Distal Triceps Research Articles

Chronic Distal Triceps Rupture Repaired Using Acellular Dermal Allograft as an Interposition Graft

Chronic Distal Triceps Rupture Repaired Using Acellular Dermal Allograft as an Interposition Graft

Distal Triceps Rupture Repair: The Triceps Pulley-Pullover Technique

Distal triceps rupture is an uncommon but debilitating injury, and surgical fixation is almost invariably warranted. A number of techniques have been described in the literature in which combinations of transosseous tunnels and bone anchors have been used. We describe a modification to existing techniques—the triceps pulley-pullover technique with all-suture anchors. This technique minimizes bone loss, while maximizing the bone-tendon contact area and creating a double-row repair to optimize strength and healing.

There is a role for allografts in reconstructive surgery of the elbow and forearm.

Allografts play an important role in tendon, ligament, and bone reconstruction surgery, particularly when suitable available autologous tissue is limited. Enthusiasm for the use of allografts in reconstructive orthopedic surgery has increased over the past decade, with an increase in allograft use in a variety of procedures. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the various applications and indications for the use of allografts in reconstructive surgical procedures of the elbow and forearm. MEDLINE/PubMed was searched from 1990 through October 2018 for studies on tendon and bony allografts in elbow and forearm reconstructive surgery. The Achilles tendon allograft is the most frequently used tendinous allograft, predominantly used in distal biceps and triceps reconstruction. Although reconstruction of the ulnar collateral ligament of the elbow is generally performed using autografts, it has been shown that semitendinosus and gracilis allografts may be equally effective. Extensor hallucis longus allografts are recommended for reconstruction of the lateral collateral ligaments in patients with posterolateral rotatory instability, and there may be a role for osteochondral allograft transplantation in capitellar osteochondral defects. In addition, the use of allografts in reconstruction of the interosseous membrane and various bone pathologies (fractures, bone tumors, forearm nonunions) has been described in current literature. There is a large variety of pathology and procedures involving the use of various types of allografts in orthopedic reconstructive surgery of the elbow and forearm.

Triceps Repair and Restoration of Triceps Footprint With Anchorless Suture Fixation.

Triceps tendon rupture is an uncommon yet potentially devastating injury affecting patients over a broad demographic. Surgical treatment is essential to restore upper extremity functional status, and a vast array of techniques has been implemented with different fixation devices including suture buttons, intraosseous anchors, and suture repairs. Outcomes of distal triceps tendon repair have demonstrated nearly full return of functional capacity. Complications include infection, ulnar nerve neuropathy, arthrofibrosis, flexion contracture, hardware irritation, and most commonly, repair failure. We illustrate a triceps repair technique with suture fixation that restores the tendinous footprint without need of an adjunctive device.

Distal Triceps Speed Bridge Repair

Distal triceps ruptures are uncommon injuries resulting in loss of elbow extension strength and necessitating surgical repair to ensure optimal functional outcome. Traditional fixation techniques using running, locking sutures through the tendon secured through bone tunnels have been shown to poorly restore the anatomic footprint and are mechanically inferior to anatomic repairs. We endorse restoring the anatomic footprint of the distal triceps, similar to the well-researched rotator cuff repair model.

Distal triceps transosseous cruciate versus suture anchor repair using equal constructs: a biomechanical comparison

Suture anchor-based repair has been advocated for repair of distal triceps avulsion, but previous models have used an unequal number of sutures across the repair site. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in triceps tendon displacement between gold standard repair with transosseous cruciate bone tunnels and suture anchor repair with an equal number of sutures in the constructs. The triceps tendon footprint was measured in 20 cadaveric elbows (10 matched pairs), and a distal triceps tendon rupture was created. The specimens in each pair were randomly assigned to transosseous cruciate repair or knotless, double-row, anatomic footprint, suture anchor repair. Specimens underwent cyclic loading to 1500 cycles and then load to failure. Footprint uncoverage was measured at 1500 cycles. Data for medial and lateral triceps tendon displacement, footprint uncoverage, and failure load were obtained. Triceps displacement did not differ significantly between the transosseous cruciate and the suture anchor repair group at 1500 cycles on the medial (3.6 ± 0.9 mm vs. 4.3 ± 1.6 mm [mean ± standard deviation], respectively; P = .27) and lateral side (3.1 ± 1.2 mm vs. 2.0 ± 1.2 mm, respectively; P = .06). No other differences were found between the constructs. Transosseous cruciate distal triceps repair and knotless double-row suture anchor repair using constructs with an equal number of sutures showed no significant difference in tendon displacement at 1500 loading cycles. These findings suggest that the biomechanical strength of an all-suture construct is not different from that of suture anchors for repair of distal triceps avulsions.

Surgical Repair of Distal Triceps Tendon Injuries: Short-Term Clinical Outcomes and Re-Rupture Rate

Objectives:The purpose of this study is to describe the clinical, functional, and patient-reported outcomes of distal triceps tendon repairs, as well as to describe perioperative risk profile and re-rupture rates among those with or without pre-existing enthesopathy.Methods:Patients who underwent surgical repair of traumatic triceps tendon injuries between 2008 and 2016 were identified from the surgical database at a single institution. The electronic medical records were queried to determine demographic information, time from injury, mechanism of injury, extent of tear, pre-existing enthesopathy, and postoperative complications. Patients with arthritis, concomitant ligament surgery, and/or secondary rupture following previous elbow surgery were excluded. Follow-up outcome measures included the Mayo Elbow, Disabilities of the Arm, Hand, and Shoulder (QuickDASH), Veterans RAND (VR/SF-12), and Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic (KJOC) scores with a minimum of 1-year follow up.Results:A total of 88 patients (83 males, 5 females) with mean age of 47 years (range, 14-74) were identified with distal triceps tendon repairs at an average of 49 days (range, 1 to 3650 days) after injury. Sixty-nine patients (76.1%) returned for follow-up at average 3.99 years post-operatively (SD, 2.51). The most common mechanisms of injury were direct elbow trauma (45.4%), extension/lifting exercises (18.1%), overuse (13.6%), and hyperflexion or hyperextension (14.8%). Twenty patients were identified with pre-existing, symptomatic enthesophytes, and 68 tears were caused by acute injury; A total of 42 and 46 partial tendon tears were identified (Table 1). Bone tunnels were most commonly used (n=42, 47.7%), while direct sutures (n=31, 35.2%) and suture anchors (n=12, 13.6%) were also used. Postoperative complications occurred in 23.9% of patients, but no patients experienced re-rupture at time of final follow-up. Final postoperative patient-reported outcome measures are noted in Table 1. No statistically significant correlation was found between patient age (p=0.750), degree of tear (p=0.870), or surgical technique (p=0.740) and presence of perioperative complications.Conclusion:Despite heightened risk of perioperative complications after primary repair of distal triceps tendon injuries, the current series identifies favorable functional outcomes and no cases of re- rupture at short- to mid-term follow-up. Furthermore, age, surgical technique, and extent of tear were not associated with adverse patient outcomes in this investigation.Table 1:Outcomes by Presence of EnthesophytesOutcomesTotalEnthesophytesAcute TearP value Number 882068 Complete Tears 42240 <0.001 Complications (n) 21 (23.9%)9 (42.9%)12(17.9%) 0.019 Persistent pain/numbness/swelling1156.0101 Significant strength loss2020.159 Tendon calcification2200.163 Triceps thickening2110.471 Triceps adhesions1010.320 Olecranon cyst2110.471 Dehiscence1010.320 Sane ± SD 89.4 ± 18.181.2± 18.191.3 ± 17.10.191 VAS ± SD 0.881 ± 1.742.06 ± 2.920.550 ± 0.9430.062 KJOC±SD 84.5 ± 20.085.6 ± 17.584.2 ± 20.90.875 VR/SF-12±SD 0.793 ± 0.1190.768 ± 0.1650.802 ± 0.1030.590

The V-Shaped Distal Triceps Tendon Repair: A Comparative Biomechanical Analysis

Background: Restoring footprint anatomy, minimizing gap formation, and maximizing the strength of distal triceps tendon repairs are essential factors for a successful healing process and return to sport. Hypothesis: The novel V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique with unicortical button fixation closely restores footprint anatomy, provides minimal gap formation and high ultimate failure load, and minimizes iatrogenic fracture risk in acute/subacute distal triceps tendon tears. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Twenty-four cadaveric elbows (mean ± SD age, 66 ± 5 years) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 repair groups: the transosseous cruciate repair technique (gold standard), the knotless suture-bridge repair technique, and the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique. Anatomic measurements of the central triceps tendon footprint were obtained in all specimens with a 3-dimensional digitizer before and after the repair. Cyclic loading was performed for a total of 1500 cycles at a rate of 0.25 Hz, pulling in the direction of the triceps. Displacements were measured on the medial and lateral tendon sites with 2 differential variable reluctance transducers. Load to failure and construct failure mode were recorded. Results: The mean triceps bony insertion area was 399.05 ± 81.23 mm2. The transosseous cruciate repair technique restored 36.6% ± 16.8% of the native tendon insertion area, which was significantly different when compared with the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (85.2% ± 14.8%, P = .001) and the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (88.9% ± 14.8%, P = .002). Mean displacement showed no significant difference between the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (medial side, 0.75 ± 0.56 mm; lateral side, 0.99 ± 0.59 mm) and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (1.61 ± 0.97 mm and 1.29 ± 0.8 mm) but significance between the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the transosseous cruciate repair technique (4.91 ± 1.12 mm and 5.78 ± 0.9 mm, P < .001). Mean peak failure load of the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique (732.1 ± 156.0 N) was significantly higher than that of the knotless suture-bridge repair technique (505.4 ± 173.9 N, P = .011) and the transosseous cruciate repair technique (281.1 ± 74.8 N, P < .001). Mechanism of failure differed among the 3 repairs, with the only olecranon fracture occurring in the knotless suture-bridge repair technique at the level of the lateral row suture anchors. Conclusion: At time zero, the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique both provided anatomic footprint coverage. Ultimate load to failure was highest for the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique, while gap formation was different only in comparison with the transosseous cruciate repair technique. Clinical Relevance: The V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique provides an alternative procedure to other established repairs for acute/subacute distal triceps tendon ruptures. The reduced repair site motion of the V-shaped distal triceps tendon repair technique and the knotless suture-bridge repair technique at the time of surgery may allow a more aggressive rehabilitation program in the early postoperative period.

MRI overestimates the full-thickness tear of distal triceps tendon rupture.

Injury to the distal triceps brachii tendon is rare. Imaging radiographs are used to confirm the findings of physical examination, classify the extent of injury, and guide treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the gold standard of diagnostic imaging. However, no previous study has reported on the accuracy of differentiation between partial- and full-thickness triceps tendon tears. Our study's aim was to define the accuracy of MRI in differentiating partial- from full-thickness tear of the distal triceps tendon. We hypothesized that MRI has low accuracy in differentiating partial- from full-thickness tears. A total of eight patients with nine triceps tendon tears underwent surgical repair from 2011 to 2015. MRI of the elbows were retrospectively reviewed for the presence and type of tear, tendon involvement, and location of the tear, and later correlated with surgical findings. Of the three surgically confirmed complete tears, MRI correctly reported a complete tear in all patients. Of the six partial tears confirmed at surgery, MRI correctly identified four tears. In two cases, MRI described a complete tear, but only a partial tear was noted at surgery. False-positive MRI assessment of distal triceps injury is not rare. Surgeons should rely on clinical examination in assessing distal triceps tendon injury, with imaging studies providing an adjunctive role in the diagnosis and decision-making.

Results of primary repair of distal triceps tendon ruptures in a general population: a multicentre study.

The aim of the study was to analyze the results of primary tendon reinsertion in acute and chronic distal triceps tendon ruptures (DTTRs) in the general population. A total of 28 patients were operated on for primary DTTR reinsertions, including 21 male patients and seven female patients with a mean age of 45 years (14 to 76). Of these patients, 23 sustained an acute DTTR and five had a chronic injury. One patient had a non-simultaneous bilateral DTTR. Seven patients had DTTR-associated ipsilateral fracture or dislocation. Comorbidities were present in four patients. Surgical treatment included transosseous and suture-anchors reinsertion in 22 and seven DTTRs, respectively. The clinical evaluation was performed using Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the modified American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (m-ASES), the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (QuickDASH), and the Medical Research Council (MRC) Scale. A total of 27 patients (28 DTTRs) were available for review at a mean of 47.5 months (12 to 204). The mean MEPS, QuickDASH, and m-ASES scores were 94 (60 to 100), 10 (0 to 52), and 94 (58 to 100), respectively. Satisfactory results were observed in 26 cases (93%). Muscle strength was 5/5 and 4/5 in 18 and ten DTTRs, respectively. One patient with chronic renal failure experienced a traumatic rerupture of distal triceps. One patient (1 DTTR) experienced mild elbow stiffness. Primary repair of acute and chronic DTTRs in a general population yields satisfactory results in the majority of patients with a low rerupture rate. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:610-16.

Operative Management of Acute Triceps Tendon Ruptures: Review of 184 Cases

Background: Distal triceps tendon ruptures are rare. The authors present a series of 184 surgically treated, acute, traumatic triceps tendon avulsions and compare the complications between those treated with anchors (A) versus transosseous (TO) suture repair. Hypothesis: No difference exists in the retear rate between TO and A repairs. Study Designed: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All patients who underwent an open primary repair of a traumatic triceps tendon avulsion within 90 days of injury, between 2007 and 2015, were retrospectively reviewed. Surgeries were performed within a multisurgeon (75 surgeons), multicenter (14 centers), community-based integrated health care system. Patient demographic information, type of repair, complications, and time from surgery to release from medical care were recorded. Results: 184 triceps tears in 181 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 49 years (range, 15-83 years). There were 169 males. The most common mechanisms of injury were fall (56.5%) and weight lifting (19%). Mean time from injury to surgery was 19 days (range, 1-90 days); in 74.5% of cases, surgery was performed in 3 weeks or less. There were 105 TO and 73 A repairs. No significant difference was found between the two groups in the mean age (P = .18), sex (P = .51), completeness of tears (P = .74), tourniquet time (P = .455), and prevalence of smokers (P = .64). Significant differences were noted between TO and A repairs in terms of reruptures (6.7% vs 0%, respectively; P = .0244), overall reoperation rate (9.5% vs 1.4%; P = .026), and release from medical care (4.3 vs 3.4 months; P = .0014), but no difference was seen in infection rate (3.8% vs 0%; P = .092). No difference was noted in release from medical care in patients who underwent surgery 3 weeks or less after injury compared with those undergoing surgery more than 3 weeks after injury (3.90 vs 4.09 months, respectively; P = .911). Conclusion: Primary repair of triceps ruptures with TO fixation has a significantly higher rerupture rate, higher reoperation rate, and longer release from medical care than does repair with A fixation. Implementation of suture anchors in triceps repairs offers a lower complication rate and earlier release from medical care.

Triceps Tendon Anatomic Repair Utilizing the "Suture Bridge" Technique.

Triceps tendon ruptures are uncommon injuries, but they typically require surgical repair. Multiple primary repair techniques are available, including transosseous, suture anchor, and anatomic repairs. The technique described here, the "suture bridge" repair, provides an anatomic repair of the distal triceps tendon to its footprint. It has the potential advantages of increased load to failure, better footprint coverage, higher load resistance, and allows for early motion.

Enthesopathy in rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis: An ultrasound study

ObjectiveWe aimed to compare the prevalence of enthesopathy seen on ultrasonography (US) in spondyloarthritis (SpA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and compared it to healthy controls. MethodsAll included patients with RA (2010 ACR/EULAR criteria) and SpA (ASAS criteria) and healthy controls underwent clinical and US evaluation of enthesis at seven sites (quadriceps, proximal and distal patellar, Achilles and triceps tendons, plantar aponeurosis and lateral epicondyle enthesis). The Glasgow Ultrasound Enthesitis Scoring System (GUESS) and the Madrid Sonographic Enthesitis Index (MASEI) scores were determined by two sonographers blinded to clinical data. ResultsWe included 30 patients with RA (mean age: 55.7±14.8 years, mean disease duration 10.5±7.9years); 41 with SpA (mean age: 45.3±15.4 years, mean disease duration 9.2±8.7years) and 26 healthy controls (HC) (mean age: 50.4±17.3years). Patients with SpA and RA had similar prevalence of painful enthesis of examined sites (17% vs. 14%, non-significant [ns]), but more than among in healthy controls (3%, P<0.05 for RA and SpA comparison). Comparison between SpA and RA patients revealed that at least one US enthesis abnormality was found with similar frequency (46% and 48% sites [ns]) but both rheumatic diseases had higher frequency of US enthesis abnormality than HC (31%, P<0.05 for RA and SpA comparison). The mean MASEI score was 8.5±7.3 for RA patients, 7.8±6.5 for SpA patients (ns) and 3.4±2.8 for healthy controls (P<0.05 for RA and SpA comparison). Overall, 6 RA (20%) and 4 SpA (10%) patients had a MASEI score≥18 (ns). None of the healthy controls had a MASEI score≥18 (P<0.05 for RA and SpA comparison). The mean GUESS score was 5.8±3.1 and 6.3±3.9 for RA and SpA patients (ns), and 4.0±3.1 for healthy controls (P<0.01 vs. SpA and <0.05 vs. RA). ConclusionsRA and SpA patients did not differ in entheseal abnormalities seen on US. Such US features may have low specificity in inflammatory conditions affecting joints and enthesis such as SpA and RA.

Distal Biceps and Triceps Injuries.

Background:Rupture of the distal biceps and triceps tendons are relatively uncommon injuries typically occurring in middle-aged males as a result of eccentric loading of the tendon.Methods:A literature search was performed and the authors’ personal experiences reported.Results:This review discusses the diagnosis, indications and guidelines for management of these injuries and provides a description of the authors’ preferred operative techniques.Conclusion:Whilst non-operative treatment may be appropriate for patients with low functional demands, surgical management is the preferred option for the majority of patients. We have described a cortical button technique and osseous tunnel technique utilised at our institution for distal biceps and triceps tendon fixation respectively. For biceps or triceps tendon injuries, those receiving an early diagnosis and undergoing surgical intervention, an excellent functional outcome can be expected.

Functional outcomes of distal triceps tendon repair comparing transosseous bone tunnels with suture anchor constructs

Distal triceps tendon ruptures are relatively rare. Few studies have investigated functional outcomes after repair. There is no consensus on fixation methods for this injury. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional outcomes and the reoperation rates after distal triceps tendon repairs using transosseous tunnels and suture anchors. A multicenter, retrospective review of all primary triceps repairs done between 2006 and 2015 was performed. Patients were included if they had a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Intraoperative data recorded included repair method and number of anchors used when applicable. Patients were contacted for functional assessment with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS). Postoperative complications were also queried. There were 56 cases of primary triceps repair identified in an all-male cohort. Average age at time of surgery was 52.7 years; 58.9% of patients had transosseous repair, and 41.1% had suture anchor repair. The average follow-up was 4.26 years. The average postoperative MEPS score for all patients was 94. There was no difference in MEPS outcomes based on construct type. Postoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores had an overall average of 4.81. A statistically significant difference was found, with the transosseous group averaging 2.98 points lower than the suture anchor group. This difference was not found to be clinically relevant. Only 4 patients had rerupture of the triceps requiring revision. Primary repair of distal triceps tendon ruptures yields good, durable patient outcomes with minimal rerupture regardless of repair construct.

Medial elbow pain.

Medial elbow pain is uncommon when compared with lateral elbow pain.Medial epicondylitis is an uncommon diagnosis and can be confused with other sources of pain.Overhead throwers and workers lifting heavy objects are at increased risk of medial elbow pain.Differential diagnosis includes ulnar nerve disorders, cervical radiculopathy, injured ulnar collateral ligament, altered distal triceps anatomy or joint disorders.Children with medial elbow pain have to be assessed for ‘Little League elbow’ and fractures of the medial epicondyle following a traumatic event.This paper is primarily focused on the differential diagnosis of medial elbow pain with basic recommendations on treatment strategies.Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2017;2:362-371. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.2.160006

The distal triceps tendon insertional anatomy—implications for surgery

BackgroundImproved knowledge of the distal triceps insertion is needed as a result of an increase in procedures involving this area, including distal triceps repair, posterior capsulectomy, and olecranon tip osteotomy for coronoid reconstruction.Materials and methodsFive pair-matched upper limbs were dissected to study the morphology and dimension of the distal triceps tendon, triceps tendon insertion, capsular insertion on the olecranon, and triceps lateral retinaculum. Muscle origins of the triceps insertions were identified proximally.ResultsThree distinct insertional areas were found in the olecranon corresponding to the posterior capsular insertion, the deep muscular portion, and the superficial tendinous portion of the triceps with areas of 1.5, 1.2, and 2.8 cm2, respectively. The deep muscular head corresponded to the medial head of the triceps and the tendinous portion corresponded to the long and lateral heads and correlated with the height of the specimen. The triceps width at insertion was 2.6 ± 0.5 cm (standard deviation), and the triceps lateral retinaculum extended the tendon laterally for 2.5 ± 0.7 cm. The tendinous portion of the triceps tendon extended proximally 15.3 ± 1.4 cm. The triceps inserted at a mean of 1.1 cm from the tip of the olecranon.ConclusionsThe distinct insertional heads of the triceps provides additional knowledge that can aid in diagnosing and treating partial triceps tears. In addition, a safe zone for capsulectomy and olecranon tip osteotomy is described that can be used to increase the safety of these procedures.

Paper #67 - Outcomes following distal triceps tendon repair

Paper #67 - Outcomes following distal triceps tendon repair

Distal triceps injuries (including snapping triceps): A systematic review of the literature.

AIMTo review current literature on types of distal triceps injury and determine diagnosis and appropriate management.METHODSWe performed a systematic review in PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE using the terms distal triceps tears and snapping triceps on the 10th January 2017. We excluded all animal, review, foreign language and repeat papers. We reviewed all papers for relevance and of the papers left we were able to establish the types of distal triceps injury, how these injuries are diagnosed and investigated and the types of management of these injuries including surgical. The results are then presented in a review paper format.RESULTSThree hundred and seventy-nine papers were identified of which 65 were relevant to distal triceps injuries. After exclusion we had 47 appropriate papers. The papers highlighted 2 main distal triceps injuries: Distal triceps tears and snapping triceps. Triceps tear are more common in males than females occurring in the 4th-5th decade of life and often due to a direct trauma but are also strongly associated with weightlifting and American football. The tears are diagnosed by history and clinically with a palpable gap. Diagnosis can be confirmed with the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging. Treatment depends on type of tear. Partial tears can be treated conservatively with bracing and physio whereas acute tears need repair either open or arthroscopic using suture anchor or bone tunnel techniques with similar success. Chronic tears often need augmenting with tendon allograft or autograft. Snapping triceps are also seen more in men than women but at a mean age of 32 years. They are characterized by a snapping sensation mostly medially and can be associated with ulna nerve subluxation and ulna nerve symptoms. US is the diagnostic modality of choice due to its dynamic nature and to differentiate between snapping triceps tendon or ulna nerve. Treatment is conservative initially with activity avoidance and if that fails surgical management includes resection of triceps edge or transposition of the tendon plus or minus ulna nerve transposition.CONCLUSIONDistal triceps injuries are uncommon. This systematic review examines the evidence base behind diagnosis, imaging and treatment options of distal triceps injuries including tears and snapping triceps.

Standardized Ultrasound Measurement of Subcutaneous Fat Patterning: High Reliability and Accuracy in Groups Ranging from Lean to Obese

A recently standardized ultrasound technique for measuring subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) was applied to normal-weight, overweight and obese persons. Eight measurement sites were used: upper abdomen, lower abdomen, erector spinae, distal triceps, brachioradialis, lateral thigh, front thigh and medial calf. Fat compression was avoided. Fat patterning in 38 participants (body mass index: 18.6–40.3 kgm−2; SAT thickness sums from eight sites: 12–245 mm) was evaluated using a software specifically designed for semi-automatic multiple thickness measurements in SAT (sound speed: 1450 m/s) that also quantifies embedded fibrous structures. With respect to ultrasound intra-observer results, the correlation coefficient ρ = 0.999 (p < 0.01), standard error of the estimate = 1.1 mm and 95% of measurements were within ±2.2 mm. For the normal-weight subgroup, the median measurement deviation was 0.43 mm (1.1% of mean thickness), and for the obese/overweight subgroup it was 0.89 mm (0.5%). The eight sites used here are suggested to represent inter-individual differences in SAT patterning. High measurement accuracy and reliability can be obtained in all groups, from lean to overweight and obese, provided that measurers are trained appropriately.