RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Aseptic loosening is one of the most common complications of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Modern implants, such as the Nexel, have been designed in an attempt to decrease loosening. The present study aims to report implant survivorship, radiographic assessment of loosening and lucency, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients treated with the Nexel TEA at midterm follow-up. METHODS: Consecutive series of adult patients underwent TEA using the Nexel by a single surgeon via standardized technique. Patients with minimum 3-year follow-up with radiographic and PROM data were included. Survivorship was defined by the absence of revision. Loosening was assessed via the Wrightington method by 3 independent fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons. Lucency was analyzed across individual radiographic zones on orthogonal radiographs. PROMs included the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE), and EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). RESULTS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients (22 female, 16 male) with a mean age of 67 years underwent TEA via a triceps-sparing isolated medial window approach. Mean follow-up was 5.5 years (range 3-9). Primary diagnoses were as follows: 19 osteoarthritis (OA), 9 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 9 post-traumatic arthritis (PA), and 1 conversion of elbow arthrodesis. Overall survivorship was 97.4%, with 1 patient undergoing revision for infection. Loosening was found in 5.3% of elbows, averaged across 3 observers. Lucency was most pronounced at the level of the humeral condyles. PROMs demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful improvements in 76%, 92%, and 73% of patients for QuickDASH, PREE, and EQ-5D, respectively. No significant correlations were found between patient age, gender, loosening, lucency, and PROMs. CONCLUSION: At midterm follow-up, the Nexel TEA demonstrated excellent overall survivorship and low rate of implant loosening. The single failure requiring revision for infection was conversion of a prior elbow arthrodesis. PROMs overall exhibited marked and consistent improvement from preoperative to final postoperative follow-up. Although promising, these results should be interpreted with some caution as long-term data regarding this prosthesis are still lacking.