Neurobionplus
Home About Journal AHEAD OF PRINT Current Issue Back Issues Instructions Submission Search Subscribe Blog    
Login 

Users Online: 723 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 48  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 453-457

Misconceptions about the three point bony relationship of the elbow


Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh, India

Correspondence Address:
Mandeep S Dhillon
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, PGIMER, Sector 12, Chandigarh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.139835

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: The 3 bony point relationship of the elbow is an important surface evaluation done in all cases of elbow pathology; its importance is highlighted by the fact that significant emphasis is also laid on this during the specialty board examinations. Confusion about the exact inter relationship exists even in the standard orthopaedic books, with various authors labeling it as isosceles, equilateral or a different triangle, without any citation to back this statement. Materials and Methods: The knowledge of the three bony points relationship in elbow was verified after a survey of orthopaedic surgeons undertaken by the senior author, produced disparate answers. Most (63%) classified this as an isosceles triangle. To clarify this further, 200 elbows were prospectively evaluated to measure the distances between these points and the angles were calculated. Conclusion: Our observations indicate that this triangle is neither isosceles, nor equilateral, but a scalene triangle of unequal sides. There may even be a minimal difference in the 2 sides of the same individual, which has the potential to complicate routine comparison of the two elbows during examination. Results: The analysis of data revealed that all surgeons were aware of the three bony points relationship; however 21 of the 179 (mostly senior surgeons) did not give too much importance to this evaluation in daily clinical practice. Nine surgeons were not sure what type of triangle was formed, 17 thought it was an equilateral triangle, 40 thought it was some other type of triangle while 113 (63%) thought these points formed an isosceles triangle. This is a reflection of the disparity in the perception about this triangle in the orthopaedic community in general.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed6577    
    Printed74    
    Emailed2    
    PDF Downloaded453    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal