Mid-term results of the Latitude primary total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The Latitude total elbow prosthesis is a third-generation implant, developed to restore the natural anatomy of the elbow. Literature on this prosthesis is scarce. The aim of this study was to analyze the mid-term results of the Latitude total elbow prosthesis. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 62 patients (21 men and 41 women). The mean age at the time of surgery was 65 years (range, 28-87 years). The main indication for surgery was inflammatory arthritis. The outcome measures were complications, reoperations, self-reported physical functioning, pain, satisfaction, objectively measured physical functioning, and radiologic signs of loosening. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to determine survival with revision as the endpoint. RESULTS: Sixty-nine primary Latitude prostheses were placed in 62 patients between 2008 and 2019. Six patients (7 prostheses) died, 3 elbows underwent revision, and 9 patients were lost to follow-up. A total of 44 patients (50 prostheses) were available for follow-up. The mean length of follow-up was 51 months (range, 10-144 months). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a survival rate of 82% at 10 years after surgery. The main reason for revision was aseptic loosening. Radial head dissociation was seen in 8 patients (24%), but none had complaints. Self-reported and objectively measured physical functioning yielded good results, although 23 patients (46%) did show radiolucent lines on radiographs. CONCLUSION: Latitude total elbow arthroplasty is considered a successful procedure with low pain scores, high patient satisfaction, and good physical functioning. Survival rates nonetheless remain low and complication rates remain high yet are comparable to those of other elbow arthroplasties. We recommend biomechanical studies to concentrate on specific postoperative loading instructions to minimize wear and consequent loosening.

Nerve injuries do occur in elbow arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: The purpose is to create more awareness as well as emphasize the risk of permanent nerve injury as a complication of elbow arthroscopy. METHODS: Patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy complicated by permanent nerve injury were retrospectively collected. Patients were collected using two strategies: (1) by word-of-mouth throughout the Dutch Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, and the Leiden University Nerve Centre, and (2) approaching two medical liability insurance companies. Medical records were reviewed to determine patient characteristics, disease history and postoperative course. Surgical records were reviewed to determine surgical details. RESULTS: A total of eight patients were collected, four men and four women, ageing 21-54 years. In five out of eight patients (62.5%), the ulnar nerve was affected; in the remaining three patients (37.5%), the radial nerve was involved. Possible causes for nerve injury varied among patients, such as portal placement and the use of motorized instruments. CONCLUSIONS: A case series on permanent nerve injury as a complication of elbow arthroscopy is presented. Reporting on this sequel in the literature is little, however, its risk is not to be underestimated. This study emphasizes that permanent nerve injury is a complication of elbow arthroscopy, concurrently increasing awareness and thereby possibly aiding to prevention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case series.

Prospective cohort study comparing a triceps-sparing and triceps-detaching approach in total elbow arthroplasty: a protocol.

BACKGROUND: New surgical approaches have been developed to optimise elbow function after total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Currently, there is no consensus on the best surgical approach. This study aims to investigate the functional outcomes, prosthetic component position and complication rates after a triceps-sparing and a triceps-detaching approach in TEA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre prospective comparative cohort study will be conducted. All patients with an indication for primary TEA will enrol in either the triceps-sparing or the triceps-detaching cohort. Primary outcome measure is elbow function, specified as fixed flexion deformity. Secondary outcome parameters are self-reported and objectively measured physical functioning, including triceps force, prosthetic component position in standard radiographs and complications. DISCUSSION: The successful completion of this study will clarify which surgical approach yields better functional outcomes, better prosthetic component position and lower complication rates in patients with a TEA. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Medical Ethics Review Board of University Medical Center Groningen reviewed the study and concluded that it is not clinical research with human subjects as meant in the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO), therefore WMO approval is not needed (METc2019/544). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR NL8488.

Comparison of techniques for correction of magnification of pelvic X-rays for hip surgery planning.

The aim of this study was to develop an accurate method for correction of magnification of pelvic x-rays to enhance accuracy of hip surgery planning. All investigated methods aim at estimating the anteroposterior location of the hip joint in supine position to correctly position a reference object for correction of magnification. An existing method-which is currently being used in clinical practice in our clinics-is based on estimating the position of the hip joint by palpation of the greater trochanter. It is only moderately accurate and difficult to execute reliably in clinical practice. To develop a new method, 99 patients who already had a hip implant in situ were included; this enabled determining the true location of the hip joint deducted from the magnification of the prosthesis. Physical examination was used to obtain predictor variables possibly associated with the height of the hip joint. This included a simple dynamic hip joint examination to estimate the position of the center of rotation. Prediction equations were then constructed using regression analysis. The performance of these prediction equations was compared with the performance of the existing protocol. The mean absolute error in predicting the height of the hip joint center using the old method was 20 mm (range -79 mm to +46 mm). This was 11 mm for the new method (-32 mm to +39 mm). The prediction equation is: height (mm) = 34 + 1/2 abdominal circumference (cm). The newly developed prediction equation is a superior method for predicting the height of the hip joint center for correction of magnification of pelvic x-rays. We recommend its implementation in the departments of radiology and orthopedic surgery.