The history of Latin terminology of human skeletal muscles (from Vesalius to the present).

PURPOSE: The aim of this literary search was to chart the etymology of 32 selected human skeletal muscles, representative of all body regions. METHODS: In researching this study, analysis of 15 influential Latin and German anatomical textbooks, dating from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century, was undertaken, as well as reference to four versions of the official Latin anatomical terminologies. Particular emphasis has been placed on the historical development of muscular nomenclature, and the subsequent division of these data into groups, defined by similarities in the evolution of their names into the modern form. RESULTS: The first group represents examples of muscles whose names have not changed since their introduction by Vesalius (1543). The second group comprises muscles which earned their definitive names during the seventeenth and eighteenth century. The third group is defined by acceptance into common anatomical vernacular by the late nineteenth century, including those outlined in the first official Latin terminology (B.N.A.) of 1895. The final group is reserved for six extra-ocular muscles with a particularly poetic history, favoured and popularised by the anatomical giants of late Renaissance and 1,700 s. CONCLUSIONS: As this study will demonstrate, it is evident that up until introduction of the B.N.A. there was an extremely liberal approach to naming muscles, deserving great respect in the retrospective terminological studies if complete and relevant results are to be achieved. Without this knowledge of the vernacular of the ages past, modern researchers can find themselves 'reinventing the wheel' in looking for their answers.

Is minimally invasive application by intramedullary osteosynthesis in comparison with volar plating real benefit in the treatment of distal radius fractures?

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Can minimally invasive intramedullary osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures provide better therapeutic results than multidirectional locking plates. Retrospective study of 68 patients operated for distal radius fractures, 18 were treated with intramedullary X-screw (XSCR) fixation and 50 with the multidirectional angle-stable plate system (APTUS). The evaluation at 1-year follow-up included functional status of the wrist and hand, and radiographic findings. In the XSCR group, the functional outcomes of the treated extremity did not achieve values comparable with those of the uninjured side in any of the parameters measured. The radiographic findings did not meet the requirements of successful healing due to failure to restore an anatomical volar tilt in 22.2% cases. In the APTUS group, comparable values of the injured and the uninjured side were achieved in radial deviation, ulnar deviation, pronation, supination and grip strength. The radiographic criteria of successful healing were met by all fractures treated by locking plate osteosynthesis. Implant migration associated with secondary displacement of bone fragments was recorded in 33.3 % of the XSCR patients and only in 4.0 % of the APTUS patients. The overall evaluation show that intramedullary osteosynthesis does not produce better treatment outcomes compared with plate osteosynthesis in indicated types of fractures.