Physical examination is critical to formation of a differential diagnosis in patients with ulnar-sided wrist pain. Although the specificity and sensitivity of some of those tests have been reported in the literature, the prevalence of positive findings of those provocative maneuvers has not been reported. The aim of the study is to find the prevalence of positive findings of the most commonly performed tests for ulnar sided wrist pain in a population presenting to UE surgeon clinics, and to correlate those findings with wrist arthroscopy findings.

Patients with ulnar sided wrist pain were identified from a prospective database of patients presented with wrist pain from September 2014. Prevalence of positive findings for the following tests were gathered: ECU synergy test, ECU instability test (Ice cream and Fly Swatter), Lunotriquetral ballottement, Kleinman shear, triquetrum tenderness, triquetrum compression test, triquetral-hamate tenderness, pisotriquetral shuck test, ulnar fovea test, ulnocarpal impaction (UCI) maneuver, UCI maneuver with fovea pressure (ulnar carpal plus test), piano key sign. A subgroup was then created for those who underwent wrist arthroscopy, and analysis of the sensitivities, the specificities and the predictive values of these provocative tests was carried out with correlation to arthroscopic finding.

Prevalence of ECU instability tests was t 1.13% (ice cream scoop) and 1.5% (fly swatter). Lunotriquetral ballottement test's positive findings range from 4.91% (excessive laxity) to 14.34% (pain reproducing symptoms. The Kleinman shear test yielded pain in 13.58% of patients, and instability in only 2.26%. Triquetrum compression test reproduces pain in 32.83% of patients, and triquetral-hamate tenderness reproduced pain in 13.21%. Pisotriquetral grind test yields 15.85% positive findings for pain, and 10.57% for crepitus with radioulnar translation. The ulnar fovea test revealed pain in 69.05% of cases. The UCI maneuver yielded pain in 70.19%. The UCI maneuver plus ulnar fovea test reproduced pain in 80.38% of cases. Finally, the piano key sign yields positive finding in 2.64% of cases.

For patients who underwent surgery, sensitivities, specificities and predictive values were calculated based on arthroscopic findings. The lunotriquetral ballottement test has 59.6% sensitivity, 39.6% specificity, 20.3% positive predictive value and 85.4% negative predictive value. The sensitivity of Kleinman test was 62.4%, the specificity was 41.3%, the positive predictive value was 23.5%, and the negative predictive value was 83.2%. The sensitivity of fovea test was 94.3%, the specificity was 82.5%, the positive predictive value was 89.5% and the negative predictive value was 92.3%. The UCI maneuver plus ulnar fovea test has 96.5% sensitivity, 80.7% specificity 86.4% positive predictive value, and 95.3% negative predictive value.

Among the provocative tests, the prevalence of positive findings is low in the majority of those maneuvers. The exceptions are the fovea test, the UCI maneuver, and the UCI plus maneuver. With regard to the sensitivity and the specificity of those tests, the current study reproduces the numbers reported in the literature. Of those patients who underwent wrist arthroscopy, the tests are better at predicting at the absence of injury rather than at predicting its presence

Previous studies describing drill trajectory for single incision distal biceps tendon repair suggest aiming ulnar and distal (Lo et al). This suggests that the starting point of the drill would be anterior and radial to the anatomic insertion of the distal biceps tendon. Restoration of the anatomic footprint may be important for restoration of normal strength, especially as full supination is approached.

To determine the safest drill trajectory for preventing injury to the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) when repairing the distal biceps tendon to the ANATOMIC footprint through a single-incision anterior approach utilising cortical button fixation.

Through an anterior approach in ten cadaveric specimens, three drill holes were made in the radial tuberosity from the centre of the anatomic footprint with the forearm fully supinated. Holes were made in a 30º distal, transverse and 30º proximal direction. Each hole was made by angling the trajectory from an anterior to posterior and ulnar to radial direction leaving adequate bone on the ulnar side to accommodate an eight-millimetre tunnel. Proximity of each drill trajectory to the PIN was determined by making a second incision on the dorsum of the proximal forearm. A K-wire was passed through each hole and the distance between the PIN and K-wire measured for each trajectory.

The PIN was closest to the trajectory K-wires drilled 30° distally (mean distance 5.4 mm), contacting the K-wire in three cases. The transverse drill trajectory resulted in contact with the PIN in one case (mean distance 7.6 mm). The proximal drill trajectory appeared safest with no PIN contact (mean distance 13.3 mm). This was statistically significant with a Friedman statistic of 15.05 (p value of 0.00054).

When drilling from the anatomic footprint of the distal biceps tendon the PIN is furthest from a drill trajectory aimed proximally. The drill is aimed radially to minimise blowing out the ulnar cortex of the radius.

For any reader inquiries, please contact vansurgdoc@gmail.com

Postero-lateral rotator instability (PLRI) is the most common pattern of recurrent elbow instability. Unfortunately, current imaging to aid PLRI diagnosis is limited. We have developed an ultrasound (US) technique to measure ulnohumeral joint gap with and without stress of the lateral ulnocollateral ligament. We sought to define lateral ulnohumeral joint gap measurements in the resting and stressed state to provide insight into how US may aid diagnosis of PLRI.

Sixteen elbows were evaluated in eight healthy volunteers. Lateral ulnohumeral gap was measured on US in the resting position and with posterolateral drawer stress test maneuver applied. Joint laxity was calculated as the difference between stress and rest conditions. Measurements were performed by two independent readers with comparison performed between stress and rest positions.

A highly significant difference in ulnohumeral gap was seen between stress and rest conditions (Reader 1: p < 0 .0001 and Reader 2: p=0.0002) with median values of 2.93 mm and 2.50 mm at rest and 3.92 mm and 3.40 mm at stress for Reader 1 and 2 respectively. Median joint laxity was 1.02 mm and 0.74 mm respectively for each reader. Correlation and agreement between readers was good.

This study provides key new insight into use of US for diagnosis as PLRI as it defines normal ulnohumeral distances and demonstrates widening when applying the posterolateral drawer stress maneuver. Further evaluation of this technique is required in patients with PLRI.

Four-Corner Fusions (4CF) and Proximal Row Carpectomies (PRC) are common procedures utilized to treat carpal pathologies and radial sided wrist pain. Usually, the range of motion (ROM) and grip strength (GS) is affected by such conditions. Literature quotes significant reduction in ROM (50–60%) and grip strength (GS) (80% of normal) with PRC and 4CF. This study aims to determine the correlation between pre-operative ROM and GS and post-operative ROM and GS for patients with wrist pain undergoing PRC or 4CF. We hypothesize that ROM between pre-operative and post-operative patients does not change, but GS improves.

Data from a prospective database of patients with wrist pain was searched to identify patients who have undergone PRC or 4CF with one year follow-up completed in the past two years. 17 such participants were identified. The diagnosis, pre-operative ROM in flexion, extension, radial deviation, ulnar deviation, pronation and supination, as well as GS at time of surgery and at six months and one year follow up were identified and assessed. The data was analysed to determine correlation between pre-and postoperative ROM and GS. The analysis was subdivided to compare patients treated with PRC versus patients with 4CF.

No significant difference between pre- and post-operative ROM was detected, except in flexion at 6 months post-operatively. The average flexion was significantly lower at 6 months (p=0.0251) compared to pre-operative levels. Average flexion pre-operatively and at 6 and 12 months was found to be 46.6 (SD=15), 34.3 (SD=13.3), 51.2 (SD=21.5) respectively. Extension was at 41.4 (SD=15.3) pre-operatively and at 33.4 (SD=12.8) and 42.1 (SD=15.5) at 6 and 12 months post-operatively. Similarly, radial and ulnar deviation averages pre-operatively and at 6 and 12 months post-operatively were found to be 11.33 (SD=5.9), 11.9 (SD=4.5), 16 (SD=8.2) [radial deviation] and 24.1 (SD=8.3), 21.4 (SD=7.3), 26 (SD=12.8) [ulnar deviation].

No significant difference was found in GS at 6 months post-operative. However, significant difference at 12 months post-operatively was observed with an average GS of 28.4 kg (SD=12.8) [p=0.0385]. Average GS pre-operatively and at 6 months was 15.8 kg (SD=9.7) and 17.3 kg (SD=8.9) respectively.

This study provides an insight on ROM and GS after PRC and 4CF. It shows that patients do not gain or lose ROM after surgery. As expected, GS improves with treatment as the pain diminishes. It is interesting to note that flexion gets worse at 6 months post-operatively before it bounces back to pre-operative levels.

Ulnar shortening osteotomy (USO) is a procedure performed to alleviate ulnar sided wrist pain caused by ulnar impaction syndrome (UIS) and/or triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) injury. Presently, non-union rates for ulnar shortening osteotomy is quoted to be 0–18% in the literature. However, there is a dearth of literature on the effect of site of osteotomy and plate placement on the rate of complications like a delayed union, symptomatic hardware and need for second surgery for hardware removal. In this study, we performed a multi-centered institutional review of ulnar shortening osteotomies performed, focusing on plate placement (volar vs. dorsal) and osteotomy site (distal vs. proximal) and determining if it plays a role in reducing complications.

This study was a multi-centered retrospective chart review. All radiographs and charts for patients that have received USO for UIS or TFCC injury between 2013 and 2017 from hand and wrist fellowship-trained surgeons in Calgary, Alberta and Winnipeg, Manitoba were examined. Basic patient demographics including age, sex, past medical history, and smoking history were recorded. Postoperative complications such as delayed union, non-union, infection, chronic regional pain syndrome, hardware irritation requiring removal were evaluated with a two-year follow-up period. Osteotomy sites were analyzed based on the location in relation to the entire length of the ulna on forearm radiographs. Surgical techniques including volar vs. dorsal plating, oblique vs. transverse osteotomy cuts, and plate type were documented.

Continuous variables of interest were summarized as mean or medians with standard deviation or inter-quartile range as appropriate. Differences in baseline characteristics were determined by t-test or one-way ANOVA for continuous variables and chi-square or Fischer exact test for dichotomous variables. All analyses were conducted using SPSS V24.0 (Chicago, IL, USA). All statistical tests were considered significant if p < 0.05.

Between 2013–2017 there were 117 ulnar shortening osteotomies performed. The average age of patients was 46.2 ± 16.2, with 62.4% being female. The mean pre-operative ulnar variance was +3.89 ± 2.17 mm and post-operative ulnar variance was −1.90 ± 1.80 mm. 84.6% of the plates were placed on the volar aspect of the ulna and 14.5% were placed on the dorsal aspect. An oblique osteotomy was made 99.1% of the time. In measuring osteotomy placement, the average placement was made in the distal 1/3 of the ulna. Overall, there was a 40% complication rate. Hardware irritation requiring removal encompassed 23%, non-union 14%, and wound infection covered 0.8%. When comparing dorsal vs volar plating, there was no statistically significant difference for non-union or hardware removal. Similarly, in evaluating osteotomy level, there was no statistical difference between proximal vs distal osteotomy for non-union and hardware removal.

In this multi-centered retrospective review of ulnar shortening osteotomies, we found that there was an overall complication rate of 40%. There was no statistically significant difference in complication rates between dorsal vs volar plate placement or proximal vs distal osteotomy sites. Further studies examining other potential risk factors in lowering the complication rate would be beneficial.

Compared to single-incision distal biceps repair (SI), double-incision repair (DI) theoretically allows for reattachment of the tendon to a more anatomically favorable position. We hypothesized that DI repair would result in greater terminal supination torque compared to SI repair for acute distal biceps ruptures.

In this retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they sustained an isolated, acute (° supinated position. Secondary outcomes included supination torque in 45° supinated, neutral, and 45° pronated positions, ASES elbow score, DASH, SF-12, and VAS. Power analysis revealed that at least 32 patients were needed to detect a minimum 15% difference in the primary outcome (β = 0.20). Statistical analysis was performed with significance level α = 0.05 using R version 3.4.1 (R Core Team 2017, Vienna, Austria).

Of 53 eligible patients, 37 consented to participate. Fifteen were repaired using DI technique and 22 using SI technique. Mean age was 47.3yrs and median follow-up time was 28.1months. The groups did not differ with respect to age, time-to-follow-up, dominance of arm affected, Workers Compensation or smoking status. Mean supination torque, measured as the percentage of the unaffected side, was 60.9% (95%CI 45.1–76.7) for DI repair versus 80.4% (95%CI 69.1–91.7) for SI repair at the 60°supinated position (p=0.036). There were no statistically significant differences in mean supination torque at the 45°supinated position: 67.1% (95%CI 49.4–84.7) for DI versus 81.8% (95%CI 72.2–91.4) for SI (p=0.102), at the neutral position: 88.8% (95%CI 75.2–102.4) for DI versus 97.6% (95%CI 91.6–103.7) for SI (p=0.0.170), and at the 45°pronated position: 104.5% (95%CI 91.1–117.9) for DI versus 103.4 (95%CI 97.2–109.6) for SI (p=0.0.862). No statistically significant differences were detected in the secondary outcomes ASES Pain, ASES Function, DASH scores, SF-12 PCS or MCS, or VAS Pain. A small difference was detected in VAS Function (median 1.3 for DI repair versus 0.5 for SI repair, p=0.023). In a multivariate linear regression model controlling for arm dominance, age, and follow-up time, SI repair was associated with a greater mean supination torque than DI repair by 19.6% at the 60°supinated position (p=0.011).

Contrary to our hypothesis, we found approximately a 20% mean improvement in terminal supination torque for acute distal biceps ruptures repaired with the single-incision technique compared to the double-incision technique. Patients uniformly did well with either technique, though we contend that this finding may have clinical significance for the more discerning, high-demand patient.

Compared to single-incision distal biceps repair (SI), double-incision repair (DI) theoretically allows for reattachment of the tendon to a more anatomically favorable position. We hypothesized that DI repair would result in greater terminal supination torque compared to SI repair for acute distal biceps ruptures.

In this retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they sustained an isolated, acute (° supinated position. Secondary outcomes included supination torque in 45° supinated, neutral, and 45° pronated positions, ASES elbow score, DASH, SF-12, and VAS. Power analysis revealed that at least 32 patients were needed to detect a minimum 15% difference in the primary outcome (β = 0.20). Statistical analysis was performed with significance level α = 0.05 using R version 3.4.1 (R Core Team 2017, Vienna, Austria).

Of 53 eligible patients, 37 consented to participate. Fifteen were repaired using DI technique and 22 using SI technique. Mean age was 47.3yrs and median follow-up time was 28.1months. The groups did not differ with respect to age, time-to-follow-up, dominance of arm affected, Workers Compensation or smoking status. Mean supination torque, measured as the percentage of the unaffected side, was 60.9% (95%CI 45.1–76.7) for DI repair versus 80.4% (95%CI 69.1–91.7) for SI repair at the 60°supinated position (p=0.036). There were no statistically significant differences in mean supination torque at the 45°supinated position: 67.1% (95%CI 49.4–84.7) for DI versus 81.8% (95%CI 72.2–91.4) for SI (p=0.102), at the neutral position: 88.8% (95%CI 75.2–102.4) for DI versus 97.6% (95%CI 91.6–103.7) for SI (p=0.0.170), and at the 45°pronated position: 104.5% (95%CI 91.1–117.9) for DI versus 103.4 (95%CI 97.2–109.6) for SI (p=0.0.862). No statistically significant differences were detected in the secondary outcomes ASES Pain, ASES Function, DASH scores, SF-12 PCS or MCS, or VAS Pain. A small difference was detected in VAS Function (median 1.3 for DI repair versus 0.5 for SI repair, p=0.023). In a multivariate linear regression model controlling for arm dominance, age, and follow-up time, SI repair was associated with a greater mean supination torque than DI repair by 19.6% at the 60°supinated position (p=0.011).

Contrary to our hypothesis, we found approximately a 20% mean improvement in terminal supination torque for acute distal biceps ruptures repaired with the single-incision technique compared to the double-incision technique. Patients uniformly did well with either technique, though we contend that this finding may have clinical significance for the more discerning, high-demand patient.