Limits...
Teres major muscle – insertion footprint

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Teres major muscle (TM) and latissimus dorsi muscle (LD) are frequently used in muscle transfers around the shoulder girdle. Some authors have suggested harvesting techniques in which the muscle is detached in continuity with a bone segment. Information on the bony attachment footprint of these muscles is lacking. The purpose of this study was to investigate the region of attachment of the TM to facilitate safe and complete harvesting with a bone segment where it is indicated, and to determine the relationship of the TM footprint with that of the LD. Twenty‐eight upper extremities of 14 human cadavers (six female, eight male) were investigated during the students’ dissection course in the winter term 2012. The attachment footprints were photographed and the images were processed with imageJ Version 1.46r. The TM attachment footprint at the crest of the lesser tubercle had an average dimension of 187 ± 89 mm2. It was 49.6 ± 7.9 mm long and 7.4 ± 2.5 mm wide. The bony attachment of the LD within the bicipital groove, just below the tendon of the long head of the biceps muscle, had an area of 94 ± 37 mm2. It was 36.5 ± 8 mm long and 3.7 ± 1.2 mm wide. Both muscles were separated by 4.4 ± 1.7 mm and their attachments overlapped in the craniocaudal direction by 24.4 ± 12.4 mm. Earlier studies have investigated the dimensions of the muscles’ tendons close to the attachment not the bony attachment itself. The dimension of the attachment of the TM was larger than that of the LD. The ratio between the footprint areas was approximately 2:1. This information should be considered by surgeons undertaking transfers, which include a bony segment of the muscle insertion.

No MeSH data available.


Steps of processing the images with imageJ – Version 1.46r. (1) Open the gray‐scaled and by GIMP processed image; (2) calibrate the scale according to the ruler included within the image; (3) set the lower threshold level at 240 and the upper at 255; (4) choose ‘Polygon selection’ and surround the teres major muscle (TM) approximately; (5) select ‘Analyze particles’, set ‘Show (pixel^2) by “25 – Infinity”, Set “Circularity” by 0.00–1.00’; (6) perform steps 4 and 5 for the latissimus dorsi muscle's (LD's) attachment again.
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy-nc-nd
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5382588&req=5

joa12593-fig-0002: Steps of processing the images with imageJ – Version 1.46r. (1) Open the gray‐scaled and by GIMP processed image; (2) calibrate the scale according to the ruler included within the image; (3) set the lower threshold level at 240 and the upper at 255; (4) choose ‘Polygon selection’ and surround the teres major muscle (TM) approximately; (5) select ‘Analyze particles’, set ‘Show (pixel^2) by “25 – Infinity”, Set “Circularity” by 0.00–1.00’; (6) perform steps 4 and 5 for the latissimus dorsi muscle's (LD's) attachment again.

Mentions: The attachment footprints of all 28 shoulders were photographed. The images were preprocessed using ‘GIMP – GNU Image Manipulation Program’, Version 2.6.8, (Natterer et al. 2012) and then entered into ‘imageJ’, Version 1.46r (Rasband, 1997; Abràmoff et al. 2004; Schneider et al. 2012) to calculate the area of each insertion footprint (Fig. 2).


Teres major muscle – insertion footprint
Steps of processing the images with imageJ – Version 1.46r. (1) Open the gray‐scaled and by GIMP processed image; (2) calibrate the scale according to the ruler included within the image; (3) set the lower threshold level at 240 and the upper at 255; (4) choose ‘Polygon selection’ and surround the teres major muscle (TM) approximately; (5) select ‘Analyze particles’, set ‘Show (pixel^2) by “25 – Infinity”, Set “Circularity” by 0.00–1.00’; (6) perform steps 4 and 5 for the latissimus dorsi muscle's (LD's) attachment again.
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy-nc-nd
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5382588&req=5

joa12593-fig-0002: Steps of processing the images with imageJ – Version 1.46r. (1) Open the gray‐scaled and by GIMP processed image; (2) calibrate the scale according to the ruler included within the image; (3) set the lower threshold level at 240 and the upper at 255; (4) choose ‘Polygon selection’ and surround the teres major muscle (TM) approximately; (5) select ‘Analyze particles’, set ‘Show (pixel^2) by “25 – Infinity”, Set “Circularity” by 0.00–1.00’; (6) perform steps 4 and 5 for the latissimus dorsi muscle's (LD's) attachment again.
Mentions: The attachment footprints of all 28 shoulders were photographed. The images were preprocessed using ‘GIMP – GNU Image Manipulation Program’, Version 2.6.8, (Natterer et al. 2012) and then entered into ‘imageJ’, Version 1.46r (Rasband, 1997; Abràmoff et al. 2004; Schneider et al. 2012) to calculate the area of each insertion footprint (Fig. 2).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Teres major muscle (TM) and latissimus dorsi muscle (LD) are frequently used in muscle transfers around the shoulder girdle. Some authors have suggested harvesting techniques in which the muscle is detached in continuity with a bone segment. Information on the bony attachment footprint of these muscles is lacking. The purpose of this study was to investigate the region of attachment of the TM to facilitate safe and complete harvesting with a bone segment where it is indicated, and to determine the relationship of the TM footprint with that of the LD. Twenty‐eight upper extremities of 14 human cadavers (six female, eight male) were investigated during the students’ dissection course in the winter term 2012. The attachment footprints were photographed and the images were processed with imageJ Version 1.46r. The TM attachment footprint at the crest of the lesser tubercle had an average dimension of 187 ± 89 mm2. It was 49.6 ± 7.9 mm long and 7.4 ± 2.5 mm wide. The bony attachment of the LD within the bicipital groove, just below the tendon of the long head of the biceps muscle, had an area of 94 ± 37 mm2. It was 36.5 ± 8 mm long and 3.7 ± 1.2 mm wide. Both muscles were separated by 4.4 ± 1.7 mm and their attachments overlapped in the craniocaudal direction by 24.4 ± 12.4 mm. Earlier studies have investigated the dimensions of the muscles’ tendons close to the attachment not the bony attachment itself. The dimension of the attachment of the TM was larger than that of the LD. The ratio between the footprint areas was approximately 2:1. This information should be considered by surgeons undertaking transfers, which include a bony segment of the muscle insertion.

No MeSH data available.