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.

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.

Mid- to long-term functional outcome and return to sport after elbow dislocation in bouldering: a clinical retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic elbow dislocations are among the most common injuries in sport climbing. They occur most frequently in bouldering (a climbing discipline with strong upward trend often performed indoors) due to the typical low-height backward fall into crashpads. There is still no data about the functional outcome and return to sport of this typical bouldering injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All Patients with elbow dislocations due to a bouldering associated fall between 2011 and 2020 were identified retrospectively in our level I trauma centre. Trauma mechanisms, injury types and therapies were obtained. Follow-up was performed with an online questionnaire including sports-related effects, return to sport and the Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS). RESULTS: 30 patients with elbow dislocations after bouldering accidents were identified. In 22 (73.3%) patients the injury was a simple dislocation. The questionnaire was completed by 20 patients. The leading mechanism was a low-height fall into crashpads. Surgical procedures were performed in every second patient. 18 patients (90%) reported return to bouldering after 4.7 ± 2.1 months. 12 patients (66.7%) regained their pre-injury level. Mid-/Long-term follow-up (mean 105 ± 37.5 months) showed excellent results in ESAS score (97.2 ± 3.9 points). Persistent limited range of motion or instability was reported by only 3 patients (15%). CONCLUSION: Most athletes are able to return to bouldering but only two thirds regain their pre-injury performance level in this demanding upper-extremity sport. The unique low-height trauma mechanism may create a false sense of security. Specific awareness and safety features should be placed for climbing athletes to reduce elbow injuries.

Long-terms outcomes of radial head arthroplasty using a bipolar prosthesis.

BACKGROUND: In acute treatment of radial head fractures, a radial head prosthesis can be considered if open reduction and internal fixation are not technically feasible. METHODS: We reviewed the data of 27 consecutive bipolar Judet radial head prostheses implanted in patients with unreconstructable radial head fractures and no other concomitant fractures (coronoid or olecranon factures). The lesions of the lateral collateral ligament were rated according to the McKee classification. Twenty-three patients with more than ten-year follow-up participated in this retrospective study All patients underwent assessments for pain, range of motion and stability using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, the QuickDash questionnaire and a Visual Analogue Scale for pain. Radiography assessment was performed to determine the correct setting of the implant, presence of periprosthetic loosening, prosthetic disassembly, heterotopic ossification, capitellum and ulnohumeral degenerative changes. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 149 months (± 12.2). Mean range of motion in flexion-extension was 111° (± 10.55), mean extension was 18° (± 14.32) and mean flexion was 130° (± 11.4). Mean arc of motion in supination-pronation was 150° (± 12.26). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 88, the mean QuickDash score was 7.3; 86% of the patients were satisfied. Seven patients (26%) required secondary surgery. The most frequent complication was heterotopic ossification, which had negative consequences on the functional result. CONCLUSIONS: Bipolar radial head prostheses are an option for acute treatment of isolated unreconstructable radial head fractures. During follow-up, three patients required implant revision and removal; the capitellum surface presented severe degenerative changes and the prosthesis was not replaced. Another complication was the risk of implant dislocation, in relation to implant design, incorrect positioning of the radial head stem or else to inadequate reconstruction of the lateral collateral ligament. Further work is needed to establish the long-term follow-up results of Judet implants in complex elbow fractures.

The use of hinged elbow orthosis following surgical management of terrible triad injuries of the elbow.

PURPOSE: To determine outcomes following surgical management of terrible triad injuries in patients treated with and without a hinged elbow orthosis (HEO) in the post-operative setting. METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of 41 patients who underwent surgical treatment of terrible triad injuries including radial head fracture, coronoid fracture, and ulnohumeral dislocation between 2008 and 2023 with at least 10-week follow-up. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated post-operatively without HEO, and 22 patients were treated with HEO. There were no differences in range of motion (ROM) between patients treated with and without HEO in final flexion-extension arc (118.4° no HEO, 114.6° HEO, p = 0.59) or pronation-supination arc (147.8° no HEO, 141.4° HEO, p = 0.27). Five patients treated without HEO and one patient treated with HEO returned to the operating room for stiffness (26%, 5%, p = 0.08). QuickDASH scores were similar between groups (p = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: This study found no difference in post-operative ROM, complications, or QuickDASH scores in patients treated post-operatively with or without HEO. Based on these results, we cannot determine whether the use of HEO adds additional stability to the elbow while initiating ROM exercises post-operatively.

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.

Comparison of Surgical Treatment Outcomes of Pediatric Medial Epicondyle Fractures With and Without Elbow Dislocation.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare surgical treatment outcomes of pediatric medial epicondyle fractures with and without elbow dislocation. METHODS: A total of 139 patients (75 boys and 64 girls; mean ± SD age, 9.6 ± 3.3 years) who received surgical treatment for medial epicondyle fractures at the Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from January 2012 to December 2018 were included in our study. There were 99 cases that had a medial epicondyle fracture alone (group A) and 40 cases had a concomitant elbow dislocation (group B). Pain, ulnar nerve palsy, and stability of the elbow joint were recorded. Robert's criteria was used to assess elbow function. RESULTS: The prevalence of ulnar nerve palsy was lower in group A compared to group B, both before and after surgery. More patients underwent ulnar nerve transposition in group B than in group A. The incidence of elbow valgus instability was higher in group B than in group A. At the final follow-up, all patients had achieved good radiographic restoration of the elbow joint. Clinical outcomes in group A, according to Robert's criteria, were better than those in group B. CONCLUSIONS: Elbow dislocation was associated with poorer functional outcomes following surgical treatment of medial epicondyle fractures in children. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Radial Head Arthroplasty for Fracture: Implant Survivorship and Outcomes at Mean Follow-up of 8 Years.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate implant survivorship and clinical outcomes following radial head arthroplasty for fracture at long-term follow-ups. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult patients who underwent primary uncemented radial head arthroplasty for radial head or neck fractures between 2012 and 2015. Medical records were reviewed to collect information regarding demographics, injury characteristics, reoperations, and revisions requiring implant removal. A bivariate analysis was conducted to identify potential risk factors for reoperation. A Kaplan-Meier curve was created to determine implant survival rates. Eligible patients were contacted to confirm any reoperations and obtain Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores at long-term follow-ups. RESULTS: A total of 89 patients were eligible for analysis and assessed at a mean of 97 months after surgery (range, 81-128). Reoperation rate was 16% (14 of 89 patients), including 5% of patients requiring implant removal or revision. However, 93% of reoperations occurred within the first 12 months of the index surgery. Fracture dislocations of the elbow had a higher rate of reoperation. A Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated an implant survival rate of 96% at 10-year follow-up. Of the patients who responded, the mean Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score was 8.7 ± 10.3, with none requiring additional reoperations or revisions. There were otherwise similar outcome scores among patients requiring reoperation versus those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Although radial head arthroplasty for fractures has a high potential for reoperation within the first year, survival rates with uncemented implants remain high at 10 years, and patients report excellent Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores at long-term follow-ups, despite any need for reoperation. Fractures with associated elbow dislocation may be at a higher risk for reoperation, and it is important to provide this prognostic information to patients who are likely to require arthroplasty for more extensive injuries. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Mid-term outcome following radial head arthroplasty in acute trauma: risk factors for poor outcome.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to evaluate the outcomes of a single type of radial head implant in a large cohort of patients at mid-term follow-up and to determine the associated risk factors for inferior functional outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective follow-up assessment of 65 patients (33 women and 32 men; mean age, 53.3 years [range, 22-81 years]) who underwent radial head arthroplasty (RHA) for acute trauma between 2012 and 2018, after a minimum follow-up period of 3 years. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Oxford Elbow Score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, and Mayo Modified Wrist Score were evaluated, and all available radiographs were analyzed. All complications and revision procedures were assessed. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify potential risk factors for a poor outcome following RHA. RESULTS: After an average follow-up period of 4.1 years (range, 3-9.4 years), the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 77.2 (standard deviation [SD], 18.9); mean Oxford Elbow Score, 32.0 (SD, 10.6); mean Mayo Modified Wrist Score, 74.6 (SD, 13.7); and mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, 29.0 (SD, 21.2). Average range of motion measured 10° (SD, 15°) in extension, 125° (SD, 14°) in flexion, 81° (SD, 14°) in pronation, and 63° (SD, 24°) in supination. The overall complication and reoperation rates were 38.5% and 30.8%, respectively, with severe elbow stiffness being the most common reason for revision. Patient age >50 years, the use of an external fixator, the presence of accompanying medial collateral ligament injuries, and the development of higher-grade osteoarthritis were associated with a poor outcome. CONCLUSION: Satisfactory medium-term outcomes can be achieved using a monopolar, long-stemmed RHA in patients with acute trauma. However, complication and revision rates are high, frequently leading to inferior outcome scores. Additionally, a higher patient age, the use of an external fixator, the presence of accompanying medial collateral ligament injuries, and the occurrence of higher-grade osteoarthritis were associated with a poor outcome; these factors should raise awareness by the treating trauma surgeon.

The Boyd approach: a valuable alternative to treating simple to complex elbow fractures and dislocations.

BACKGROUND: The Boyd approach is a single-incision posterior approach to the proximal radius and ulna based on a lateral anconeus muscle reflection and release of the lateral collateral ligamentous complex. This approach remains a lesser-used technique following early reports of proximal radioulnar synostosis and postoperative elbow instability. Although limited by small case series, recent literature does not support these early reported complications. This study presents a single surgeon's outcomes using the Boyd approach for the treatment of simple to complex elbow injuries. METHODS: Following institutional review board approval, a retrospective review of all patients with simple to complex elbow injuries treated consecutively using a Boyd approach by a shoulder and elbow surgeon was conducted from 2016 to 2020. All patients with at least 1 postoperative clinic visit were included. Data collected included patient demographics, injury description, postoperative complications, elbow range of motion, and radiographic findings including heterotopic ossification and proximal radioulnar synostosis. Categorical and continuous variables were reported using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients were included with an average age of 49 years (range 13-82 years). The most commonly treated injuries were Monteggia fracture-dislocations (32%) and terrible triad injuries (18%). Average follow-up was 8 months (range 1-24 months). Final average elbow active arc of motion was from 20° (range 0°-70°) of extension to 124° (range 75°-150°) of flexion. Final supination and pronation were 53° (range 0°-80°) and 66° (range 0°-90°), respectively. There were no cases of proximal radioulnar synostosis. Heterotopic ossification contributing to less than functional elbow range of motion occurred in 2 (5%) patients who elected conservative management. There was 1 (2%) case of early postoperative posterolateral instability due to repair failure of injured ligaments that required revision using a ligament augmentation procedure. Five (11%) patients experienced postoperative neuropathy, including 4 (9%) with ulnar neuropathy. Of these, 1 underwent ulnar nerve transposition, 2 were improving, and 1 had persistent symptoms at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest case series available demonstrating the safe utilization of the Boyd approach for the treatment of simple to complex elbow injuries. Postoperative complications including synostosis and elbow instability may not be as common as previously understood.

Patient satisfaction, joint stability and return to sports following simple elbow dislocations: surgical versus non-surgical treatment.

PURPOSE: While conservative management is commonly promoted for simple elbow dislocations, the importance of primary surgical treatment in these injuries is still undetermined. The objective of this study was to report patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sports (RTS) and joint stability using ultrasound in patients following conservative or surgical treatment after simple elbow dislocation. METHODS: Patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months after conservative (CT) or surgical treatment (ST) following simple elbow dislocation were included in this retrospective study. To evaluate patients' postoperative outcome and satisfaction, the Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS) was used, and validated scores such as the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS), the Quick Disability of Arm and Shoulder Score (Quick-DASH) and RTS were assessed. For objective assessment of residual joint instability, a standardized clinical examination as well as a dynamic ultrasound evaluation of the affected and the contralateral elbow was performed. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (26 women, 18 men) with an average age of 41.5 ± 15.3 years were available for follow-up survey (65.5 ± 30.4 months; range 26-123). 21 patients were treated conservatively and twenty-three patients received surgical treatment. CT and ST resulted in similar outcome with regard to ROM, ESAS (CT: 99.4 ± 1.5; ST: 99.8 ± 0.3), MEPS (CT: 97.3 ± 6.8 points; ST: 98.7 ± 3.3) and Quick-DASH (CT: 7.8 ± 10.4; ST: 6.3 ± 7.9) (n.s.). There was no difference in elbow stability and laxity measured by ultrasound between the study groups and compared to the healthy elbow (n.s.). Two patients of the CT group (10%) complained about persistent subjective elbow instability. RTS was faster after surgical compared to conservative treatment (p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: Both, conservative and surgical treatment results in high patient satisfaction and good-to-excellent functional outcome after simple elbow dislocation. Even though ultrasound evaluation showed no significant differences in joint gapping between groups, 10% of conservatively treated patients complained about severe subjective instability. Surgically treated patients returned faster to their preoperatively performed sports. Thus, primary surgical treatment may be beneficial for high demanding patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level III.

Coronoid tip fractures in terrible triad injuries can be safely treated without fixation.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal treatment of terrible triad injuries of the elbow (TTI) remains topic of ongoing discussion. The aim of this study was to determine whether different treatment strategies for coronoid tip fractures in terrible triad injuries influences the clinical and radiological results in a mid-term follow-up. METHODS: A total of 62 patients with surgical treatment of a TTI including a coronoid tip fracture (37 women, 25 men; mean age, 51 years) were available for follow-up assessment after an average of 4.2 years (range 24-110 months). Thirteen patients had O'Driscoll 1.1 and 49 O'Driscoll 1.2 coronoid fractures, of which 26 were treated with and 36 without fixation. Range of motion, the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score as well as grip strength were evaluated. Radiographs were analyzed for all participants. RESULTS: No significant benefit in outcome variables could be detected between patients, whose coronoid had been fixed, compared to patients without fixation of the coronoid. In the coronoid fixation group, patients had mean outcome scores of 81.5 ± SD 19.1 (range 35-100) for MEPS, 31.0 ± SD 12.5 (range 11-48) for OES and 27.7 ± SD 23 (range 0-61) for DASH score, while in the no-fixation group, mean MEPS was 90.8 ± SD 16.5 (range 40-100), mean OES was 39.0 ± SD 10.4 (range 16-48) and mean DASH score was 14.5 ± SD 19.9 (range 0-48). Mean range of motion was 116° ± SD 21° (range 85-140°) versus 124° ± SD 24° (range 80-150°) in extension-flexion and 158° ± SD 23° (range 70-180°) versus 165° ± SD 12° (range 85-180°) in pronation-supination. Overall complication rate was 43.5% and revision rate was 24.2%, with no significant differences between both groups. Suboptimal results were more frequently seen in patients who had degenerative or heterotopic changes on their latest radiograph. CONCLUSIONS: Sufficient elbow stability and good outcomes can be achieved in most patients with TTI and coronoid tip fractures. Although some bias in treatment allocation and group heterogeneity cannot be completely omitted, our analysis detected no significant benefit in outcome when the coronoid tip fracture has been fixed compared to patients with non-fixed coronoid tip. Therefore, we would suggest a no-fixation approach for coronoid tip fractures as primary treatment in TTI of the elbow. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Monteggia fractures and Monteggia-like-lesions: a systematic review.

Monteggia injuries are rare, but severe injuries of the elbow including various injury patterns. Treatment of these injuries is still topic of debate and strategies differ widely. In this systematic review on Monteggia injuries in adults, we aimed to clarify the incidence of different injury patterns within Monteggia injuries, investigate the main reasons leading to revision surgery and explore which surgical treatments should be favored to achieve satisfactory clinical results.We initially identified 182 publications and ultimately included 17 retrospective studies comprising 651 cases. All patients were classified using the Bado classification, leading to 30.5% Bado type I fractures, 60.4% type II fractures, 5.1% type III and 3.1% type IV fractures. Mean revision rate was 23%. Ulna non-union (28%) and limited range-of-motion (22%) are the main reasons for revision surgery. Meta-analysis shows a trend toward the use of locking plates for ulna fixation which may lead to less revision surgery and fewer ulna non-unions. Further biomechanical and clinical research is necessary to clarify the role of radial head surgery.

Prospective clinical results of an additive ligament bracing for stabilizing simple and complex elbow instabilities.

INTRODUCTION: Ligament bracing augments ligament repair using a non-absorbable suture tape. Although biomechanically an increase in primary stability has been proven, there is a lack of clinical evidence. Purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical results of patients treated with ligament bracing due to primary elbow instability, including an analysis of complications. Furthermore, clinical results for patients treated with and without early functional mobilization were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective case-series evaluated clinical and functional results from patients treated with ligament bracing due to primary elbow instability. Clinical outcome measures were range of motion (ROM) as well as objective and subjective elbow scores [Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS); Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH score)]. Stability was evaluated sonographically by humero-radial gapping under varus stress. RESULTS: This study involved 34 patients treated with ligament bracing. After a mean follow-up of 12.9 months ROM was 112° ± 29, MEPS 88 ± 13 points, DASH 91 ± 11 points, and 84% were satisfied with their result. Lateral joint gapping was 2.4 mm. No significant difference was observed regarding a postoperative mobilization with and without limitations. Most common complication after ligament bracing was elbow stiffness including heterotopic ossifications in four patients (12%). CONCLUSION: Operatively treated elbow instability with additional ligament bracing results in good clinical outcomes with high patient satisfaction and recovery of elbow stability. The high primary stability of the ligament bracing allows early functional mobilization without bracing, which facilitates postoperative rehabilitation. Elbow stiffness with heterotopic ossification seems to be a potential complication. Furthermore, the optimal tensioning of the ligament bracing remains challenging, including the risk of an over tensioning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

The inter-individual anatomical variation of the trochlear notch as a predisposition for simple elbow dislocation.

PURPOSE: Besides the multi-layered capsule-ligamentous complex of the elbow joint the high bony congruence in the ulnohumeral joint contributes to elbow stability. Therefore, we assume that specific anatomical configurations of the trochlear notch predispose to dislocation. In case of ligamentous elbow dislocation both conservative and surgical treatment is possible without a clear treatment algorithm. Findings of constitutional bony configurations could help deciding for the best treatment option. METHODS: In this retrospective matched-pair analysis we compared MRI imaging from patients sustaining a primary traumatic elbow dislocation (instability group) with patients suffering from chronic lateral epicondylitis (control group), treated between 2009 and 2019. Two independent observers measured different anatomical landmarks of the trochlear notch in a multiplanar reconstructed standardized sagittal trochlear plane (SSTP). Primarily, opening angle and relative depth of the trochlear notch were determined. After adjustment to the proximal ulnar rim in the SSTP, coronoid and olecranon angle, the articular angle as well as the ratio of the tip heights of the trochlear notch were measured. RESULTS: We compared 34 patients in the instability group (age 48 ± 14 years, f/m 19/15) with 34 patients in the control group (age 47 ± 16 years, f/m 19/15). Instability group showed a significantly larger opening angle (94.1° ± 6.9° vs. 88.5° ± 6.9°, p = 0.0002), olecranon angle (60.9° ± 5.3° vs. 56.1° ± 5.1°, p < 0.0001) and articular angle (24.7° ± 6.4° vs. 22.3° ± 5.8°, p = 0.02) compared to the control group. Measuring the height from the coronoid (ch) and olecranon (oh) tip also revealed a significantly larger tip ratio (tr = ch/oh) in the instability group (2.7 ± 0.8 vs. 2.2 ± 0.5, p < 0.0001). The relative depth (61.0% ± 8.3% vs. 62.7% ± 6.0%, p = 0.21) of the trochlear notch as well as the coronoid angle (32.8° ± 4.5° vs. 31.7° ± 5.2°, p = 0.30) showed no significant difference in the instability group compared to the control group. The interrater reliability of all measurements was between 0.83 and 0.94. CONCLUSION: MRI of patients with elbow dislocation show that there seems to be a bony anatomical predisposition. According to the results, it seems reasonable to include predisposing bony factors in the decision-making process when surgical stabilization and conservative treatment is possible. Further biomechanical studies should prove these assumptions to generate critical bony values helping surgeons with decision making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Overhead arm positioning in the rehabilitation of elbow dislocations: An in vitro biomechanical study.

STUDY DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical study. INTRODUCTION: Elbow stiffness is a common complication following elbow dislocation. Overhead exercises have been proposed to initiate early motion to reduce stiffness through employing gravity to stabilize the elbow. The implications of this position with regard to elbow kinematics after dislocation have not been reported. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To determine the influence of the overhead position on elbow stability following combined medial and lateral collateral ligament (MCL and LCL) injuries. METHODS: Passive and simulated active extension were performed on 11 cadaveric elbows with the arm in the overhead, dependent, and horizontal positions and with the forearm in pronation, neutral, and supination. Internal-external rotation (IER) and varus-valgus angulation (VVA) of the ulnohumeral joint were assessed for the intact elbow and after simulated MCL-LCL injury. Repeated-measures analyses of variance were conducted to analyze the effects of elbow state, arm position, forearm rotation, and extension angle. RESULTS: During passive extension with the arm overhead, the pronated position resulted in more internal rotation than supination (-2.6 ± 0.7°, P = .03). There was no effect of forearm rotation on VVA. The overhead position increased internal rotation relative to the dependent position when the forearm was neutral (-8.5 ± 2.5°, P = .04) and relative to the horizontal position when the forearm was supinated (-12.7 ± 2.2°, P= .02). During active extension, pronation increased valgus angle compared to the neutral (+1.2 ± 0.3°, P= .04) and supinated (+1.5 ± 0.4°, P= .03) positions, but did not affect IER. There was no difference between active and passive motion with the arm overhead (P > .05). DISCUSSION: Movement of the injured elbow in the overhead position most closely replicated kinematics of the intact elbow compared to the other arm positions. CONCLUSIONS: Overhead elbow extension results in similar kinematics between an intact elbow and an elbow with MCL and LCL tears. As such, therapists might consider early motion in this position to reduce the risk of elbow stiffness after dislocation.

Suture tape augmentation of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament increases load to failure in simulated posterolateral rotatory instability.

PURPOSE: Simple elbow dislocations are accompanied with lateral ulnar collateral ligament ruptures. For persisting instability, surgery is indicated to prevent chronic posterolateral rotatory instability. After lateral collateral ligament (LCL) complex repair the repair is protected by temporary immobilization, limited range of motion and hinged bracing. Internal bracing is an operative alternative augmenting the LCL repair using non-absorbable suture tapes. However, the stability of LCL repair with and without additional augmentation remains unclear. The hypothesis was that LCL repair with additional suture tape augmentation would improve load to failure. Secondary goal of this study was to evaluate different humeral fixation techniques. A humeral fixation using separate anchors for the LCL repair and the augmentation was not expected to provide superior stability compared to using only one single anchor. METHODS: Twenty-one elbows were tested. A cyclic varus rotational torque of 0.5-3.5 Nm was applied in 90°, 60°, 30°, and 120° elbow flexion to the intact, torn, and repaired LCLs. The specimens were randomized into three groups: repair alone (group I), repair with additional internal bracing using two anchors (group II), repair using one humeral anchor (group III). A load-to-failure protocol was conducted. RESULTS: Load to failure was significantly higher in groups II (26.6 Nm; P = 0.017) and III (23.18 Nm; P = 0.038) than in group I (12.13 Nm). No significant difference was observed between group II and III. All specimens lost reduction after LCL dissection by a mean of 4.48° ± 4.99° (range 0.66-15.82). The mean reduction gain after repair was 7.21° ± 4.97° (2.70-21.23; mean over reduction, 2.73°). The laxity was comparable between the intact and repaired LCLs (n.s.), except for varus movements at 30° in group II (P = 0.035) and 30° (P = 0.001) and 120° in group III (P = 0.008) with significantly less laxity. Inserting the ulnar suture anchor showed failure in the thread in 10 cases. CONCLUSION: LCL repair with additional internal bracing yielded higher load to failure than repair alone. Repair with additional internal bracing for the humeral side using one anchor was sufficient. A higher primary stability would facilitate postoperative management and allow immediate functional treatment. Reducing the number of humeral anchors would save costs.

Old unreduced elbow dislocation: Patients' perspectives on outcome of open reduction.

INTRODUCTION: Old unreduced elbow dislocation is not uncommon in developing countries. Many authors have reported outcome of open reduction in the management of this problem. However, we did not find any study that document patient reported outcome. OBJECTIVE: the objective of this study was to determine the patients' perspectives of outcome of open reduction in the management of old unreduced elbow dislocation. METHODS: This was a prospective interventional study of 49 consecutive patients with old unreduced simple elbow dislocation who were treated with open reduction at the National Orthopaedic Hospital, Dala - Kano, Nigeria and Albarka Clinic Kano, Nigeria between January 2015 and December 2019. RESULTS: Fourty nine patients were studied with median age of 31.0 years (range: 19-60 years). The majority of the patients were within 31-40 years age group. The male to female ratio was 6:1. Using the Mayor Elbow Performance Scale (MEPS) and Patients specific Functional scale (PSFS); there are significant improvements in postoperative functional capability of the patients (P = 0.000). With the short assessment for patient satisfaction (SAPS), 93.3% of patients were either satisfied or very satisfied with the outcome of open reduction. CONCLUSION: The outcome of open reduction for old unreduced elbow dislocation is good and is well accepted by the patients.

Biomechanical significance of the collateral ligaments in transolecranon fracture-dislocations.

BACKGROUND: It is widely accepted that transolecranon fracture-dislocations are not associated with collateral ligament disruption. The aim of the present study was to investigate the significance of the collateral ligaments in transolecranon fractures. METHODS: Twenty cadaveric elbows with a mean age of 46.3 years were used. All soft tissue was dissected to the level of the capsule, leaving the anterior band of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) and lateral collateral ligament (LCL) intact. A standardized, oblique osteotomy starting from the distal margin of the cartilage bare area of the ulna was made. The elbows were loaded with an inferiorly directed force of 5 and 10 N in the intact, MCL cut, LCL cut, and both ligaments cut states. All measurements were recorded on lateral calibrated radiographs. RESULTS: The mean inferior translation with intact ligaments (n = 20) when the humerus was loaded with 5 and 10 N was 1.52 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-2.02) and 2.23 mm (95% CI, 1.61-2.85), respectively. When the LCL was cut first (n = 10), the inferior translation with 5 and 10 N load was 4.11 mm (95% CI, 0.95-7.26) and 4.82 mm (95% CI, 1.91-7.72), respectively. When the MCL was cut first (n = 10), the inferior translation when loaded with 5 and 10 N was 3.94 mm (95% CI, 0.796-7.08) and 5.68 mm (95% CI, 3.03-8.33), respectively. The inferior translation when loaded with 5 and 10 N and both ligaments cut was 15.65 mm (95% CI, 12.59-18.79) and 17.50 mm (95% CI, 14.86-20.13), respectively. There was a statistical difference between the intact and MCL cut first at 10 N and when both ligaments were cut at 5 and 10 N. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that collateral ligament disruption is a prerequisite for a transolecranon fracture-dislocation. An inferior translation of more than 3 mm suggests that at least one of the collateral ligaments is disrupted, and more than 7.5 mm indicates that both collateral ligaments are disrupted.