EFFICACY OF THE INTERFERENCE SCREW AND DOUBLE DOCKING METHODS USING PALMARIS LONGUS AND GRAFT JACKET FOR MEDIAL COLLATERAL ELBOW LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single-strand medial collateral elbow ligament (MCL) reconstruction strength was evaluated using double docking (DD) and interference screw (IS) methods with either palmaris longus (PL) or Graft Jacket_ (GJ) as the reconstruction material. Thirteen upper-extremities were mounted in 90° valgus orientations, and subjected to increasing cyclic valgus loading until failure. DD reconstructions outperformed IS reconstructions (P 0.05). The initial Graft Jacket strength makes it a potential alternative to palmaris longus tendons; Laboratory evaluation of graft strength during healing is required. For its simplicity and strength, the DD technique should be considered, clinically. Single-strand medial collateral elbow ligament (MCL) reconstruction strength was evaluated using double docking (DD) and interference screw (IS) methods with either palmaris longus (PL) or Graft Jacket_ (GJ) as the reconstruction material. Thirteen, fresh-frozen upper-extremities (66 ±5 years) were cleaned of all soft tissues except the medial and lateral collateral ligaments, flexed to 90° and mounted in a rigid, valgus testing system. DD or IS reconstructions were performed using either PL or GJ. A cyclic (0.5Hz) load was applied 12cm distal to the medial epicondyle. After 500 cycles, the load was increased by 10N until catastrophic failure or a length increase of 10mm. The mean maximum load for the DD with GJ was 65 ±12N; for the IS with GJ: 45 ±5N; for the DD with PL: 59 ±11N; and for the IS with PL: 56 ±14N. The mean maximum number of cycles endured by the DD with GJ was 1292 ±562; for the IS with GJ: 356 ±292; for the DD with PL: 1104 ±479; and for the IS with PL: 924 ±690. For both the maximum load and number of cycles, the DD outperformed the IS (P 0.05). Single-strand reconstructions using the double dock method outperform the interference screw technique. For its simplicity and strength, the DD technique should be considered, clinically. The initial Graft Jacket strength makes it a potential alternative to palmaris longus tendons; laboratory evaluation of graft strength during healing is required. Funding: This study was partially funded by Wright Medical Technology (Arlington, TN) and the Canadian Institute for Health Research. Please contact author for graphs and/or diagrams.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".