4.3 Article

Three-Dimensional Study of Pectoralis Major Muscle and Tendon Architecture

期刊

CLINICAL ANATOMY
卷 22, 期 4, 页码 500-508

出版社

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ca.20784

关键词

pennation angles; fiber bundle length; 3D computer modeling; skeletal muscle; muscle volume

资金

  1. research/educational license for Autodesk(R) Maya(R) provided by Autodesk

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A thorough understanding of the normal structural anatomy of the pectoralis major (PM) is of paramount importance in the planning of PM tendon transfers or repairs following traumatic PM tears. However, there is little consensus regarding the complex musculotendinous architecture of the PM in the anatomic or surgical literature. The purpose of this study is to model and quantify the three-dimensional architecture of the pectoralis muscle and tendon. Eleven formalin embalmed cadaveric specimens were examined: five (2M/3F) were serially dissected, digitized, and modeled in 3D using Autodesk (R) Maya (R); six (4M/2F) were dissected and photographed. The PM tendon consisted of longer anterior and shorter posterior layers that were continuous inferiorly. The muscle belly consisted of an architecturally uniform clavicular head (CH) and a segmented sternal head (SH) with 6-7 segments. The most inferior SH segment in all specimens was found to fold anteriorly forming a trough that cradled the inferior aspect of the adjacent superior segment. No twisting of either the PM muscle or tendon was noted. Within the CH, the fiber bundle lengths (FBL) were found to increase from superior to inferior, whereas the mean FBLs of SH were greatest in segments 3-5 found centrally. The mean lateral pennation angle was greater in the CH (29.4 +/- 6.9 degrees) than in the SH (20.6 +/- 2.7 degrees). The application of these findings could form the basis of future studies to optimize surgical planning and functional recovery of repair/reconstruction procedures. Clin. Anat. 22: 500-508, 2009. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据