Abstract:Cross-sectional magnetic resonance imaging is currently the only available method to quantify rotational malunion of the radius and ulna. Its low side-to-side reliability warrants comparison between the imaging results and the clinical findings. A side-to-side difference in the rotation profile may serve as a reason to perform an axial osteotomy when the results of the clinical and magnetic resonance imaging assessments are consistent with each other.
“…Previous studies have shown a wide variation in the absolute values of the radial torsion angle, resulting in a very wide range of normal values 6,7. The parameters adopted in the present study for the measurement of the radial torsion angle differed from those employed in other studies, resulting in considerably different absolute values compared to previously reported data but a substantially lower variation between sides for both denuded bones and volunteers.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 56%
“…In addition, none of the existing methods is sufficiently accurate to identify rotational deviations of the radius of less than 35°. However, rotational deviations less than 35° have been described as important in the reduction of forearm rotation 7,9-12. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some authors have stated that the most important and reliable finding for an evaluation is the difference between sides 6,7. Former investigators have obtained a mean difference between sides of 4.9°, with a range from 0.01° to 18.1° 6.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A reference line (line A) was traced on the volar rim of the distal radius, as recommended by Dumont et al7 Another line, called line B, was traced on a diametrical path perpendicular to the most prominent point of the radial tubercle on the proximal radius (Figure 4). The diameter was related to the best circumference that fit the radius cross section; the insertion of the biceps tendon was visible within the soft tissue window and served as a reference that helped to find the proper point on the radial tubercle.…”
OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the intraobserver and interobserver reliability of radial torsion angle measurement using computed tomography.METHODS:Twelve pairs of cadaver radii and 116 forearms from 58 healthy volunteers were evaluated using axial computed tomography sections measured at the level of the bicipital tuberosity and the subchondral region of the radius. During digital imaging, the angle was formed by two lines, one diametrically perpendicular to the radial tubercle and the other tangential to the volar rim of the distal joint surface. Measurements were performed twice each by three observers.RESULTS:In cadaveric bones, the mean radial torsion angle was 1.48° (‐6° ‐ 9°) on the right and 1.62° (‐6° ‐ 8°) on the left, with a mean difference between the right and left sides of 1.61° (0° ‐ 8°). In volunteers, the mean radial torsion angle was 3.00° (‐17° ‐ 17°) on the right and 2.91° (‐16°‐ 15°) on the left, with a mean difference between the sides of 1.58° (0° ‐ 7°). There was no significant difference between each side. The interobserver correlation coefficient for the cadaver radii measurements was 0.88 (0.72 ‐ 0.96) and 0.81 (0.58 ‐ 0.93) for the right and left radius, respectively, while for the volunteers, the difference was 0.84 (0.77 – 0.90) and 0.83 (0.75 – 0.89), respectively. Intraobserver reliability was high.CONCLUSION:The described method is reproducible and applicable even when the radial tubercle has a rounded contour.
“…Previous studies have shown a wide variation in the absolute values of the radial torsion angle, resulting in a very wide range of normal values 6,7. The parameters adopted in the present study for the measurement of the radial torsion angle differed from those employed in other studies, resulting in considerably different absolute values compared to previously reported data but a substantially lower variation between sides for both denuded bones and volunteers.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 56%
“…In addition, none of the existing methods is sufficiently accurate to identify rotational deviations of the radius of less than 35°. However, rotational deviations less than 35° have been described as important in the reduction of forearm rotation 7,9-12. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some authors have stated that the most important and reliable finding for an evaluation is the difference between sides 6,7. Former investigators have obtained a mean difference between sides of 4.9°, with a range from 0.01° to 18.1° 6.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A reference line (line A) was traced on the volar rim of the distal radius, as recommended by Dumont et al7 Another line, called line B, was traced on a diametrical path perpendicular to the most prominent point of the radial tubercle on the proximal radius (Figure 4). The diameter was related to the best circumference that fit the radius cross section; the insertion of the biceps tendon was visible within the soft tissue window and served as a reference that helped to find the proper point on the radial tubercle.…”
OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the intraobserver and interobserver reliability of radial torsion angle measurement using computed tomography.METHODS:Twelve pairs of cadaver radii and 116 forearms from 58 healthy volunteers were evaluated using axial computed tomography sections measured at the level of the bicipital tuberosity and the subchondral region of the radius. During digital imaging, the angle was formed by two lines, one diametrically perpendicular to the radial tubercle and the other tangential to the volar rim of the distal joint surface. Measurements were performed twice each by three observers.RESULTS:In cadaveric bones, the mean radial torsion angle was 1.48° (‐6° ‐ 9°) on the right and 1.62° (‐6° ‐ 8°) on the left, with a mean difference between the right and left sides of 1.61° (0° ‐ 8°). In volunteers, the mean radial torsion angle was 3.00° (‐17° ‐ 17°) on the right and 2.91° (‐16°‐ 15°) on the left, with a mean difference between the sides of 1.58° (0° ‐ 7°). There was no significant difference between each side. The interobserver correlation coefficient for the cadaver radii measurements was 0.88 (0.72 ‐ 0.96) and 0.81 (0.58 ‐ 0.93) for the right and left radius, respectively, while for the volunteers, the difference was 0.84 (0.77 – 0.90) and 0.83 (0.75 – 0.89), respectively. Intraobserver reliability was high.CONCLUSION:The described method is reproducible and applicable even when the radial tubercle has a rounded contour.
“…Angular deformities are assessed on true AP and lateral views. Rotational deformities are more difficult to assess and require assessment of the relationship between the radial styloid and bicipital tuberosity and ulnar styloid and coronoid process on full forearm views comparing both sides [2, 12]. The level of axial malunion may be defined by comparison with the level of the original fracture or the level of angular deformity in patients with combined deformity.Fig.…”
The forearm is a complex anatomical and functional unit with unique osseous, soft tissue and articular relationships. Disruption of these important relations can have a significant impact, leading to pain, instability of the radio-ulnar articulation and reduced range of motion. The gold standard for treating forearm fractures in adults remains anatomic reduction, stable plate fixation and preservation of the surrounding blood supply. Failure to achieve these goals may lead to malunion, requiring reconstructive surgery, which can be technically challenging. In this review, we discuss the essential aspects of anatomy and pathomechanics, clinical and radiological assessment and the state of the art in pre-operative planning and deformity correction surgery.
The mechanism of CN cross‐coupling reactions catalyzed by CuI associated to a 1,3‐diketonate ligand L− is investigated by cyclic voltammetry and 1H NMR spectroscopy up to the formation of the key anionic complex [LCuINHCy]−. Its reaction with PhI, shown experimentally, proceeds via an unusual iodide activation, and the transition states are investigated by density functional calculations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
