Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 10, 2025
Structured Motor Rehabilitation After Selective Nerve Transfers
Published on: August 15, 2019
Clinical Outcomes After Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstructions With Concomitant Ulnar Nerve Transposition in
Jeffrey C Lynch1, Emma E Johnson2, Michael C Ciccotti2
1Department of Orthopaedics, Jefferson Health New Jersey, Stratford, New Jersey, USA.
Background:
Injury of the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) has become increasingly common, particularly in overhead athletes. There is no consensus on management of the ulnar nerve in UCL reconstruction (UCLR) in patients with preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms, as literature supports both not decompressing the nerve as well as ulnar nerve transposition (UNT).
Hypothesis/Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare subjective clinical outcomes and return-to-sports (RTS) metrics between patients who received UNT during UCLR and a matched cohort who underwent UCLR alone. We hypothesized that there would be no significant difference in patient outcomes or RTS metrics between the cohorts.
Study Design:
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods:
Using an institutional database, patients who underwent UCLR with UNT between 2007 and 2017 were retrospectively identified. These patients were matched based on sex, age at surgery (±3 years), and body mass index (±2 kg/m2) to a comparison group that underwent UCLR alone. Patients completed the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic Shoulder & Elbow (KJOC) score, the Timmerman and Andrews elbow score, the Conway-Jobe scale, and custom patient satisfaction and RTS questionnaires.
Results:
Thirty patients who underwent UCLR with concomitant UNT and 30 matched patients who underwent UCLR without UNT were available for follow-up at a mean of 6.9 (3.4-9.9) and 8.1 (3.4-13.9) years, respectively. The UNT group reported similar KJOC (78.4 in UNT vs 76.8; P = .780), Conway-Jobe (60% excellent in UNT vs 77% excellent; P = .504), Timmerman and Andrews (86.2 in UNT vs 88.8; P = .496), and satisfaction scores (85.3% in UNT vs 89.3%; P = .512) compared with UCLR group. In terms of RTS rate (84% in UNT vs 93% in UCLR; P = .289) and duration required to RTS (11.1 months in UNT vs 12.5 months in UCLR; P = .176), the 2 groups did not significantly differ. Finally, despite significant differences in preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms (100% in UNT vs 7% in UCLR; P < .001), the 2 groups did not statistically differ in the proportion of patients who experienced postoperative ulnar nerve symptoms (13% in UNT vs 0% in UCLR; P = .112).
Conclusion:
This matched cohort analysis showed no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes and RTS between patients undergoing UCLR with and without UNT.
