Treatment strategies for simple elbow dislocation - a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Current treatment concepts for simple elbow dislocation involve conservative and surgical approaches. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the superiority of one treatment strategy over the other by a qualitative analysis in adult patients who suffered simple elbow luxation. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and following the suggestions for reporting on qualitative summaries was performed. A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus, including variations and combinations of the following keywords: elbow, radiohumeral, ulnohumeral, radioulnar, luxation, and therapy. Seventeen studies that performed a randomized controlled trial to compare treatment strategies as conservative or surgical procedures were included. Reviews are not selected for further qualitative analysis. The following outcome parameters were compared: range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure (Quick-DASH), recurrent instability, pain measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and time to return to work (RW). RESULTS: Early mobilization after conservative treatment strategies showed improved ROM compared to immobilization for up to 3 weeks after surgery with less extension deficit in the early mobilization group (16° ± 13°. vs. 19.5° ± 3°, p < 0.05), as well as excellent clinical outcome scores. Surgical approaches showed similar results compared to conservative treatment, leading to improved ROM (115 vs. 118 ± 2.8) and MEPS: 95 ± 7 vs. 92 ± 4. CONCLUSION: Conservative treatment with early functional training of the elbow remains the first-line therapy for simple elbow dislocation. The surgical procedure provides similar outcomes compared to conservative treatment regarding MEPS and ROM for patients with slight initial instability in physical examination and radiographs. People with red flags for persistent instability, such as severe bilateral ligament injuries and moderate to severe instability during initial physical examination, should be considered for a primary surgical approach to prevent recurrent posterolateral and valgus instability. Postoperative early mobilization and early mobilization for conservatively treated patients is beneficial to improve patient outcome and ROM.

Postoperative Elbow Instability: Options for Revision Stabilization.

Persistent and recurrent postoperative elbow instability includes a spectrum of pathologies ranging from joint incongruity and subluxation to dislocation. Restoration of osseous anatomy, particularly the coronoid, is a priority in restoring elbow alignment and maintaining ulnohumeral joint stability. After managing bony deficiencies, soft-tissue and ligamentous structures are typically addressed. When required, both static and dynamic adjunctive stabilization procedures have been described, which aid in maintaining a concentric reduction. In these complex procedures, both complication avoidance and early recognition of postoperative complications assist in obtaining a good result. In this review, we discuss current treatment options for revision stabilization for patients with persistent and recurrent elbow subluxation or dislocation after primary stabilization.

Increasing Severity of Radial Longitudinal Deficiency Correlates With the Degree of Proximal Ulnar Hypoplasia.

PURPOSE: Classification systems and treatment for children with radial longitudinal deficiency are classically focused on the hand and wrist. However, the elbow can affect the function of these patients secondary to stiffness or instability. The objective of this study was to determine if a correlation exists between severity of radial longitudinal deficiency (RLD) and degree of proximal ulnar hypoplasia. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review was performed at a pediatric hospital. One hundred elbows were identified in 72 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Measurements such as the coronoid height, olecranon coronoid angle (OCA), and the anterior coverage index were obtained from lateral radiographs of children with RLD. Ten elbows had posterior subluxation of the ulnohumeral joint radiographically. Eleven patients had thrombocytopenia absent radius (TAR) syndrome. RESULTS: There was a significant mean difference for OCA between RLD types. Type 4 RLD (mean [M] = 17.9; standard deviation [SD] = 11.3) had a significantly lower OCA than type 0 (M = 26.4; SD = 5.9) and type 1 (M = 31.0; SD = 5.0). A subanalysis of the 58 elbows with type 4 RLD demonstrated that those with TAR (n = 11) had significantly higher anterior coverage index total scores (M = 1.7; SD = 0.3) than those with type 4 without TAR (M = 1.5; SD = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: The degree of proximal ulnar hypoplasia is correlated with increasing severity of RLD, with significantly lower OCA and coronoid height observed in the elbow radiographs of patients with type 4 RLD compared with type 0 and type 1. Children with TAR have less proximal ulnar dysplasia and higher anterior coverage index than children with type 4 RLD without associated TAR. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic IV.

Ulnohumeral Cross-Pinning in the Management of Traumatic Elbow Instability.

PURPOSE: Traumatic elbow instability (subluxation and dislocation) represents a challenging clinical entity that can be complicated by persistent intraoperative instability after attempted stabilization or recurrent postoperative instability. Both static and dynamic supplemental stabilization procedures have been described for cases where fracture fixation and ligament repair fail to restore stability. There is a paucity of prior studies involving ulnohumeral cross-pinning (UCP), which is a type of static supplemental stabilization. Our purpose was to assess complications and outcomes after UCP. METHODS: We reviewed all surgical cases involving primary and revision UCP for traumatic elbow instability at a single center from 2017-2023. Baseline demographics were recorded. Outcomes including radiographs, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures, and surgical complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Fourteen patients undergoing UCP were included with a mean follow-up of 27 months. Five cross-pinnings (36%) were performed during revision procedures. Mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH), and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores were 2.4, 34, and 69, respectively. The mean flexion-extension and pronation-supination arcs were 114° and 140°, with 85% achieving at least a 100° arc for flexion and forearm rotation. Five patients (36%) had complications, all of which required reoperation. Two complications involved postoperative instability: one radial head subluxation and one radial head dislocation. Both occurred in revision UCP cases indicated for recurrent postoperative instability. CONCLUSIONS: Ulnohumeral cross-pinning for persistent and recurrent elbow instability results in maintained ulnohumeral joint alignment, functional arcs of elbow range of motion, and acceptable patient-reported outcome measures, particularly in the setting of a primary procedure indicated for persistent intraoperative instability. Ulnohumeral cross-pinning is a reasonable supplemental stabilization procedure for complex elbow instability. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

The posterolateral ligament of the elbow: anatomy and clinical relevance.

BACKGROUND: The posterolateral capsule was recognized in the past as an important structure for elbow stability but was later disregarded. Two recent biomechanical studies demonstrated its role in preventing posterolateral instability, and thus it should be identified as a distinct ligament: the posterolateral ligament (PLL). This study includes 2 parts: an anatomic study of the PLL's footprint and a collection of 5 cases of pathologic lesions of the PLL. METHODS: Six cadaveric upper limbs were assessed. The attachments of the PLL were dissected, the footprints were marked and photographed, and the 2-dimensional area and length were measured. RESULTS: The mean proximal attachment dimensions were a length of 13 mm and an area of 101 mm2, and the mean distal attachment dimensions were 19 mm and 111 mm2, respectively. There were 2 cases of posterolateral elbow pain in professional cricket bowlers, diagnosed radiographically as enthesopathy of the PLL's proximal attachment on the posterior capitellum, probably due to repeated forced hyperextension of the elbow. Both patients were treated by débridement of the posterior capitellum and reattachment of the PLL, with complete resolution of symptoms. In addition, there were 3 cases of clinical posterolateral rotatory instability in young patients. Two athletes had an isolated acute tear of the PLL, and on physical examination, both had positive posterior draw test results but negative pivot-shift test results. Both underwent elbow arthroscopy and repair of the PLL with resolution of symptoms. The third patient had long-standing recurrent elbow instability, following a failed lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction, in the presence of an Osborne-Cotterill lesion. He underwent revision lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction, bone grafting of the bony lesion, and reattachment of the PLL, with complete resolution of symptomatic posterolateral rotatory instability. CONCLUSIONS: The PLL of the elbow has a significant role in the elbow's posterolateral stability. Its footprints were described, and its clinical significance was demonstrated in cases of elbow instability caused by acute ligament tears and elbow pain due to ligament enthesopathy. Surgeons should be aware of this structure and potential pathology related to its injury.

Surgical treatment and outcomes of trans-ulnar basal coronoid fracture-dislocations.

BACKGROUND: Trans-ulnar fracture-dislocations of the elbow are complex injuries that can be difficult to classify and treat. Trans-ulnar basal coronoid injuries, in which the coronoid is not attached to either the olecranon or the metaphysis, present substantial challenges to achieve anatomic reduction and stable internal fixation. The purpose of this study was to analyze the outcome of surgical treatment of trans-ulnar basal coronoid fracture-dislocations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2002 and 2019, 32 consecutive trans-ulnar basal coronoid fracture-dislocations underwent open reduction and internal fixation at our institution. Four elbows were lost to follow-up within the first 6 months after surgery and were excluded. Among the 28 elbows remaining, there were 13 females and 15 males with a mean age of 56 (range 28-78) years at the time of injury. The mean clinical and radiographic follow-up times were 37 months and 29 months, respectively. Radiographs were reviewed to determine rates of union, Hastings and Graham heterotopic ossification (HO) grade, and Broberg and Morrey arthritis grade. RESULTS: Union occurred in 25 elbows. Union could not be determined for 1 elbow at most recent follow-up and the remaining 2 elbows developed nonunion of the coronoid. Complications occurred in 10 elbows (36%): deep infection (4), ulnar neuropathy (2), elbow contracture (2), and nonunion (2). There were reoperations in 11 elbows (39%): irrigation and débridement with hardware removal (4), hardware removal (2), ulnar nerve transposition (2), contracture release with HO removal (2), and revision with iliac crest autograft (1). At most recent follow-up, the mean flexion-extension arc was 106° (range 10°-150°), and the mean pronation-supination arc was 137° (range 0°-170°). The mean Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score was 11 (range 0-39) points with a mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation-Elbow score of 81 (range 55-100) points. At final radiographic follow-up, 16 elbows (57%) had HO (8 class I and 8 class II), and 20 elbows (71%) had arthritis (8 grade 1, 6 grade 2, and 6 grade 3). DISCUSSION: Trans-ulnar basal coronoid fracture-dislocations are severe injuries associated with high rates of reoperation, HO, and post-traumatic arthritis. However, the majority of elbows achieve union, a functional range of motion, and reasonable patient reported outcome measures. Over the study period, surgeons were more likely to utilize multiple deep approaches and separate fixation of the coronoid (either with lag screws or anteromedial plates) to ensure anatomic reduction.

Bridge plating is an effective adjunct treatment for complex elbow instability.

BACKGROUND: Managing persistent elbow instability and chronic dislocations presents challenges despite traditional treatments. Supplementary methods like immobilization and various fixations, though common, can carry high complication rates. This study assesses the efficacy of bridge plating in treating complex elbow instability through a retrospective review of patients. Data on characteristics, treatment duration, range of motion, complications, and evaluation scores were analyzed, providing insights into outcomes complications associated with bridge plating. RESULTS: Eleven patients were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 80 ± 68 weeks postoperatively. The mean age was 53 ± 14 years and there were 5 females and 6 males. The mean body mass index was 38. Bridge plating was used for a spectrum of complex elbow injuries. The mean time from injury to bridge plating in acute cases was 29 ± 19 days and 344 ± 381 days in chronic cases. The mean duration of bridge plating was 121 ± 72 days. At the time of plate removal, mean intraoperative elbow motion was extension 58° ± 12°, flexion 107° ± 14°, supination 66° ± 23° and pronation 60° ± 26°. At the latest follow-up visit, mean elbow motion was extension 37° ± 22°, flexion 127° ± 17°, supination 72° ± 15°, and pronation 63° ± 18°. There were 6 complications (55%): heterotopic ossification, ulnar neuropathy, wound failure over the plate in a thin patient, an ulnar shaft periprosthetic fracture due to a seizure-induced fall, and persistent elbow subluxation despite bridge plate fixation. Finally, 1 patient sustained a fracture of a 3.5-mm locking bridge plate. One patient required a contracture release for persistent stiffness. Four of these complications can be directly attributed to the use of the bridge plate (36%). At final follow-up, the mean patient-rated elbow evaluation score was 34, with 0 indicating no pain and disability. The mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was 66% for the 8 patients who had this available, with 100% being the best possible attainable score. CONCLUSION: Bridge plating effectively maintains joint reduction in selected complex elbow instability cases. However, patients with bridge plates often require a second surgery for removal and experience high rates of general complications because of the complexity of their condition.

Anconeus-sparing minimally invasive approach for lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction using a triceps tendon autograft is an effective and safe treatment for chronic posterolateral instability of the elbow.

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment helps to restore stability of the elbow in patients with posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI). The anconeus muscle is one of the most important active stabilizers against PLRI. A minimally invasive anconeus-sparing approach for lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) reconstruction using a triceps tendon autograft has been previously described. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of this intervention and identify risk factors that influenced the clinical and patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with chronic PLRI and no previous elbow surgery who underwent surgical reconstruction of the LUCL using a triceps tendon autograft in a minimally invasive anconeus-sparing approach during 2012 and 2018 were evaluated. Outcome measures included a clinical examination and the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) questionnaires. Subjective patient outcomes were evaluated with the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and the Subjective Elbow Value (SEV). Integrity of the common extensor tendons and centering of the radial head were assessed preoperatively on standardized magnetic resonance images (MRIs). RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were available at final follow-up. The mean age of patients was 51 ± 12 years with a mean follow-up of 53 ± 14 months (range 20-76). Clinical examination after surgery (n = 41) showed no clinical signs of instability in 98% of the patients (P < .001) and a nonsignificant improvement in range of motion. OES, MEPS, and VAS scores averaged 40 ± 10 of 48 points, 92 ± 12 of 100 points, and 1 ± 2 points, respectively, all corresponding with good or excellent outcomes. The SEV was 88%, indicating very high satisfaction with the surgery. Only 1 patient had revision surgery due to pain, and there were no reported postoperative complications in this cohort. A radial head subluxation in the MRI correlated significantly with worse postoperative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The anconeus-sparing minimally invasive technique for posterolateral stabilization of the elbow using a triceps tendon autograft is an effective and safe treatment for chronic posterolateral instability of the elbow with substantial improvements in elbow function and pain relief with a very low rate of persistent clinical instability.

Static stability of novel uncemented elbow hemiarthroplasty stabilized with ligament reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to create a model to simulate treatment of unreconstructable distal humerus fractures with hemiarthroplasty. Stability was restored with a latest plate-system that simultaneously tensions medial and lateral collateral ligament grafts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Static varus and valgus elbow stability was tested in 11 cadaver elbows with intact ligaments and capsule at 5 flexion angles (0°, 30°, 60°, 90°, 120°). The elbows were then destabilized via release of all ligaments and capsular attachments. The distal humerus articular cartilage was excised and replaced with an uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Ligament reconstruction was subsequently performed, and elbow stability was measured and compared to the native state. Dimensions of the hemiarthroplasty component were compared to native elbow dimensions to assess and quantify any existing relationship to elbow stability. RESULTS: A hemiarthroplasty was implanted in all specimens. A size mismatch occurred between the distal humerus trochlea and the olecranon fossa in all specimens and averaged 6.3 mm. Following ligament reconstruction, specimens reproduced the flexion angle-dependent stability of native elbows to both varus and valgus stress. On the medial side, elbow joint stability in mid-flexion was approximately 7% tighter after hemiarthroplasty. Laterally, the elbow was approximately 15% tighter after hemiarthroplasty and demonstrated peak stability in full flexion. The 3 assessed hemiarthroplasty components and bony dimensions did not exhibit any relationship between implant-bone mismatch and elbow stability after ligamentous reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Cadaveric elbow specimens underwent uncemented hemiarthroplasty with soft tissue stabilization with a novel technique for ligament reconstruction. Following hemiarthroplasty and ligament reconstruction, these specimens maintained secure fixation between ligament and bone. Static stability was maintained at varying degrees of elbow flexion regardless of variable mismatch between the hemiarthroplasty component and the native olecranon fossa.

Arthroscopic assessment for lateral collateral ligament complex deficiency of the elbow: a cadaveric study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether elbow instability due to lateral collateral ligament complex injury can be assessed reliably through arthroscopy. METHODS: Eight fresh human cadaveric elbows were placed in a simulated lateral decubitus position. The radiocapitellar joint (RCJ) gap and ulnohumeral joint (UHJ) gap (mm) were measured with different sizes of probes from the posterolateral viewing portal. The elbow was 90 degrees flexed with neutral forearm rotation for RCJ gap measurement and 30 degrees flexed with full supination for UHJ gap measurement. Sequential testing was performed from Stage 0 to Stage 3 (Stage 0: intact; Stage 1: the release of the anterior 1/3 LCL complex; Stage 2: the release of the anterior two thirds of the LCL complex; and Stage 3: the release of the entire LCL complex) on each specimen. The mean gap of RCJ and lateral UHJ was used for the comparison between stages with the intact elbow. RESULTS: The mean RCJ gap distance in Stage 2 and Stage 3 was significantly increased compared to that in Stage 0 (Stage 0 vs. Stage 2: P = .008; Stage 0 vs. Stage 3: P = .010). The mean UHJ gap distance of Stage 1, Stage 2, and Stage 3 was significantly increased compared to that in Stage 0 (Stage 0 vs. Stage 1: P = 0.025; Stage 0 vs. Stage 2: P = .010; Stage 0 vs. Stage 3: P = .011). In contrast, the release of the anterior 1/3 of the LCL complex (Stage 1) was not significantly increased compared to the mean joint gap distance of RCJ (P = .157). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic measurement of joint gap widening in RCJ and UHJ is a reliable assessment method to detect LCL complex deficiency that involves the anterior two thirds or more.

Short-Term Patient Outcomes after Placement of an Internal Joint Stabilizer for Terrible Triad Injuries: A Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the functional and patient-reported outcomes after the use of the internal joint stabilizer (IJS) for unstable terrible triad injuries. Specifically, we sought to determine our complication rate and the impact of complications on patient outcomes. METHODS: We identified all patients who had an IJS placed as a supplemental fixation for a terrible triad injury at two urban, level 1 academic medical centers. We reviewed these patients' charts for demographic information, complication profiles, postoperative range of motion (ROM), and pain-level data. We also collected the QuickDASH and Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE) scores. Descriptive statistics were reported. Final visit data were compared between patients who returned to the OR for a complication and those who did not. RESULTS: From 2018 to 2020, 29 patients had an IJS placed for a terrible triad injury. The median final follow-up was 6.3 months after surgery (IQR: 6.2 months). There were 38 complications in 19 patients (65.5%) that required 12 patients to return to the OR (41.3%) for procedures beyond simple IJS removal. There were no significant differences in the ROM between patients who returned to the OR for a complication and those who did not. QuickDASH and PREE scores were greater (indicating more disability) in patients who had a complication that required a secondary surgical procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who receive an IJS incur a high rate of complications. When patients sustain complications that require secondary surgeries, their ultimate functional outcome scores worsen. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Lateral Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair With Suture-Tape Augmentation for Traumatic Elbow Instability.

PURPOSE: Ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation has been used in the operative treatment of joint instability and may have advantages with respect to early motion and stability. The purpose of this investigation was to describe the clinical results of traumatic elbow instability treated with lateral ulnar collateral ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation. METHODS: All cases of acute and chronic elbow instability treated surgically between 2018 and 2020 were included if they underwent ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament as part of the procedure. Cases with <6 months of follow-up were excluded. A manual chart review was performed to record patient demographics as well as injury and surgery characteristics. Radiographic outcomes, range of motion, and patient-reported outcome measures, including the visual analog pain scale and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, were recorded. Range of motion measurements were recorded at the end of the clinical follow-up, as were surgical complications. RESULTS: Eighteen cases were included with a mean follow-up of 20 months. Five (28%) cases involved a high-energy mechanism, and 11 (62%) cases involved terrible triad fracture dislocations. The mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire and visual analog pain scale scores were 17 and 2, respectively. The mean flexion-extension arc was 124°, and 2 (11%) cases had <100° flexion-extension arc. There were 2 (11%) postoperative complications, and both cases had postoperative instability requiring reoperation. We observed no cases of capitellar erosion from the suture-tape material. CONCLUSIONS: For complex elbow instability, ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament results in acceptable functional outcomes and a reoperation rate comparable with other joint stabilization procedures. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Radial head replacement for acute complex elbow instability: a long-term comparative cohort study of 2 implant designs.

BACKGROUND: Radial head fractures not amenable to reconstruction should be treated by radial head replacement (RHR) when there is associated elbow or forearm instability. There are multiple RHR designs with different philosophies, but 2 of the most commonly used implants include the anatomic press-fit radial head system and the loose-fit metallic spacer. There is little information available specifically comparing the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of these 2 systems. The objective of this study was to compare the long-term clinical and radiologic outcomes of 2 RHR designs in the context of complex acute elbow instability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-five patients with an average age of 54 years (range, 21-87 years) underwent an acute RHR (46 press-fit Acumed anatomic and 49 loose-fit Evolve metallic spacer) and were prospectively followed for an average of 61 months (range, 24-157 months). There were 34 terrible triads; 36 isolated RH fractures with medial, lateral, or longitudinal instability; and 25 RH fractures associated with a proximal ulnar fracture. Clinical outcome and disability were evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the Oxford Elbow Score, and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score. Pain and satisfaction were assessed using a visual analog scale. Radiographic analysis included presence of loosening, bone loss, and overstuffing related to the RHR. RESULTS: Eight patients with an anatomic RHR (2 with overstuffing, 3 for stiffness, and 3 with loose implants) and 1 patient with a spacer (with stiffness) required implant removal. There were no significant differences between spacer RHR and anatomic RHR in arc of motion (120° vs. 113°, P = .14), pain relief (1 vs. 1.7, P = .135), MEPS (94 vs. 88; P = .07), Oxford Elbow Score (42.3 vs. 42.2, P = .4), or DASH score (12.2 vs. 14.4, P = .5). However, patients with a spacer RHR were significantly more satisfied (9 vs. 7.7; P = .004) than those with an anatomic implant. Radiographically, 19 anatomic implants had significant proximal bone loss and 10 showed complete lucent lines around the stem. Lucent lines were common around the spacer RHR. These radiographic changes were not always related to worse clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Both the anatomic and spacer RHR designs can provide good clinical long-term outcomes. However, patients with a spacer showed a higher degree of satisfaction and those with an anatomic press-fit RHR had a higher revision rate, with radiographic changes that warrant continued follow-up.

Sensitivity and specificity of the posterolateral rotatory drawer test in the diagnosis of lateral collateral ligament insufficiency of the elbow.

BACKGROUND: Numerous clinical tests are described for the diagnosis of chronic lateral collateral ligament (LCL) insufficiency of the elbow; however, none of these tests have been adequately assessed for sensitivity, with at most 8 patients included in previous studies. Furthermore, no test has had specificity assessed. The posterolateral rotatory drawer (PLRD) test is thought to have improved diagnostic accuracy over other tests in the awake patient. The aim of this study is to formally assess this test using reference standards in a large cohort of patients. METHODS: A total of 106 eligible patients were identified for inclusion from a single-surgeon database of operative procedures. Examination under anesthetic (EUA) and arthroscopy were chosen as the reference standards to compare the PLRD test against. Only patients with a clearly documented PLRD test finding performed preoperatively in the clinic, and a clearly documented EUA and/or arthroscopic findings from surgery were included. A total of 102 patients underwent EUA, 74 of whom also underwent arthroscopy. Twenty-eight patients had EUA, and then an open procedure without arthroscopy. Four patients had arthroscopy without a clearly documented EUA. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients had a positive PLRD test, and 69 had a negative test. Compared to the reference standard of EUA (n = 102), the PLRD test had a sensitivity of 97.3% (85.8%-99.9%) and a specificity of 98.5% (91.7%-100%) (PPV = 0.973, NPV = 0.985). Compared to the reference standard of arthroscopy (n = 78), the PLRD test had a sensitivity of 87.5% (61.7%-98.5%) and a specificity of 98.4% (91.3%-100%) (PPV = 0.933, NPV = 0.968). Compared to either reference standard (n = 106), the PLRD test has a sensitivity of 94.7% (82.3%-99.4%) and a specificity of 98.5% (92.1%-100%) (PPV = 0.973, NPV = 0.971). CONCLUSION: The PLRD test demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 94.7% and specificity of 98.5% with high positive and negative predictive values. This test is recommended as the primary diagnostic tool for LCL insufficiency in the awake patient and should be widely incorporated into surgical training.

A coronoid-centric classification system of proximal trans-ulnar fracture-dislocations has almost perfect intraobserver and interobserver agreement.

BACKGROUND: Fracture-dislocations of the elbow, particularly those that involve a fracture through the proximal ulna, are complex and can be difficult to manage. Moreover, current classification systems often cannot discriminate between Monteggia-variant injury patterns and trans-olecranon fracture-dislocations, particularly when the fracture involves the coronoid. The Mayo classification of proximal trans-ulnar fracture-dislocations categorizes these fractures into 3 types according to what the coronoid is still attached to: trans-olecranon fracture-dislocations (the coronoid is still attached to the ulnar metaphysis); Monteggia-variant fracture-dislocations (the coronoid is still attached to the olecranon); and ulnar basal coronoid fracture-dislocations (the coronoid is not attached to either the olecranon or the ulnar metaphysis). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the intraobserver and interobserver agreement of the Mayo classification system when assessing elbow fracture-dislocations involving the proximal ulna based on radiographs and computed tomography scans. METHODS: Three fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons and 2 fellowship-trained orthopedic trauma surgeons blindly and independently evaluated the radiographs and computed tomography scans of 90 consecutive proximal trans-ulnar fracture-dislocations treated at a level I trauma center. The inclusion criteria included subluxation or dislocation of the elbow and/or radioulnar joint with a complete fracture through the proximal ulna. Each surgeon classified all fractures according to the Mayo classification, which is based on what the coronoid remains attached to (ulnar metaphysis, olecranon, or neither). Intraobserver reliability was determined by scrambling the order of the fractures and having each observer classify all the fractures again after a washout period ≥ 6 weeks. Interobserver reliability was obtained to assess the overall agreement between observers. κ Values were calculated for both intraobserver reliability and interobserver reliability. RESULTS: The average intraobserver agreement was 0.87 (almost perfect agreement; range, 0.76-0.91). Interobserver agreement was 0.80 (substantial agreement; range, 0.70-0.90) for the first reading session and 0.89 (almost perfect agreement; range, 0.85-0.93) for the second reading session. The overall average interobserver agreement was 0.85 (almost perfect agreement; range, 0.79-0.91). CONCLUSION: Classifying proximal trans-ulnar fracture-dislocations based on what the coronoid remains attached to (olecranon, ulnar metaphysis, or neither) was associated with almost perfect intraobserver and interobserver agreement, regardless of trauma vs. shoulder and elbow fellowship training. Further research is needed to determine whether the use of this classification system leads to the application of principles specific to the management of these injuries and translates into better outcomes.

Posterolateral stabilization of the elbow by autologous ligament reconstruction to limit long-term development of osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Posterolateral instability is the most frequent form of both acute and chronic elbow instability. Joint incongruity due to posterolateral unlocking leads to shear and compression stress of the internal aspect of the humeroulnar joint. We carried out long-term analysis of patients with posterolateral elbow instability in order to determine whether, in addition to improving their symptoms, reconstruction of the lateral collateral ligament complex may play a protective role against the development of post-traumatic osteoarthritis. We hypothesized that ligament reconstruction according to the technique of O'Driscoll stabilizes the elbow and also limits the development of osteoarthritis in the long term. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic posterolateral instability of the elbow and who underwent ligament reconstruction according to the technique of O'Driscoll from January 1995 to December 2010 were identified and retrospectively included for 2 follow-up evaluations at a mean of 5 and 14 years. RESULTS: Fourteen elbows in 14 patients were included. All had a negative lateral pivot shift test and none reported a new episode of instability. Two patients (14%) had osteoarthritis. The 2 radiographic evaluations showed no progression of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis developed in 33% of patients with intra-articular fracture. In simple dislocations, pre-existing osteoarthritic lesions were stabilized and there were no new cases of osteoarthritis. CONCLUSION: Elbow ligament reconstruction according to the technique of O'Driscoll gives effective posterolateral stabilization and appears to protect against progression to osteoarthritic degeneration in the long term. In the absence of associated lesions, it prevents the development of osteoarthritis or the worsening of pre-existing osteoarthritis.

Lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction enhancing secondary stabilizers in chronic PLRI of the elbow provides good to excellent clinical results with no recurrent instability.

PURPOSE: The adopted treatment for chronic elbow PLRI is lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction. However, the most frequently reported complication after primary reconstruction is recurrent instability - up to 25 %. It was thus hypothesized that enhancing the secondary stabilizers will provide successful results with a lower rate of recurrent instability in comparison to techniques with primary reconstruction only. This study aimed to demonstrate a novel surgical technique involving secondary stabilizers. METHODS: In this retrospective study of 29 cases with chronic PLRI the mean duration of symptoms was 39.6 ± 4.9 months. The mean age was 47.9 years with mainly male patients. The surgeries were performed by one senior surgeon at a single institution. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) were recorded. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 36.8 ± 7.7 months. The MEPS score improved significantly from 59.8 ± 13.1 to 84.7 ± 7.6 (p < 0.001). 23/29 patients (79.2 %) had converted to good and excellent results (MEPS >75 points). The DASH score improved from 40.8 ± 4.6 to 20.9 ± 7.2 (p < 0.001). The total complication rate was 10.3 % (N = 3). No recurrent instability was recorded in comparison to 12.2 % for primary reconstruction only, as reported in the literature (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Enhancing the secondary stabilizers by utilizing an adjacently located autograft provided good and excellent results with no recurrent instability. This novel surgical procedure is easy to reproduce and provides a safe and reliable alternative in cases of chronic PLRI when compared to techniques with primary reconstruction only.

The lateral ulnar collateral ligament: Anatomical and structural study for clinical application in the diagnosis and treatment of elbow lateral ligament injuries.

The lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) is considered one of the main stabilizers of the elbow. However, its anatomical description is not well established. Imaging techniques do not always have agreed upon parameters for the study of this ligament. Therefore, herein, we studied the macro and microanatomy of the LUCL to establish its morphological and morphometric characteristics more precisely. Fifty-five fresh-frozen human elbows underwent dissection of the lateral collateral ligament. Morphological characteristics were studied in detail. Ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance (MR) were done before dissection. Two specimens were selected for PGP 9.5 S immunohistochemistry. Ten additional elbows were analyzed by E12 sheet plastination. LUCL was identified in all specimens and clearly defined by E12 semi-thin sections. It fused with the common extensor tendon and the radial ligament. The total length of the LUCL was 48.50 mm at 90°, 46.76 mm at maximum flexion and 44.10 mm at complete extension. Three morphological insertion variants were identified. Both US and MR identified the LUCL in all cases. It was hypoechoic in the middle and distal third in 85%. The LUCL was hypointense on MR in 95%. Free nerve endings were present on histology. The LUCL is closely related to the anular ligament. It is stretched during flexion and supination. US and MR can reliably identify its fibers. Anatomical data are relevant to the surgeon who repairs the ligaments of the elbow. Also, to the radiologist and pain physician who interpret imaging and treat patients with pain syndromes of the elbow.

Arthroscopic rod technique compared to stress ultrasound in the dynamic evaluation of lateral ligament instabilities of the elbow.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose was to compare the arthroscopic rod technique to stress ultrasound in the dynamic assessment of lateral elbow instabilities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen elbows of eight specimen with a mean age of 66.4 ± 13.3 years were assessed in a prone position following a defined dissection setup. After evaluation of the native status, an arthroscopic dissection of the radial collateral ligament (RCL) or lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL), and finally of entire capsuloligamentous structures was performed. Three raters examined each state (native, RCL or LUCL lesion, complete lesion) with the arthroscopic rod technique in 90° flexion and with stress ultrasound in 30 and 90° flexion. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess the interrater reliability as well as test-retest reliability for each testing modality (arthroscopy and ultrasound). RESULTS: The arthroscopic rod technique showed a superior interrater and test-retest reliability of 0.953 and 0.959 (P < 0.001), respectively, when compared to stress ultrasound with an ICC of 0.4 and 0.611 (P < 0.001). A joint space opening during arthroscopy of > 6 mm humero-ulnar or > 7 mm humero-radial was indicative for a lateral collateral ligament lesion. However, a differentiation between an isolated RCL or LUCL tear was not possible. A lateral joint opening of ≥ 9 mm was only observed in complete tears of the lateral capsuloligamentous complex. CONCLUSIONS: The arthroscopic rod technique showed a superior interrater and test-retest reliability when compared to stress ultrasound. Arthroscopic assessment for radial elbow instability was found to be reliable and reproducible. A joint gapping ≥ 9 mm in the arthroscopic evaluation is a sign for a complete insufficiency of the radial capsuloligamentous complex. However, it is not possible to precisely distinguish between a lesion of the RCL or LUCL by arthroscopy. On the basis of our results, dynamic ultrasound testing may be inappropriate to objectify lateral elbow instability.

Using External Joint Stabilizer - Elbow (EJS-E) for treating elbow instability-biomechanical assessment and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of using an External Joint Stabilizer - Elbow (EJS-E) for persistent elbow instability based on biomechanical experiments and analysis of clinical results. METHODS: An EJS-E was used in 17 elbow instability patients. The median follow-up was 26 months (range, 12-42 months). We evaluated the flexion-extension and pronation-supination movement arcs, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Broberg and Morrey classification system, and occurrence of complications in these patients. Moreover, construct stiffness and maximum strength tests were performed to evaluate the strength of the fixation techniques. RESULTS: The final median range of the extension-to-flexion and pronation-to-supination arc of the elbow was 135° (range, 110°-150°) and 165° (range, 125°-180°), respectively. The VAS pain scores were > 3 in two patients. The median MEPS was 90 (range, 80-100 points). Five patients showed signs of grade I post-traumatic osteoarthritis according to the Broberg and Morrey radiographic classification system, while grade II changes were observed in three patients. Complications included axis pin loosening with pin-tract infection in two patients, transient ulnar nerve symptoms in two patients, heterotopic ossification in two patients, and suture anchors infection in one patient. Based on the biomechanical testing results, the EJS-E exhibited higher stiffness and resisting force in varus loading. It was 0.5 (N/mm) stiffer and 1.8 (N·m) stronger than the internal joint stabilizer (IJS) by difference of medians (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical and clinical outcomes show that EJS-E via the posterior approach can restore mobility and stability in all patients, thus serving as a valuable alternative option for the treatment of persistent instability of the elbow.