{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,25]],"date-time":"2026-08-25T22:34:13Z","timestamp":1787697253384,"version":"build-2784847793"},"reference-count":26,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,13]],"date-time":"2025-07-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1752364800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Am J Sports Med"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The modified Jobe and docking techniques are the most utilized ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction techniques, with previous research demonstrating successful and equivalent outcomes at midterm follow-up. However, these techniques have not been compared with UCL repair with suture augmentation (SA), nor has longer-term follow-up been reported.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To directly compare clinical outcomes at midterm follow-up of these 3 surgical techniques: the modified Jobe, docking, and repair with SA.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Study Design:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Twenty-four surgical procedures for UCL repair with SA were performed by a single surgeon, each with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were matched by age, gender, and handedness to patients from previously published modified Jobe and docking cohorts. The following were compared among groups: Conway Scale, Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic Shoulder and Elbow Score, years played, gender, handedness, sport, position, graft type (for reconstructive techniques), future upper extremity injury, need for additional surgery, rates of ulnar nerve symptoms, and return-to-play time.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Patients were similar with respect to age (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .54), gender (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .66), handedness (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .29), sport (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .23), years played (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .72), level of competition (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .08), type of pathology (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .23), future shoulder surgery (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .71), and future elbow surgery (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .61). The mean \u00b1 SD follow-up was 6.2 \u00b1 3.9, 7.3 \u00b1 4.6, and 5.2 \u00b1 1.1 years in the modified Jobe, docking, and repair + SA groups, respectively (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .66). The reconstruction groups had a greater proportion of pitchers than the repair + SA group (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .02). Tear locations in the SA cohort were proximal in 18 (75%) and distal in 6 (25%). In the SA cohort, 13 (54%) were partial tears, 10 (42%) were complete tears, and 1 (4%) was attenuated. The repair + SA cohort had a significantly greater proportion of proximal tears than the docking cohort (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .03). No difference was identified among techniques in results on the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic score (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .70) or Conway Scale (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .06). The UCL repair + SA cohort returned to sports 4 months earlier than the reconstruction cohorts (\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">P<\/jats:italic>\n                      = .0001).\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion:<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>No differences in outcomes scores or return-to-play rates were found when the modified Jobe and docking UCL reconstruction techniques were compared with the UCL repair + SA technique at &gt;5-year mean follow-up; however, the SA group returned to sport 4 months earlier on average. Given the similar outcomes among groups, all 3 techniques are viable treatment options for UCL injuries.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1177\/03635465251352186","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,14]],"date-time":"2025-07-14T05:00:03Z","timestamp":1752469203000},"page":"2313-2319","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Direct Comparison of Modified Jobe and Docking Reconstructions With Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair With Suture Augmentation at Midterm Follow-up"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"53","author":[{"given":"Steve H.","family":"Bayer","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-7007-4596","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Justin W.","family":"Arner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Burke and Bradley Orthopedics, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8301-025X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Benjamin B.","family":"Rothrauff","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0765-3699","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"James P.","family":"Bradley","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Burke and Bradley Orthopedics, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,13]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_2_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/036354659502300406"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546518812421"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546520921174"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2019.04.061"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546518803771"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5435\/JAAOS-22-05-315"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546510378100"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5435\/JAAOS-D-14-00323"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546506290988"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546519833684"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546515620390"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/1941738109338553"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/1941738115607208"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2106\/00004623-198668080-00004"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_16_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/2325967118755991"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546518820304"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_18_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2015.01.020"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546504267804"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546506289884"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/03635465020300041401"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/036354659602400503"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1067\/mse.2001.112881"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/2325967119874135"},{"issue":"6","key":"e_1_3_2_25_2","first-page":"563","article-title":"Elbow injuries of javelin-throwers","volume":"93","author":"Waris W.","year":"1946","unstructured":"Waris W. Elbow injuries of javelin-throwers. Acta Chir Scand. 1946;93(6):563-575.","journal-title":"Acta Chir Scand"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_26_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546513509051"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_27_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2519\/jospt.2019.8215"}],"container-title":["The American Journal of Sports Medicine"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/03635465251352186","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1177\/03635465251352186","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/03635465251352186","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,20]],"date-time":"2026-05-20T09:23:22Z","timestamp":1779269002000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/03635465251352186"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,13]]},"references-count":26,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,8]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1177\/03635465251352186"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/03635465251352186","relation":{},"ISSN":["0363-5465","1552-3365"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0363-5465","type":"print"},{"value":"1552-3365","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,13]]}}}