open access

Vol 81, No 4 (2022)
Original article
Submitted: 2021-08-24
Accepted: 2021-09-10
Published online: 2021-09-28
Get Citation

The morphological and morphometric analysis of the variant patterns of the tricipital aponeurosis: a new anatomical classification with possible clinical implications

A. Patra1, A. Asghar12, K. S. Ravi3, F. Duparc4, S. Arora5
·
Pubmed: 34590297
·
Folia Morphol 2022;81(4):1022-1030.
Affiliations
  1. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bathinda, Department of Anatomy, AIIMS, Bathinda, India
  2. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, India
  3. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India
  4. Universite de Rouen, France
  5. Maulana Azad Medical College, Department of Anatomy, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi, India

open access

Vol 81, No 4 (2022)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Submitted: 2021-08-24
Accepted: 2021-09-10
Published online: 2021-09-28

Abstract

Background: Tricipital aponeurosis (TA) has gained attraction as a constant and reliable landmark to identify the location of radial nerve in the setting of fracture distal humeri. The aponeurosis itself shows variant anatomical patterns. In this study, we intend to provide a comprehensive description and functional classification of observed anatomical variations with possible clinical implications.
Materials and methods: Sixty arms belonging to 30 adult cadavers were studied. TA was examined grossly to document variations in its shape and classified accordingly. Subsequently, length and breadth of TA were measured. The distance of the radial nerve (RN) from the point of confluence and from the lateral border of TA was also measured (tricepso-radial distance [TRD]). These distances were correlated with the different patterns of TA obtained.
Results: Based on the shape of the proximal apex of TA or point of confluence and frequency of their occurrence, we propose a new classification of 4 patterns for the TA anatomy. Pattern I: classically seen as the triangular proximal apex (76.67%); pattern II: tongue shaped or blunt proximal apex (18.33%); pattern III: bifurcated or dual proximal apex (3.33%); pattern IV: as the absence of TA (1.67%). The mean of length and breadth of TA was 16.58 ± 2.05 cm and 3.61 ± 0.61 cm, respectively. The mean distance of RN from point of confluence and lateral border of TA was 3.57 ± 0.19 cm and 2.04 ± 0.56 cm, respectively. The length, breadth of TA and TRD differs amongst the different patterns of TA.
Conclusions: Anatomical variations in the shape and size of TA are frequently encountered. The proposed, hitherto undescribed, classification may make operating surgeon aware of these morphological variations and help prevent iatrogenic injury to RN. Such classification is simple and unique; however, its success relies upon universal acceptance.

Abstract

Background: Tricipital aponeurosis (TA) has gained attraction as a constant and reliable landmark to identify the location of radial nerve in the setting of fracture distal humeri. The aponeurosis itself shows variant anatomical patterns. In this study, we intend to provide a comprehensive description and functional classification of observed anatomical variations with possible clinical implications.
Materials and methods: Sixty arms belonging to 30 adult cadavers were studied. TA was examined grossly to document variations in its shape and classified accordingly. Subsequently, length and breadth of TA were measured. The distance of the radial nerve (RN) from the point of confluence and from the lateral border of TA was also measured (tricepso-radial distance [TRD]). These distances were correlated with the different patterns of TA obtained.
Results: Based on the shape of the proximal apex of TA or point of confluence and frequency of their occurrence, we propose a new classification of 4 patterns for the TA anatomy. Pattern I: classically seen as the triangular proximal apex (76.67%); pattern II: tongue shaped or blunt proximal apex (18.33%); pattern III: bifurcated or dual proximal apex (3.33%); pattern IV: as the absence of TA (1.67%). The mean of length and breadth of TA was 16.58 ± 2.05 cm and 3.61 ± 0.61 cm, respectively. The mean distance of RN from point of confluence and lateral border of TA was 3.57 ± 0.19 cm and 2.04 ± 0.56 cm, respectively. The length, breadth of TA and TRD differs amongst the different patterns of TA.
Conclusions: Anatomical variations in the shape and size of TA are frequently encountered. The proposed, hitherto undescribed, classification may make operating surgeon aware of these morphological variations and help prevent iatrogenic injury to RN. Such classification is simple and unique; however, its success relies upon universal acceptance.

Get Citation

Keywords

triceps brachii, aponeurosis, classification, humerus, fracture, landmark

About this article
Title

The morphological and morphometric analysis of the variant patterns of the tricipital aponeurosis: a new anatomical classification with possible clinical implications

Journal

Folia Morphologica

Issue

Vol 81, No 4 (2022)

Article type

Original article

Pages

1022-1030

Published online

2021-09-28

Page views

3995

Article views/downloads

564

DOI

10.5603/FM.a2021.0097

Pubmed

34590297

Bibliographic record

Folia Morphol 2022;81(4):1022-1030.

Keywords

triceps brachii
aponeurosis
classification
humerus
fracture
landmark

Authors

A. Patra
A. Asghar
K. S. Ravi
F. Duparc
S. Arora

References (31)
  1. Arora S, Goel N, Cheema GS, et al. A method to localize the radial nerve using the 'apex of triceps aponeurosis' as a landmark. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(9): 2638–2644.
  2. Artico M, Telera S, Tiengo C, et al. Surgical anatomy of the radial nerve at the elbow. Surg Radiol Anat. 2009; 31(2): 101–106.
  3. Ashfaq Hasan S, Rauls RB, Cordell CL, et al. "Zone of vulnerability" for radial nerve injury: anatomic study. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2014; 23(2): 105–110.
  4. Bono C, Grossman M, Hochwald N, et al. Radial and Axillary Nerves. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2000; 373: 259–264.
  5. Bryan RS, Morrey BF. Extensive posterior exposure of the elbow. A triceps-sparing approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982(166): 188–192.
  6. Carlan D, Pratt J, Patterson JM, et al. The radial nerve in the brachium: an anatomic study in human cadavers. J Hand Surg Am. 2007; 32(8): 1177–1182.
  7. Chaudhry T, Noor S, Maher B, et al. The surgical anatomy of the radial nerve and the triceps aponeurosis. Clin Anat. 2010; 23(2): 222–226.
  8. Chou PH, Shyu JF, Ma HL, et al. Courses of the radial nerve differ between chinese and Caucasians : clinical applications. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008; 466(1): 135–138.
  9. Clement H, Pichler W, Tesch NP, et al. Anatomical basis of the risk of radial nerve injury related to the technique of external fixation applied to the distal humerus. Surg Radiol Anat. 2010; 32(3): 221–224.
  10. Cox CL, Riherd D, Tubbs RS, et al. Predicting radial nerve location using palpable landmarks. Clin Anat. 2010; 23(4): 420–426.
  11. DeFranco MJ, Lawton JN. Radial nerve injuries associated with humeral fractures. J Hand Surg Am. 2006; 31(4): 655–663.
  12. Dev D. Results of triceps aponeurosis tongue approach for distal humerus fractures. J Med Sci Clin Res. 2019; 7(4): 134–137.
  13. Gerwin M, Hotchkiss RN, Weiland AJ. Alternative operative exposures of the posterior aspect of the humeral diaphysis with reference to the radial nerve. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996; 78(11): 1690–1695.
  14. Guse TR, Ostrum RF. The surgical anatomy of the radial nerve around the humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995(320): 149–153.
  15. Hackl M, Damerow D, Leschinger T, et al. Radial nerve location at the posterior aspect of the humerus: an anatomic study of 100 specimens. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015; 135(11): 1527–1532.
  16. Hoppenfeld S, deBoer P, Buckley R. Surgical Exposures in Orthopaedics: The Anatomic Approach. Lippincott , Williams & Wilkins 2012.
  17. Huttunen TT, Kannus P, Lepola V, et al. Surgical treatment of humeral-shaft fractures: a register-based study in Finland between 1987 and 2009. Injury. 2012; 43(10): 1704–1708.
  18. Kamineni S, Ankem H, Patten DK. Anatomic relationship of the radial nerve to the elbow joint: clinical implications of safe pin placement. Clin Anat. 2009; 22(6): 684–688.
  19. McCann PA, Smith GCS, Clark D, et al. The tricipital aponeurosis--a reliable soft tissue landmark for humeral plating. Hand Surg. 2015; 20(1): 53–58.
  20. McCormack RG, Brien D, Buckley RE, et al. Fixation of fractures of the shaft of the humerus by dynamic compression plate or intramedullary nail. A prospective, randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000; 82(3): 336–339.
  21. Patra A, Chaudhary P, Arora K, et al. Surgical anatomy of the radial nerve in the anterior compartment of the arm: relationship with the triceps aponeurosis. Surg Radiol Anat. 2021; 43(5): 689–694.
  22. Patra A, Chaudhary P, Malhotra V, et al. Identification of most consistent and reliable anatomical landmark to locate and protect radial nerve during posterior approach to humerus: a cadaveric study. Anat Cell Biol. 2020; 53(2): 132–136.
  23. Prasad M, Issac B, Premkumar S. Anatomic landmarks to identify the radial nerve during the posterior approach of the humerus: a cadaveric study. J Clin Diag Res. 2018.
  24. Ring D, Gulotta L, Chin K, et al. Concomitant nonunion of the distal humerus and olecranon. J South Orthop Assoc. 2003; 12(1): 27–31.
  25. Seigerman DA, Choung EW, Yoon RS, et al. Identification of the radial nerve during the posterior approach to the humerus: a cadaveric study. J Orthop Trauma. 2012; 26(4): 226–228.
  26. Shao YC, Harwood P, Grotz MRW, et al. Radial nerve palsy associated with fractures of the shaft of the humerus: a systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87(12): 1647–1652.
  27. Tsai CH, Fong YC, Chen YH, et al. The epidemiology of traumatic humeral shaft fractures in Taiwan. Int Orthop. 2009; 33(2): 463–467.
  28. Van Sint Jan S, Nguyen Van D, Rooze M. Quantified relationships of the radial nerve with the radial groove and selected humeral landmarks. Surg Radiol Anat. 2008; 30(8): 627–631.
  29. Wang JP, Shen WJ, Chen WM, et al. Iatrogenic radial nerve palsy after operative management of humeral shaft fractures. J Trauma. 2009; 66(3): 800–803.
  30. Wilkinson JM, Stanley D. Posterior surgical approaches to the elbow: a comparative anatomic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2001; 10(4): 380–382.
  31. Zlotolow DA, Catalano LW, Barron OA, et al. Surgical exposures of the humerus. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006; 14(13): 754–765.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By VM Media Group sp. z o.o., Grupa Via Medica, Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland

tel.: +48 58 320 94 94, faks: +48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl