Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Proximal ulna morphometry: which are the “true” anatomical preshaped olecranon plates?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To define the optimum design of the anatomical preshaped olecranon plate.

Methods

The geometry of the proximal ulna was studied in 200 paired Caucasian ulnae, using a digital caliper and goniometer. Gender and side differences were analyzed. Results were compared with the corresponding geometrical parameters of three olecranon plates with different contour. All three plates were placed on the dorsal surface of a “model” ulna, i.e., a right dried ulna having osteometric parameters similar to the averages of our sample, and plate-to-bone fit was examined in two planes.

Results

The proximal ulna had an 8.48° (2.1°–15.7°) mean varus angulation and an 8.49° (1.70°–14.10°) mean anterior angulation, located on average 8.19 cm (5.68–11.66 cm) and 8.63 cm (5.28–11.92 cm) distal to the bone’s most proximal point, respectively. The mean olecranon angle was 110.34° (98.70°–125.80°) and the olecranon length was 1.58 cm on average (1.20–2.12 cm). Only the plate having both varus and anterior angulation presented a good plate-to-bone fit in both planes.

Conclusions

A “true” anatomical preshaped olecranon plate should have both varus and anterior angulation close to the average angulations of the normal ulna and located in a certain distance from its proximal edge. The olecranon part of the plate should primarily not exceed the olecranon length and secondarily be close to the average olecranon angle. We believe that such a plate may facilitate intraoperative restoration of the proximal ulna complex anatomy, when dealing with comminuted or Monteggia fractures, thus leading to better postoperative results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson ML, Larson N, Merten SM, Steinmann SP (2007) Congruent elbow plate fixation of olecranon fractures. J Orthop Trauma 21:386–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brownhill JR, Mozzon JB, Ferreira LM, Johnson JA, King GJW (2009) Morphologic analysis of the proximal ulna with special interest in elbow implant sizing and alignment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18:27–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Buijze G, Kloen P (2009) Clinical evaluation of locking compression plate fixation for comminuted olecranon fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:2416–2420

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cottias P, Camara KB, Clavert P, Kahn J, Livernaux PA (2010) Digastric olecranon osteotomy: feasibility study of a new approach to the elbow. Surg Radiol Anat 32:485–489

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dakoure PWH, Ndiaye A, Sane AD, Niane MM, Seye SIL, Dia A (2007) Posterior surgical approaches to the elbow: a simple method of comparison of the articular exposure. Surg Radiol Anat 29:671–674

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Erturer RE, Sever C, Sonmez MM, Ozcelik IB, Akman S, Ozturk I (2011) Results of open reduction and plate osteosynthesis in comminuted fracture of the olecranon. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20:449–454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldberg SH, Omid R, Nassr AN, Beck R, Cohen MS (2007) Osseous anatomy of the distal humerus and proximal ulna: implications for total elbow arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16:S39–S46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Grechening W, Clement H, Pichler W, Tesch NP, Windisch G (2007) The influence of lateral and anterior angulation of the proximal ulna on the treatment of a Monteggia fracture: an anatomical cadaver study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89-B:836–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kozin SH, Berglung LJ, Cooney WP, Morrey BF, An K-N (1996) Biomechanical analysis of tension band fixation for olecranon fracture treatment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 5:442–448

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Marsh M, Patel N, Limb D (2010) Ann R Coll Surg Engl 92:532–533

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kieffer EM, Bouchaid J, Bierry G, Clavert P (2013) CT arthrography and anatomical correlation of the bare area of the ulnar trochlear fossa: a risk of misdiagnosis of cartilage ulcerations. Surg Radiol Anat. doi:10.1007/s00276-013-1200-7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Puchwein P, Schildhauer TA, Schöffmann S, Heidari N, Windisch G, Pichler W (2012) Three-dimensional morphometry of the proximal ulna: a comparison to currently used anatomically preshaped ulna plates. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21:1018–1023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Quintero J, Varecka T (2007) Olecranon, radial head, and complex elbow injuries. In: Ruedi TP, Buckley R, Moran C (ed) AO principles of fracture management, vol 2, 2nd edn. Thieme Medical Publishers, New York, pp 628–633

  14. Rouleau DM, Faber KJ, Athwal GS (2010) The proximal ulna dorsal angulation: a radiographic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 19:26–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rouleau DM, Canet F, Chapleau J, Petit Y, Sandman E, Faber KJ et al (2012) The influence of proximal ulnar morphology on elbow range of motion. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21:384–388

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang AA, Mara M, Hutchinson DT (2003) The proximal ulna: an anatomic study with relevance to olecranon osteotomy and fracture fixation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12:293–296

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Windisch G, Clement H, Grechenig W, Tesch NP, Pichler W (2007) A morphometrical study of the medullary cavity of the ulna referred to intramedullary nailing. Surg Radiol Anat 29:47–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Windisch G, Clement H, Grechenig W, Tesch NP, Pichler W (2007) The anatomy of the proximal ulna. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16:661–666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Anatomy, Medical School, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124, Thessaloníki, Macedonia, Greece

    Trifon Totlis, Nikolaos Anastasopoulos, Stylianos Apostolidis, George Paraskevas, Ioannis Terzidis & Konstantinos Natsis

Authors
  1. Trifon Totlis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nikolaos Anastasopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stylianos Apostolidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. George Paraskevas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ioannis Terzidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Konstantinos Natsis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Trifon Totlis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Totlis, T., Anastasopoulos, N., Apostolidis, S. et al. Proximal ulna morphometry: which are the “true” anatomical preshaped olecranon plates?. Surg Radiol Anat 36, 1015–1022 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1287-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1287-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation