Abstract
Hinged elbow orthoses (HEO) are often used to allow protected motion of the unstable elbow. However, biomechanical studies have not shown HEO to improve the stability of a lateral collateral ligament (LCL) deficient elbow. This lack of effectiveness may be due to the straight hinge of current HEO designs which do not account for the native carrying angle of the elbow. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a custom-designed HEO with adjustable valgus angulation on stabilizing the LCL deficient elbow.
Eight cadaveric upper extremities were mounted in an elbow motion simulator in the varus position. An LCL injured (LCLI) model was created by sectioning of the common extensor origin, and the LCL. The adjustable HEO was secured to the arm and its effect with 0°, 10°, and 20° (BR00, BR10, BR20) of valgus angulation was investigated. Varus-valgus angles and ulnohumeral rotations were recorded using an electromagnetic tracking system during simulated active elbow flexion with the forearm pronated and supinated. We examined 5 elbow states, intact, LCLI, BR00, BR10, BR20.
There were significant differences in varus and ER angulation between different elbow states with the forearm both pronated and supinated (P=0 for all). The LCLI state with or without the brace resulted in significant increases in varus angulation and ER of the ulnohumeral articulation compared to the intact state (P 0.05). The difference between each of the brace angles and the LCLI state ranged from 1.1° to 2.4° for varus angulation and 0.5° to 1.6° for ER.
Although there was a trend toward decreasing varus and external rotation angulation of the ulnohumeral articulation with the application of this adjustable HEO, none of the brace angles examined in this biomechanical investigation was able to fully restore the stability of the LCL deficient elbow. This lack of stabilizing effect may be due to the weight of the brace exerting unintentional varus and torsional forces on the unstable elbow. Previous investigations have shown that the varus arm position is highly unstable in the LCL deficient elbow. Our results demonstrate that application of an HEO with an adjustable carrying angle does not sufficiently stabilize the LCL deficient elbow in this highly unstable position and varus arm position should continue to be avoided in the rehabilitation programs of an LCL deficient elbow.
