A case of dislocation of the ulna forwards at the elbow, without fracture of the olecranon process : with observations / by Edwin Canton.

  • Canton, Edwin, 1817-1885.
Date:
1860
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A case of dislocation of the ulna forwards at the elbow, without fracture of the olecranon process : with observations / by Edwin Canton. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    3/6 (page 3)
    bras, ce qu’il appelle ‘flexion en arriere.’” In no case did it appear to Debruyn that flexion alone was adequate to the pro- duction of this peculiar luxation. He conceives, however, that it could occur where external force operated on the olecranon from behind forwards, whilst the forearm was held in a state of forcible flexion. In a case of this dislocation which came under the care of Monin, and occurring to a child between six and seven years of age, the patient fell, with violence, upon the elbow, whilst the forearm was forcibly flexed on the arma. The first case of this accident, I believe, distinctly recorded, was one that came under the charge of Colsonb, and occurred to a lad aged 15, who fell on the right elbow while skating, at the same time that the forearm was semi-flexed, so that the weight of the body, increased by the suddenness of the fall, bore on the olecranon process, and, driving it forwards, caused it to abandon, completely, the humeral trochlea. Having now considered the mode of production of this in- jury, I pass to a review of the symptoms by which it is to be distinguished:—Increased length of forearm; absence of the olecranon at the posterior part of the joint; slight flexion of the elbow (in a case, however, recorded by Guyotc, the fore- arm was in a straight line with the arm); tension of the in- teguments; projection of the tendon of the biceps, and a bony eminence to be felt internal to it; the lateral parts of the joint flattened and depressed, presenting on either side a longitudi- nal fossa; and posteriorly two eminences separated by a de- pression, or rather a gutter which extends from the posterior surface of the arm, beneath the inferior extremity of the hu- merus, in place of the eminence which should exist here; movements of the articulation limited and very painful; in the cases, however, of Colson and Guyotd, the joint permitted of great mobility. It would appear from the accounts of those authors who have treated this form of accident, that reduction was accom- plished with comparative facility. Debruyn remarks:—“ II suffit, apres avoir par l’extension, descendu les extremites arti- culaires des os de l’avant-bras au niveau de celle de l’humerus de flechir brusquement le membre, pour voir les os reprendre leur position naturelle”e. »Journal de Chirurg., tom. ii., p. 119. Paris : 1844. Quoted from the Journal de Med. de Lyons. b Loc. cit. c Revue Med.-Chir., tom. ii., p. 106. Paris: 1847. d Loc. cit., p. 48. e Loc. cit.