These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [The risk of neurovascular damage in elbow joint arthroscopy. Which approach is better: anteromedial or anterolateral?].
    Author: Drescher H, Schwering L, Jerosch J, Herzig M.
    Journal: Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb; 1994; 132(2):120-5. PubMed ID: 8209567.
    Abstract:
    In a cadaver dissection study the relation of the arthroscopic portals to the neurovascular structures was documented. In six cadaveric elbows the capsule was distended with 35-40cc fluid of 0.9% NaCl by using the direct lateral portal. An anterolateral and anteromedial approach to the elbow joint were established. The distance of the arthroscopic portals to the neurovascular bundles were measured at empty and filled joint after performing an anatomic dissection. The influence of flexion and extension of the joint as well as pronation and supination of the forearm on the distance of the arthroscopic sheath to the neural structures was documented. Lesions of the superficial cutaneous nerves were not seen. Using the anterolateral portal in the best position of the joint (90 degrees flexion and not distended joint at max. pronation of the forearm) we measured a proximity of 4.5 mm (range 2-10 mm) to the radial nerve. For the anteromedial approach the mean distance of the median nerve to the arthroscopic sheath was 15.5 mm (range 8-27 mm), when the optimal joint position was used (90 degrees flexed joint, distended, max. supination of the forearm).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]