Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 16, 2025
An Intramedullary Locking Nail for Standardized Fixation of Femur Osteotomies to Analyze Normal and Defective Bone Healing in Mice
Published on: November 13, 2016
Biomechanical Comparison of Stability and Strength After Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction With Suture Anchor
Kenta Inagaki1, Nobuyasu Ochiai1, Eiko Hashimoto1
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Background:
Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries occur frequently in baseball players, and UCL reconstruction is performed when nonoperative treatment fails.
Purpose:
To compare a novel all-suture anchor method of UCL reconstruction with a method using bone tunnels (Ito method) by investigating the displacement against valgus torque and the failure strength.
Study Design:
Controlled laboratory study.
Methods:
Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric upper extremities (mean age, 82.0 years) were utilized in this study. To evaluate the displacement against valgus torque, the valgus stability test was performed for 4 anterior oblique ligament (AOL) conditions: intact AOL, resected AOL, reconstructed using the anchor method, and reconstructed using the Ito method. The load-to-failure test was performed to evaluate the failure strength of the anchor and Ito methods. Displacement against valgus load was compared between conditions using the repeated-measures 2-way analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc test, and failure strength between the anchor and Ito methods was compared using the unpaired t test.
Results:
Displacements of the intact AOL and anchor method were significantly greater than those of the resected AOL at both 60° and 90° of flexion (intact AOL: P = .005 and P < .001, respectively; and anchor method: P = .024 and P < .001, respectively). The displacement of the Ito method at 90° of flexion was significantly greater than that of the resected AOL (P = .003), but no significant difference was observed at 60° of flexion (P = .109). There were no significant differences in displacement between the anchor and Ito methods at any flexion angle, nor was there a significant difference in failure torque between the anchor and Ito methods (16.3 ± 3.1 vs 17.6 ± 2.3 N·m, respectively; P = .537).
Conclusion:
The displacement and failure strength against a valgus load after UCL reconstruction using a suture anchor on the ulnar side were equal to those using bone tunnels.
Clinical Relevance:
UCL reconstruction using a suture anchor on the ulnar side is simpler and less invasive than using bone tunnels, with similar outcomes.
