Mechanisms of load transfer in the cadaver forearm: Role of the interosseous membrane

Forces transmitted through the distal ulna and proximal radius, relative motion between the radial head and capitellum, and measurements of tissue strain and local fiber tension within the central band of the interosseous membrane were recorded as cadaveric forearms were loaded axially through the w...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.) 2000-07, Vol.25 (4), p.674-682
Hauptverfasser: Markolf, Keith L., Dunbar, Arati Mallik, Hannani, Kambiz
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Forces transmitted through the distal ulna and proximal radius, relative motion between the radial head and capitellum, and measurements of tissue strain and local fiber tension within the central band of the interosseous membrane were recorded as cadaveric forearms were loaded axially through the wrist. With the elbow in valgus alignment (the radial head in direct contact with the capitellum), an average of 93% of force applied to the wrist was transferred directly through the radius to the elbow with no appreciable load transfer through the interosseous membrane. With varus alignment (initial gap between the radial head and capitellum) load applied to the wrist displaced the radius proximally an average of 1.1 mm until radial head contact occurred at a mean applied wrist force of 89.0 N. Proximal displacement of the radius generated strain in the central band of the interosseous membrane and created a more ulnar positive wrist, which in turn increased distal ulnar loading; distal ulnar force averaged 19% and interosseous membrane averaged 54% of applied wrist force. Distal ulnar loading was unaffected by 25° wrist flexion-extension or by 20° of radioulnar deviation. With 40° ulnar deviation, mean distal ulnar forces were 18% and 48% of applied wrist force for valgus and varus elbow alignments, respectively. Mean load-sharing percentages at the wrist and elbow were not significantly different between 222.5 N and 133.5 N of applied force for any wrist position and were unaffected by the angle of elbow flexion. (J Hand Surg 2000;25A:674–682. Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Surgery of the Hand.)
ISSN:0363-5023
1531-6564
DOI:10.1053/jhsu.2000.8640