Non-operative management of terrible triad injuries of the elbow; not so terrible?

Introduction: Terrible triad injuries (TTIs) of the elbow have traditionally been reported to have poor outcomes, hence requiring surgical stabilisation. We identified and reviewed patients with TTIs treated non-operatively within our department. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with TTI treated non-operatively with standardised elbow-instability rehabilitation from 2010 to 2020. We used Mason and Morrey classifications for radial head and coronoid fractures, respectively. Non-operative indications included a congruent joint on CT, significant co-morbidities pre-disposing to high-risk surgery and/or patient preference. Outcomes included Oxford Elbow Score (OES), ROM and complications. Results: Nineteen patients were included (mean age 49; 37% female). At an average of 6 years (range 2-11 years) post-treatment, mean OES was 46 ± 7. At last clinic review, mean 6 months (2-15), average ROM was 131 ± 11° flexion, 8 ± 10° extension, 85 ± 12° supination and 85 ± 13° pronation. One patient required arthrolysis and another had an incongruent ulnohumeral joint which developed clicking with a functional ROM. Conclusion: Our report suggests non-operatively managed and appropriately rehabilitated TTI injuries can achieve good function and ROM. We recommend conservative management as a viable option in cases with joint congruency and no mechanical block in patients with significant co-morbidities or those refusing surgery but patients must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Leaving No One Behind: Interventions and Outcomes of the COVID-19 Vaccine Maximising Uptake Programme.

The devastating impact of COVID-19 on individuals and communities has accelerated the development of vaccines and the deployment of ambitious vaccination programmes to reduce the risks of infection, infection transmission and symptom severity. However, many people delay or refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19, for many complex reasons. Vaccination programmes that are tailored to address individual and communities' COVID-19 concerns can improve vaccine uptake rates and help achieve the required herd-immunity threshold. The Maximising Uptake Programme has led to the vaccination of 7979 people from February-August 2021 in the South West of England, UK, who are at high risk of severe illness from COVID-19 and/or may not access the COVID-19 vaccines through mass vaccination centres and general practices. These include: people experiencing homelessness; non-English-speaking people; people from minority ethnic groups; refugees and asylum seekers; Gypsy, Roma, Travelers and boat people; and those who are less able to access vaccination centres, such as people with learning difficulties, serious mental illness, drug and alcohol dependence, people with physical and sensory impairment, and people with dementia. Outreach work coupled with a targeted communication and engagement campaign, co-designed with community leaders and influencers, have led to significant engagement and COVID-19 vaccine uptake among the target populations.

Reliability analysis of radiologic and intraoperative loosening in total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Revisions of total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) are commonly performed because of prosthetic loosening. UK National Joint Registry data show that TEA revisions are becoming increasingly common, with 123 TEA revisions performed in 2018 and 76 performed in 2017. TEA radiologic assessment is based on subjective interpretation with no published criteria. We defined TEA loosening by the presence of at least one of the following criteria: (1) progressive widening of the bone-cement, bone-prosthesis, or cement-prosthesis interface; (2) fragmentation or fracture of cement; (3) prosthetic component migration; and (4) bead shedding in porous-coated prostheses. Using this definition, we looked at interobserver and intraobserver agreement on radiologic loosening and compared this assessment with intraoperative findings. METHODS: In our tertiary care center, we conducted a retrospective review to identify TEA revisions performed between November 2008 and July 2018. Radiologic implant loosening was independently assessed by 5 orthopedic surgeons. Interobserver agreement (κ coefficient) was calculated. The majority's view of radiologic loosening was compared with intraoperative findings. RESULTS: We identified 93 sets of radiographs with implant stability clearly documented in their operative notes. The κ coefficient between assessors for humeral implant loosening was 0.87 (almost perfect). The κ coefficient for ulnar loosening was 0.75 (substantial). The κ coefficients for radiologic and intraoperative findings of humeral loosening and ulnar loosening were 0.67 and 0.71 (substantial), respectively. Intraobserver reliability was almost perfect for humeral loosening (κ = 0.86) and substantial for ulnar loosening (κ = 0.74). CONCLUSION: Our definition of loosening provides reproducible interobserver and intraobserver agreement on radiographic component loosening. In our center's experience, radiologic findings may not translate to intraoperative findings, and we would advise that surgical strategies for TEA revision include the possibility of needing to perform a dual-implant exchange.

Outcomes following revision of the revision total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is very little information in the literature on the outcomes of revision of revision total elbow arthroplasty (RRTEA). Our aim was to report the outcomes of this rarely performed procedure. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who had undergone RRTEA between 2007 and 2016. Outcomes were assessed clinically using a number of validated systems, and radiographs were reviewed for prosthesis alignment, cementation by Morrey grading, and heterotopic ossification. RESULTS: We identified 22 patients who underwent RRTEA. Of these patients, 14 were available for assessment (2 died of unrelated causes, 2 could not be contacted, 2 declined to participate because of travel difficulties, and 2 had incomplete data). At the final review, the median age was 73 years (range, 57-83 years), with a median follow-up period of 4.5 years (range, 2-7 years) since the last surgical procedure. The median number of previous revision arthroplasty procedures per patient was 3 (range, 2-6). The indications for RRTEA were aseptic loosening (60%), bushing wear (16%), fracture (14%), and infection (10%). Of the patients, 30% required extra-long or custom-made implants and 50% needed allograft augmentation. At final clinical assessment, 56% of patients had triceps insufficiency, the median flexion-extension arc was 90°, and the median prono-supination arc was 95°. The functional elbow scores revealed good outcomes in the majority of patients (median visual analog scale score, 5; median Oxford Elbow Score, 22; median Mayo Elbow Performance Index score, 55; and median QuickDASH [short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire] score, 63). Eighty-one percent of patients were satisfied with their RRTEAs. Complications included infection in 2 patients (1 superficial and 1 deep), symptomatic aseptic humeral component loosening in 1, sensory ulnar nerve symptoms in 2, and radial nerve injury in 1. One patient required ulnar nerve release. Radiologic review revealed asymptomatic loosening in 1 patient (humeral component), and overall prosthesis alignment with cementation was adequate in 81%. Heterotopic ossification was present in 38% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: RRTEA is a satisfactory treatment option in these complex cases, with good short- to mid-term survival rates but a relatively high complication rate.

Revision total elbow arthroplasty: Is it safe to perform a single-stage revision for presumed aseptic loosening based on clinical assessment, normal inflammatory markers, and a negative aspiration?

BACKGROUND: Revision total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) is a challenging procedure that is becoming increasingly common. In our unit, we regard it as essential to exclude infection as the underlying cause of TEA loosening. In all patients with arthroplasty loosening, we undertake a careful history and examination, perform radiographs, monitor inflammatory markers, and undertake a joint aspiration. If any investigation suggests infection as the etiology, then a 2-stage revision is undertaken. Open biopsies are not routinely performed. The aim was to ascertain from our outcomes whether it is safe to perform a single-stage revision for presumed aseptic loosening using these criteria. METHODS: A retrospective review of a consecutive series of revision TEAs was performed in our unit over a 10-year period (2008-2018). Single-stage revisions performed for presumed aseptic loosening were identified. Case notes, radiographs, bloods, aspiration results, and microbiology of tissue samples taken at revision were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 123 revision elbow arthroplasty cases were performed in the study period. Sixty cases were revised for preoperatively proven infection, instability, or implant failure and were excluded from this study. In 63 cases, aseptic loosening was diagnosed based on history, clinical examination, blood markers, and aspiration. There were 21 dual-component and 42 single-component revisions. In the dual-component revision group, tissue samples taken at the time of revision were positive in only 1 case (5%). In the single-component revision group, positive culture samples were present in 3 cases (7%). χ2 analysis showed no significant difference between single- and dual-component revisions (P = .76). No cases with positive culture samples from either group have required subsequent revision surgery. CONCLUSION: Given the results of this study, we conclude that is safe to perform single-stage revision arthroplasty for implant loosening based on history, examination, normal inflammatory markers, and negative aspiration results without the need for open biopsy.

The Provision of Primary and Revision Elbow Replacement Surgery in the NHS.

BESS Surgical Procedure Guidelines (SPGs). Optimising Surgical Outcomes for Shoulder and Elbow patients. The British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS) SPGs are a series of evidence and consensus Best Practice Recommendations developed by BESS surgeons and physiotherapists to help drive quality improvement and achieve the best possible surgical outcomes for UK patients. This SPG on primary and revision elbow replacement surgery is supported and endorsed by both the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) and the Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) Programme.

Surgical treatment of Monteggia variant fracture dislocations of the elbow in adults: surgical technique and clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: Monteggia variant defined as Monteggia fracture dislocation with radial head or neck fracture, coronoid fracture, ulnohumeral joint dislocation or combination of these injuries. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes of surgical treatment of Monteggia variant fracture dislocations with focus on the operative technique and management of associated radial head fractures. METHODS: Between January 2008 and January 2014, 22 patients (7 men, 15 women) with a mean age of 58.9 years (45-77 years) and unilateral Monteggia variant were included. The mean follow-up was 4.1 years (2.2-6.6 years). Patients underwent clinical and functional assessment using the Mayo Elbow Performance Index and the Oxford Elbow Score. RESULTS: Eighteen patients had radial head fractures; in five patients the fracture fragment involved less than one-third of the radial head and the fragment was excised, in four patients the radial head fracture was fixed with headless screws and in nine patients the radial head was replaced. At review the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Index was 76.6 (20-100) and the Oxford Elbow Score 35 (4-48). CONCLUSIONS: Our experience suggests that satisfactory outcomes can be obtained in the treatment of the complex Monteggia variant fracture dislocations by recognising the injury pattern and addressing all components of the injury in order to achieve elbow stability.

The Sheffield bone block procedure: a new operation for the treatment of glenoid bone loss in patients with anterior traumatic shoulder instability.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the results of the Sheffield bone block procedure for anteroinferior bone loss in traumatic shoulder instability. In this modified open technique, the medial half of coracoid process without its soft tissue attachments is used to provide congruent augmentation of the anteroinferior glenoid and secured with two screws. METHODS: In this retrospective consecutive case series (2007-11), all patients having recurrent traumatic instability with glenoid bone loss > 20% and/or a large Hill-Sachs lesion were included. The shoulder function was evaluated clinically and by Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS; by post/telephone). RESULTS: There were 84 patients in this series with a large proportion engaged in contact sports. Mean (range) age was 33 years (16 years to 45 years); male : female, 59 : 8; mean (range) follow-up period was 48 months (36 months to 84 months) and the response rate 89% (75/84). Mean postoperative OSIS was 43 (33 to 46) and one patient had re-dislocation (1.3%). No neurovascular complications/hardware failure/non-union/infections were noted. By 6 months, 85% patients had returned to pre-injury sport and 93% had returned to pre-injury work. CONCLUSIONS: The Sheffield bone block procedure provides reliable and satisfactory results in patients having recurrent instability with glenoid bone loss and/or a large Hill-Sachs lesion with minimal complications and an excellent chance of returning to original sport and occupation.

Surgical interventions for treating fractures of the olecranon in adults.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the olecranon (the bony tip of the elbow) account for approximately 1% of all upper extremity fractures. Surgical intervention is often required to restore elbow function. Two key methods of surgery are tension band wire fixation and plate fixation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of different surgical interventions in the treatment of olecranon fractures in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (22 September 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1946 to September week 2 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 19 September 2014), trial registers, conference proceedings and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs that compared different surgical interventions for the treatment of olecranon fractures in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. The primary outcomes of this review were function, pain and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We included six small trials involving 244 adults with olecranon fractures. Of these, four were RCTs and two were quasi-RCTs; both of were at high risk of selection bias. All six trials were at high risk of performance bias, reflecting lack of blinding, and four trials were at high risk of detection bias. The quality of the evidence for most outcomes was generally very low because of limitations in study design and implementation, and either imprecision of the results or inadequate outcome measures. Thus, we are very uncertain about the estimates of effect.One trial (41 participants) comparing plate fixation with standard tension band wiring provided very low quality evidence at 16 to 86 weeks' follow-up of a better clinical outcome after plate fixation (good outcome (little pain or loss of elbow motion): 19/22 versus 9/19, risk ratio (RR) 1.82 favouring plate fixation, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10 to 3.01). There was very low quality evidence of less symptomatic prominent metalwork after plate fixation (1/22 versus 8/19; RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.79). The results for other adverse effects (infection and delayed or non-union) were inconclusive. Evidence is pending from a newly (September 2014) completed trial (67 participants) making the same comparison.Four trials compared four different modified techniques of tension band wiring (i.e. additional intramedullary screw fixation, biodegradable pins, Netz pins and cable pin system) versus standard tension band wiring. There was very low quality evidence of little difference at six to 14 months in function assessed by a non-validated scoring tool from the addition of an intramedullary screw. However, there were fewer cases of metalwork prominence in the intramedullary screw group (1/15 versus 8/15; RR 2.00, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.49; one trial; 30 participants). There was very low quality evidence from one trial (25 participants) of little difference in subjectively or objectively assessed good outcome at a mean of 20 months between tension band wiring with biodegradable implants versus metal implants. There were no adverse events, either non-union or sinus or fluid accumulation, reported. All 10 participants in the metalwork group had an extra operation to remove their metalwork at one year. One trial, which did not report on function or pain, provided very low quality evidence of lower rates of metalwork for any reason or for symptoms after Netz pin tension band wiring compared with standard tension band wiring (11/21 with Netz pin versus 17/25 with standard tension band wiring; RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.26; 46 participants); this evidence also supports the possibility of higher rates of metalwork removal for Netz pins. Two intra-operative complications occurred in the Netz pin group. The fourth trial, which compared the cable pin system with standard procedure, found low quality evidence that cable pin improved functional outcome at a mean of 21 months (Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), range 0 to 100: best outcome: mean difference (MD) 7.89 favouring cable pin, 95% CI 3.14 to 12.64; one trial; 62 participants). It also found low quality evidence of fewer postoperative complications in the cable pin group (1/30 with cable pin system versus 7/32 standard tension band wiring; RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.17), although the evidence did not rule out the converse.One trial provided very low quality evidence of similar patient-reported function using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (0 to 100: worst function) at two or more years after fixation using a novel olecranon memory connector (OMC) compared with locking plate fixation (MD -0.70 favouring OMC, 95% CI -4.20 to 2.80; 40 participants). The only adverse event was a superficial infection in the locking plate group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to draw robust conclusions on the relative effects of the surgical interventions evaluated by the included trials. Further evidence, including patient-reported data, on the relative effects of plate versus tension band wiring is already pending from one recently completed RCT. Further RCTs, using good quality methods and reporting validated patient-reported measures of function, pain and activities of daily living at set follow-ups, are needed, including checking positive findings such as those relating to the use of an intramedullary screw and the cable pin system. Such trials should also include the systematic assessment of complications, further treatment including routine removal of metalwork and use of resources.

Total elbow arthroplasty for distal humeral fractures: indications, surgical approach, technical tips, and outcome.

BACKGROUND: Twenty-six consecutive total elbow arthroplasties were performed for comminuted distal humeral fractures between 1995 and 2002. At review, 3 patients had died from unrelated causes, 2 had been lost to follow-up, and 1 could not be assessed due to dementia. The mean age of the remaining 20 patients was 72 years (range, 62-92). There were 4 men and 16 women. METHOD: The mean follow-up was 63.2 months (range, 36-108). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 92 (75-100) with a mean flexion arc of 27 degrees - 125 degrees . RESULT: One patient had a postoperative superficial infection, which required a course of antibiotic therapy, and 1 patient who had a radial nerve neuropraxia recovered spontaneously after 6 weeks. Radiographs showed 19 implants were well fixed with no evidence of loosening, while 1 patient had a nonprogressive radio-lucent line on the ulna side of the prosthesis. Additionally, 2 patients developed heterotopic ossification without identifying pre-disposing factors. CONCLUSION: Total elbow arthroplasty for distal humeral fractures in elderly patients without inflammatory arthritis can be expected to five good results at a mean follow-up of 5 years.

Distal biceps tendon rupture: a new repair technique in 14 patients using the biotenodesis screw.

BACKGROUND: Distal biceps tendon ruptures are uncommon injuries. Operative treatment has been shown to improve functional outcomes. A variety of surgical repair techniques have been described for distal biceps ruptures. PURPOSE: The authors present their experience with a new technique to anatomically repair distal biceps tendon ruptures through a single-incision approach that they believe is a safe and reliable method of achieving repair. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen patients with 14 biceps tendon ruptures underwent a repair with a bioabsorbable Biotenodesis screw. All 14 patients underwent clinical assessment using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, measurement of range of motion, and flexion strength testing. Mean follow-up was 29.1 months. RESULTS: Three patients had a good result and 11 patients had an excellent result. The mean elbow flexion arc was 141.4 degrees (range, 125 degrees -155 degrees ; standard deviation, 7.19 degrees ) with no flexion contractures in the operated side compared with the unaffected elbow. All patients achieved an equal range of pronation/supination to the unaffected side. The mean flexion strength in the injured arm was 25.7 kg, compared with 26.9 kg in the uninjured side. No complications were noted about the elbow. CONCLUSION: The authors believe this new technique gives a good functional outcome with reproducible results.