Comparison of the “Contact Biomechanics” of the Intact and Proximal Row Carpectomy Wrist

Purpose The proximal row carpectomy (PRC) is a clinically useful motion-preserving procedure for various arthritides of the wrist. However, there are few studies on the “contact biomechanics” after PRC. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the contact biomechanics in terms of pressure, area, and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.) 2009-04, Vol.34 (4), p.660-670
Hauptverfasser: Tang, Peter, MD, Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD, Muriuki, Muturi, PhD, Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD, Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD, Goitz, Robert J., MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 670
container_issue 4
container_start_page 660
container_title The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)
container_volume 34
creator Tang, Peter, MD
Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD
Muriuki, Muturi, PhD
Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD
Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD
Goitz, Robert J., MD
description Purpose The proximal row carpectomy (PRC) is a clinically useful motion-preserving procedure for various arthritides of the wrist. However, there are few studies on the “contact biomechanics” after PRC. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the contact biomechanics in terms of pressure, area, and contact location of the intact and PRC wrist. Methods Six fresh-frozen cadaver forearms were tested in neutral, 45° of flexion, and 45° of extension. In the intact wrist, Fuji UltraSuperLow pressure contact film was placed in the radioulnocarpal joint. The specimen was loaded to a total force of 200 N. We then performed a PRC, and the experiment was repeated using Fuji Low film. The film was scanned and analyzed with a customized MATLAB program. Multivariable analysis of variance with multiple contrast testing and Student's t -test were performed for statistics. Results In the intact wrist, scaphoid contact pressure averaged 1.4 megapascals (MPa), and lunate contact pressure averaged 1.3 MPa. In terms of contact location, scaphoid contact in the intact wrist significantly moved dorsal and ulnar in flexion and significantly moved volar and radial in extension. Lunate contact significantly moved dorsal in flexion. PRC wrist contact pressure was 3.8 times that of the intact wrist, and the contact area was approximately 26% that of the intact wrist. Lastly, in terms of the amount of contact translation after PRC, the capitate contact translated (7.5 mm) more than did the scaphoid contact (5.6 mm) and had about equal translation to that of the lunate (7.3 mm). Conclusions Contact pressure increased significantly and contact area decreased significantly after PRC. There is significant contact translation after PRC (more than scaphoid translation but equal to lunate translation), which provides quantitative support of the theory that translational motion of the PRC may explain its good clinical outcomes.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.12.004
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67116870</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0363502308011003</els_id><sourcerecordid>67116870</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-7252bb99bc04a0e133d02bd75c7742e0bf3b5053077e18f88c35c4652951c0d93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokPhBVigbGCX9PiWi4SQICpQqVIRF7FBshznROOQxFM7Q5ldH4S-XJ-kjmYAiQUrL_z9v46-n5CnFDIKND_ps34ddMYAyoyyDEDcIysqOU1zmYv7ZAU856kExo_IoxB6gJji8iE5ohUXsszLFflWu3GjvQ1uSlyXzGtMbq9_1W6atZmTN9aNaNZ6sibcXt_8Js72v3pqkw_e_bSjHpKP7iqptd-gmd24S77GyvkxedDpIeCTw3tMvrw9_Vy_T88v3p3Vr89TI3g1pwWTrGmqqjEgNCDlvAXWtIU0RSEYQtPxRoLkUBRIy64sDZdG5JJVkhpoK35MXux7N95dbjHMarTB4DDoCd02qLygNC8LiCDbg8a7EDx2auPj9X6nKKjFqerV4lQtThVlKjqNoWeH9m0zYvs3cpAYgecHQAejh87rydjwh2OUC8EZi9zLPYfRxQ-LXgVjcTLYWh-1qdbZ_9_x6p-4GWxcRg_fcYehd1s_RcuKqhAD6tOy_jI-lEApAOd3NpSqZA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67116870</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the “Contact Biomechanics” of the Intact and Proximal Row Carpectomy Wrist</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Tang, Peter, MD ; Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD ; Muriuki, Muturi, PhD ; Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD ; Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD ; Goitz, Robert J., MD</creator><creatorcontrib>Tang, Peter, MD ; Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD ; Muriuki, Muturi, PhD ; Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD ; Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD ; Goitz, Robert J., MD</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose The proximal row carpectomy (PRC) is a clinically useful motion-preserving procedure for various arthritides of the wrist. However, there are few studies on the “contact biomechanics” after PRC. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the contact biomechanics in terms of pressure, area, and contact location of the intact and PRC wrist. Methods Six fresh-frozen cadaver forearms were tested in neutral, 45° of flexion, and 45° of extension. In the intact wrist, Fuji UltraSuperLow pressure contact film was placed in the radioulnocarpal joint. The specimen was loaded to a total force of 200 N. We then performed a PRC, and the experiment was repeated using Fuji Low film. The film was scanned and analyzed with a customized MATLAB program. Multivariable analysis of variance with multiple contrast testing and Student's t -test were performed for statistics. Results In the intact wrist, scaphoid contact pressure averaged 1.4 megapascals (MPa), and lunate contact pressure averaged 1.3 MPa. In terms of contact location, scaphoid contact in the intact wrist significantly moved dorsal and ulnar in flexion and significantly moved volar and radial in extension. Lunate contact significantly moved dorsal in flexion. PRC wrist contact pressure was 3.8 times that of the intact wrist, and the contact area was approximately 26% that of the intact wrist. Lastly, in terms of the amount of contact translation after PRC, the capitate contact translated (7.5 mm) more than did the scaphoid contact (5.6 mm) and had about equal translation to that of the lunate (7.3 mm). Conclusions Contact pressure increased significantly and contact area decreased significantly after PRC. There is significant contact translation after PRC (more than scaphoid translation but equal to lunate translation), which provides quantitative support of the theory that translational motion of the PRC may explain its good clinical outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0363-5023</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-6564</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.12.004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19345868</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JHSUDV</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; area ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biomechanical Phenomena - physiology ; Biomechanics. Biorheology ; Capitate Bone - physiopathology ; Carpal Bones - surgery ; Carpal Joints - physiopathology ; contact biomechanics ; contact location ; contact pressure ; Diseases of the osteoarticular system ; Female ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Humans ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted ; In Vitro Techniques ; load transmission ; Lunate Bone - physiopathology ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Orthopedics ; Osteoarthritis - physiopathology ; Osteoarthritis - surgery ; Photography ; Postoperative Complications - physiopathology ; Pressure ; Proximal row carpectomy ; Range of Motion, Articular - physiology ; Scaphoid Bone - physiopathology ; Tissues, organs and organisms biophysics ; Treatment Outcome ; Weight-Bearing - physiology ; Wrist Joint - physiopathology</subject><ispartof>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.), 2009-04, Vol.34 (4), p.660-670</ispartof><rights>2009</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-7252bb99bc04a0e133d02bd75c7742e0bf3b5053077e18f88c35c4652951c0d93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-7252bb99bc04a0e133d02bd75c7742e0bf3b5053077e18f88c35c4652951c0d93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363502308011003$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3536,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=21344322$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19345868$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tang, Peter, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muriuki, Muturi, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goitz, Robert J., MD</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the “Contact Biomechanics” of the Intact and Proximal Row Carpectomy Wrist</title><title>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</title><addtitle>J Hand Surg Am</addtitle><description>Purpose The proximal row carpectomy (PRC) is a clinically useful motion-preserving procedure for various arthritides of the wrist. However, there are few studies on the “contact biomechanics” after PRC. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the contact biomechanics in terms of pressure, area, and contact location of the intact and PRC wrist. Methods Six fresh-frozen cadaver forearms were tested in neutral, 45° of flexion, and 45° of extension. In the intact wrist, Fuji UltraSuperLow pressure contact film was placed in the radioulnocarpal joint. The specimen was loaded to a total force of 200 N. We then performed a PRC, and the experiment was repeated using Fuji Low film. The film was scanned and analyzed with a customized MATLAB program. Multivariable analysis of variance with multiple contrast testing and Student's t -test were performed for statistics. Results In the intact wrist, scaphoid contact pressure averaged 1.4 megapascals (MPa), and lunate contact pressure averaged 1.3 MPa. In terms of contact location, scaphoid contact in the intact wrist significantly moved dorsal and ulnar in flexion and significantly moved volar and radial in extension. Lunate contact significantly moved dorsal in flexion. PRC wrist contact pressure was 3.8 times that of the intact wrist, and the contact area was approximately 26% that of the intact wrist. Lastly, in terms of the amount of contact translation after PRC, the capitate contact translated (7.5 mm) more than did the scaphoid contact (5.6 mm) and had about equal translation to that of the lunate (7.3 mm). Conclusions Contact pressure increased significantly and contact area decreased significantly after PRC. There is significant contact translation after PRC (more than scaphoid translation but equal to lunate translation), which provides quantitative support of the theory that translational motion of the PRC may explain its good clinical outcomes.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>area</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena - physiology</subject><subject>Biomechanics. Biorheology</subject><subject>Capitate Bone - physiopathology</subject><subject>Carpal Bones - surgery</subject><subject>Carpal Joints - physiopathology</subject><subject>contact biomechanics</subject><subject>contact location</subject><subject>contact pressure</subject><subject>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>In Vitro Techniques</subject><subject>load transmission</subject><subject>Lunate Bone - physiopathology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - physiopathology</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - surgery</subject><subject>Photography</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - physiopathology</subject><subject>Pressure</subject><subject>Proximal row carpectomy</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</subject><subject>Scaphoid Bone - physiopathology</subject><subject>Tissues, organs and organisms biophysics</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Weight-Bearing - physiology</subject><subject>Wrist Joint - physiopathology</subject><issn>0363-5023</issn><issn>1531-6564</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokPhBVigbGCX9PiWi4SQICpQqVIRF7FBshznROOQxFM7Q5ldH4S-XJ-kjmYAiQUrL_z9v46-n5CnFDIKND_ps34ddMYAyoyyDEDcIysqOU1zmYv7ZAU856kExo_IoxB6gJji8iE5ohUXsszLFflWu3GjvQ1uSlyXzGtMbq9_1W6atZmTN9aNaNZ6sibcXt_8Js72v3pqkw_e_bSjHpKP7iqptd-gmd24S77GyvkxedDpIeCTw3tMvrw9_Vy_T88v3p3Vr89TI3g1pwWTrGmqqjEgNCDlvAXWtIU0RSEYQtPxRoLkUBRIy64sDZdG5JJVkhpoK35MXux7N95dbjHMarTB4DDoCd02qLygNC8LiCDbg8a7EDx2auPj9X6nKKjFqerV4lQtThVlKjqNoWeH9m0zYvs3cpAYgecHQAejh87rydjwh2OUC8EZi9zLPYfRxQ-LXgVjcTLYWh-1qdbZ_9_x6p-4GWxcRg_fcYehd1s_RcuKqhAD6tOy_jI-lEApAOd3NpSqZA</recordid><startdate>20090401</startdate><enddate>20090401</enddate><creator>Tang, Peter, MD</creator><creator>Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD</creator><creator>Muriuki, Muturi, PhD</creator><creator>Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD</creator><creator>Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD</creator><creator>Goitz, Robert J., MD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090401</creationdate><title>Comparison of the “Contact Biomechanics” of the Intact and Proximal Row Carpectomy Wrist</title><author>Tang, Peter, MD ; Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD ; Muriuki, Muturi, PhD ; Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD ; Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD ; Goitz, Robert J., MD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c439t-7252bb99bc04a0e133d02bd75c7742e0bf3b5053077e18f88c35c4652951c0d93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>area</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena - physiology</topic><topic>Biomechanics. Biorheology</topic><topic>Capitate Bone - physiopathology</topic><topic>Carpal Bones - surgery</topic><topic>Carpal Joints - physiopathology</topic><topic>contact biomechanics</topic><topic>contact location</topic><topic>contact pressure</topic><topic>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>In Vitro Techniques</topic><topic>load transmission</topic><topic>Lunate Bone - physiopathology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - physiopathology</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - surgery</topic><topic>Photography</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - physiopathology</topic><topic>Pressure</topic><topic>Proximal row carpectomy</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</topic><topic>Scaphoid Bone - physiopathology</topic><topic>Tissues, organs and organisms biophysics</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Weight-Bearing - physiology</topic><topic>Wrist Joint - physiopathology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tang, Peter, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muriuki, Muturi, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goitz, Robert J., MD</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tang, Peter, MD</au><au>Gauvin, Jean, MD, PhD</au><au>Muriuki, Muturi, PhD</au><au>Pfaeffle, Jamie H., MD, PhD</au><au>Imbriglia, Joseph E., MD</au><au>Goitz, Robert J., MD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the “Contact Biomechanics” of the Intact and Proximal Row Carpectomy Wrist</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</jtitle><addtitle>J Hand Surg Am</addtitle><date>2009-04-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>660</spage><epage>670</epage><pages>660-670</pages><issn>0363-5023</issn><eissn>1531-6564</eissn><coden>JHSUDV</coden><abstract>Purpose The proximal row carpectomy (PRC) is a clinically useful motion-preserving procedure for various arthritides of the wrist. However, there are few studies on the “contact biomechanics” after PRC. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the contact biomechanics in terms of pressure, area, and contact location of the intact and PRC wrist. Methods Six fresh-frozen cadaver forearms were tested in neutral, 45° of flexion, and 45° of extension. In the intact wrist, Fuji UltraSuperLow pressure contact film was placed in the radioulnocarpal joint. The specimen was loaded to a total force of 200 N. We then performed a PRC, and the experiment was repeated using Fuji Low film. The film was scanned and analyzed with a customized MATLAB program. Multivariable analysis of variance with multiple contrast testing and Student's t -test were performed for statistics. Results In the intact wrist, scaphoid contact pressure averaged 1.4 megapascals (MPa), and lunate contact pressure averaged 1.3 MPa. In terms of contact location, scaphoid contact in the intact wrist significantly moved dorsal and ulnar in flexion and significantly moved volar and radial in extension. Lunate contact significantly moved dorsal in flexion. PRC wrist contact pressure was 3.8 times that of the intact wrist, and the contact area was approximately 26% that of the intact wrist. Lastly, in terms of the amount of contact translation after PRC, the capitate contact translated (7.5 mm) more than did the scaphoid contact (5.6 mm) and had about equal translation to that of the lunate (7.3 mm). Conclusions Contact pressure increased significantly and contact area decreased significantly after PRC. There is significant contact translation after PRC (more than scaphoid translation but equal to lunate translation), which provides quantitative support of the theory that translational motion of the PRC may explain its good clinical outcomes.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>19345868</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.12.004</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0363-5023
ispartof The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.), 2009-04, Vol.34 (4), p.660-670
issn 0363-5023
1531-6564
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67116870
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adult
area
Biological and medical sciences
Biomechanical Phenomena - physiology
Biomechanics. Biorheology
Capitate Bone - physiopathology
Carpal Bones - surgery
Carpal Joints - physiopathology
contact biomechanics
contact location
contact pressure
Diseases of the osteoarticular system
Female
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
In Vitro Techniques
load transmission
Lunate Bone - physiopathology
Male
Medical sciences
Orthopedics
Osteoarthritis - physiopathology
Osteoarthritis - surgery
Photography
Postoperative Complications - physiopathology
Pressure
Proximal row carpectomy
Range of Motion, Articular - physiology
Scaphoid Bone - physiopathology
Tissues, organs and organisms biophysics
Treatment Outcome
Weight-Bearing - physiology
Wrist Joint - physiopathology
title Comparison of the “Contact Biomechanics” of the Intact and Proximal Row Carpectomy Wrist
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T12%3A24%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20the%20%E2%80%9CContact%20Biomechanics%E2%80%9D%20of%20the%20Intact%20and%20Proximal%20Row%20Carpectomy%20Wrist&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20hand%20surgery%20(American%20ed.)&rft.au=Tang,%20Peter,%20MD&rft.date=2009-04-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=660&rft.epage=670&rft.pages=660-670&rft.issn=0363-5023&rft.eissn=1531-6564&rft.coden=JHSUDV&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.12.004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67116870%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67116870&rft_id=info:pmid/19345868&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0363502308011003&rfr_iscdi=true