J Hand Microsurg 2019; 11(S 01): S06-S10
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1642067
Case Report
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.

The Supracondylar Process: A Rare Case of Ulnar Nerve Entrapment and Literature Review

Peter May-Miller
1   Department of General Surgery, Queen Alexandra Hospital Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom
,
Simon Robinson
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Wirral University Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Wirral, United Kingdom
,
Prateek Sharma
3   Department of Radiology, Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Chesterfield, United Kingdom
,
Shantanu Shahane
4   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Chesterfield, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations
Funding None.
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 06 January 2018

Accepted after revision: 26 February 2018

Publication Date:
25 April 2018 (online)

Abstract

A fit and well 33-year-old male mechanic was referred to the clinic complaining of locking of right elbow and paraesthesia and pain affecting the forearm and hand. Radiographs demonstrated a right-sided supracondylar process. The patient had locking of his right elbow, which caused shooting pains both distally and proximally. The ulnar nerve was irritable proximal to the cubital tunnel, and there was some weakness of the ulnar nerve supplied muscles of the hand and forearm. The patient had a subjective feeling of altered sensation over the medial one and a half digits. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) suggested that there was anomalous anatomy around the elbow and that compression of the ulnar and or the median nerve by a fibrous band appeared to be the cause of his symptoms. A surgical exploration was arranged. The incision was posterior to the medial epicondyle. A fascial/muscular band was identified from the tip of the supratrochlear spur to the olecranon and was seen to kink the ulnar nerve. This was corrected upon its release. The supratrochlear spur was excised with an osteotome, and bone wax applied to the humerus. On review 6 weeks postoperatively, his function had returned to normal.

 
  • References

  • 1 Ay S, Bektas U, Yilmaz C, Diren B. An unusual supracondylar process syndrome. J Hand Surg Am 2002; 27 (05) 913-915
  • 2 Subasi M, Kesemenli C, Necmioglu S, Kapukaya A, Demirtas M. Supracondylar process of the humerus. Acta Orthop Belg 2002; 68 (01) 72-75
  • 3 C. S, B. SS, G. VK, S. L. Morphological study of the supracondylar process of the humerus and its clinical implications. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8 (01) 1-3
  • 4 Krishnamurthy J, Lakshminarayan JLG. Supracondylar process of the humerus: a case report. Int J Anat Var 2013; 6: 98-100
  • 5 Struthers J. On a peculiarity of the humerus and humeral artery. Monthly Journal of Medical Science 1848; 8: 264-267
  • 6 Ivins GK. Supracondylar process syndrome: a case report. J Hand Surg Am 1996; 21 (02) 279-281
  • 7 Grayson DE. The elbow: radiographic imaging pearls and pitfalls. Semin Roentgenol 2005; 40 (03) 223-247
  • 8 Fragiadakis EG, Lamb DW. An unusual cause of ulnar nerve compression. Hand 1970; 2 (01) 14-16
  • 9 Sivak WN, Hagerty SE, Huyhn L, Jordan AC, Munin MC, Spiess AM. Diagnosis of ulnar nerve entrapment at the arcade of Struthers with electromyography and ultrasound. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2016; 4 (03) e648