, spiral antipronation tenodesis, and anatomic front and back reconstruction (ANAFAB) were radiologically compared with triple ligament tenodesis (TLT), in the cadaver wrists.
Materials and Methods
The study was carried out on a total of 16 fresh frozen cadaver wrists. Samples were randomly allocated to the groups treated with 3 different scapholunate instability treatment methods. These are TLT (n: 6), spiral antipronation tenodesis (n: 5) and ANAFAB tenodesis (n: 5) groups. In all samples SLIL, DCSS, STT, DIC, RSC and LRL ligaments were cut in the same way to create scapholunate instability. Wrist CT scans were taken on the samples in 4 different states, in intact, after the ligaments were cut, after the reconstruction and after the movement cycle. In all of these 4 states, wrist CTs were taken in 6 different wrist positions. For every state and every position through tomography images; Scapholunate (SL) distance, Scapholunate (SL) angle, Radioscaphoid (RS) angle, Radiolunate (RL) angle, Capitolunate (CL) angle, Dorsal scaphoid translation (Dt) measurements were made.
Results
Scapholunate distances means were different between intact and cut states only in neutral and clenched fist positions for all groups (p values <0.001). Mean differences were similar between the groups (p > 0.100). In neutral position, for SL center distance, mean difference between cut and reconstruction states were not different between the groups (p=0.497) but it was noted that only TLT group could not restore to the intact state. In neutral position, for SL angle, compared with the cut state, TLT and ANAFAB significantly reduced the angle (TLT: 20° (p=0.005), ANAFAB: 28° (p<0.001)) whereas antipronation tenodesis could not (13°, p=0.080). In clenched fist position, for SL angle, compared with the intact state, only ANAFAB group restored the angle, TLT and antipronation groups were significantly worse than the intact state (TLT: p<0.001, antipronation: p=0.001). In clenched fist position, for RL angle, compared with the intact state, ANAFAB and TLT groups restored the angle but antipronation group was significantly worse than the intact state (p<0.001). In neutral position, for RS angle, compared with the cut state, only ANAFAB significantly reduced the angle (11°, p<0.001) whereas TLT and antipronation groups could not (TLT: 6° (p=0.567), antipronasyon: 4° (p=0.128).
Conclusions
In the presence of severe scapholunate instability in which a several number of secondary stabilizers are injured, the ANAFAB tenodesis method may be preferred to the classical method, TLT tenodesis. The results of spiral antipronation tenodesis were not better than the TLT.
