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.

Distal humerus fracture in older patients: ORIF vs. total elbow arthroplasty.

Distal humerus fractures are a contemporary problem because the life expectancy, autonomy and functional demands of older patients continue to grow. This is combined with surgical advances in bone reconstruction, especially in fragile patients. A distal humerus fracture in an older adult is a serious injury with an uncertain prognosis. In fact, damage to the elbow joint in this complex anatomical area overwhelmed by low-quality bone occurs in patients who often have unfavorable characteristics (fragile skin, low physiological reserves, organ failure) combined with pharmaceutical treatments that can be iatrogenic. The treatment indication must not be based solely on the conventional radiographs used for classification purposes; the fracture and bone quality must be analyzed in three dimensions. Also, the surgeon must understand the patient's needs, worries and risks fully to decide between conservative treatment and anatomical locking plate fixation or elbow arthroplasty (hemi or total). In the end, the chosen treatment must allow at least 100̊ and preferably 120̊ of flexion-extension at the elbow. In this age range, the choice between arthroplasty and plate fixation is definitive; the surgical approach must make it possible to carry out either option, with arthroplasty implants available in case the trochlear fracture cannot be plated. The aim of this lecture is to provide a fresh perspective on the anatomy of the distal humerus, its fracture and the best surgical approaches, discuss how to decide on the indication, outline the safest and most reliable ways to reconstruct and stabilize the elbow, and lastly, summarize the expected outcomes and potential complications of each treatment option. Level of evidence: V; expert opinion.

Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty compared to total elbow replacement for distal humeral fractures: a registry analysis of 906 procedures.

BACKGROUND: Total elbow replacement (TER) is an accepted treatment for complex intra-articular distal humerus fractures in elderly patients. Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty (HA) is also a potential surgical option for unreconstructable fractures and avoids the concerns regarding mechanical wear and functional restrictions associated with TER. In the current literature, there are limited data available to compare the revision rates of HA and TER for the treatment of fracture. We used data from a large national arthroplasty registry to compare the outcome of HA and TER undertaken for fracture/dislocation and to assess the impact of demographics and implant choice on revision rates. METHODS: Data obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry from May 2, 2005, to December 31, 2021, included all procedures for primary elbow replacement with primary diagnosis of fracture or dislocation. The analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HRs) from Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: There were 293 primary HA and 631 primary TER procedures included. The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) rate at 9 years was 9.7% for HA (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0, 15.7), and 11.9% (95% CI 8.5, 16.6) for TER. When adjusted for age and gender, there was a significantly higher risk of revision after 3 months for TER compared to HA (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.22, 5.03, P = .012). There was no difference in the rate of revision for patients aged <55 years or ≥75 years when HA and TER procedures were compared. In primary TER procedures, loosening was the most common cause of revision (3.6% of primary TER procedures), and the most common type of revision in primary TER involved revision of the humeral component only (2.6% of TER procedures). TER has a higher rate of first revision for loosening compared to HA (HR 4.21, 95% CI 1.29, 13.73; P = .017). In HA procedures, instability (1.7%) was the most common cause for revision. The addition of an ulna component was the most common type of revision (2.4% of all HA procedures). CONCLUSION: For the treatment of distal humerus fractures, HA had a lower revision rate than TER after 3 months when adjusted for age and gender. Age <55 or ≥75 years was not a risk factor for revision when HA was compared to TER. Loosening leading to revision is more prevalent in TER and increases with time. In HA, the most common type of revision involved addition of an ulna component with preservation of the humeral component.

Failure of the linkage mechanism in a semi-constrained total elbow arthroplasty is a rare and unpredictable event: a review of seven cases.

PURPOSE: Linked component of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) consisted of bushing and locking pins. Failure of linked components is a rare complication of TEA. This study aims to investigate the mechanism and consequence of failure of the linkage mechanism in TEA surgeries. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2021, five patients received revision operation due to linked component failure. Besides, two patients underwent primary operation at another institute were also analyzed due to failure of the linkage mechanism. RESULTS: All seven patients underwent primary TEA and mean age for primary TEA was 48 (range, 27-62). Two patients had TEA for post-traumatic arthritis, three patients for rheumatoid arthritis, and two patients for comminuted distal humerus fracture. The average time between primary TEA and revision TEA for linked component failure was 13.6 years. Three bushing wear and four locking pin dissociation were diagnosed according to pre-operative radiography. Elbow pain and swelling are the most common clinical symptoms. Severe osteolysis, periprosthetic fracture, and stem loosening were noted in three bushing wear cases. In four dissociation of locking pin cases, breakage of male locking pin phalanges was demonstrated in two patients. For revision procedures, both the locking pins and bushings were replaced. No patients in the study required additional surgery after the revision operation for linked component failure. CONCLUSION: Osteolysis, component loosening, periprosthetic fracture may be expected after linked component failure. Patients should be regularly followed up from short-term to long-term with radiography. Early diagnosis and intervention with linked component exchange can prevent extensive revision surgery.

Valgus instability and related factors beyond 2 years following unlinked total elbow arthroplasty.

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA), categorized into linked and unlinked types, is a commonly reported treatment for rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow. Although unlinked TEA preserves bone, it may result in instability. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of unlinked TEA in rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow beyond 2 years and to identify factors correlating with postoperative valgus instability of unlinked TEA. METHODS: This study included patients who underwent TEA for rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow at our department between August 2009 and January 2017, with a follow-up period exceeding 2 years. Elbow joint range of motion (ROM) and clinical scores were evaluated preoperatively and at the final follow-up. Factors contributing to valgus instability, such as the Larsen grade, sex, age, side, preoperative ROM, postoperative ROM, implant placement, preoperative carrying angle, and the use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), were also assessed. RESULTS: This study encompassed 26 elbows from 23 patients, with a mean patient age at surgery of 64.8 years and a mean follow-up duration of 92.4 months. Significant improvements were observed in the ROM (extension: from -31° preoperatively to -21° postoperatively [P = .02], flexion: from 116° to137° [P < .001]), Japanese Orthopaedic Association-Japan Elbow Society Elbow Function Score (from 45.9 to 86.3 points [P < .001]), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (from 43.6 to 91.7 points [P < .001]). At the last follow-up, 2 elbows exhibited radiolucent lines around the humeral stem, whereas 7 had valgus instability. Factors correlated with valgus instability included total arc at the final follow-up, preoperative carrying angle, and the use of bDMARDs. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Unlinked TEA demonstrated favorable midterm outcomes for rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow, albeit with occasional valgus instability. Surgeons should consider preoperative carrying angle and bDMARD use, and exercise caution regarding intraoperative extensions.

Long-term outcomes of Kudo type-5 unlinked surface-replacing total elbow arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis: a 15-year average follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has been used for various conditions including rheumatoid arthritis (RA). While the Kudo TEA has been associated with favorable short-term outcomes, there is limited information on the longer term outcomes of this device. The aim of this study was to investigate the average 15-year outcome of Kudo type-5 TEA in patients with RA. METHODS: For this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed 29 elbows in 28 patients (Larsen grade III, n = 8; IV, n = 19; V, n = 2) with RA who underwent Kudo type-5 TEA between 1999 and 2010. The patients were followed up for a mean of 15 (range: 10-21) years. We investigated the survival with setting revision/removal as the endpoints. The risk factors for revision/loosening were assessed. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in elbow flexion after Kudo TEA. Preoperative and postoperative Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved significantly from 60.3 to 94.7. Complications included intraoperative medial humeral epicondyle fracture (n = 2), postoperative dislocations (n = 4), deep infections (n = 1), and persistent ulnar nerve neuropathy (n = 1). Aseptic loosening was observed in 7 elbows (24.1%; humerus, n = 3; ulna, n = 3; both sides, n = 1). The causes of the 5 revisions were postoperative dislocation (n = 1), deep infection (n = 1), aseptic loosening of the humerus (n = 2), and aseptic loosening of the ulna (n = 1). All 5 elbows underwent revision of the ulnar component (n = 2) or the linked TEA (n = 3). The survival rate was 81% at 15 years after surgery with setting revision/removal as the endpoints. A deviation of ulnar component insertion angle of over 5° in any plane was associated with more revision compared to those with accurately placed implants. CONCLUSION: The Kudo type-5 elbow showed good results for up to 15 years of follow-up. However, excessive deviation of insertion angle of the ulnar component (over 5°) was associated with more revision. Due to the small sample size, robust statistical analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications or revision could not be performed, and further research is warranted to resolve this limitation.

Elbow joint loads during simulated activities of daily living: implications for formulating recommendations after total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Overloading of the elbow joint prosthesis following total elbow arthroplasty can lead to implant failure. Joint moments during daily activities are not well contextualized for a prosthesis's failure limits, and the effect of the current postoperative instruction on elbow joint loading is unclear. This study investigates the difference in elbow joint moments between simulated daily tasks and between flexion-extension, pronation-supination, and varus-valgus movement directions. Additionally, the effect of the current postoperative instruction on elbow joint load is examined. METHODS: Nine healthy participants (age 45.8 ± 17 years, 3 males) performed 8 tasks; driving a car, opening a door, rising from a chair, lifting, sliding, combing hair, drinking, emptying cup, without and with the instruction "not lifting more than 1 kg." Upper limb kinematics and hand contact forces were measured. Elbow joint angles and net moments were analyzed using inverse dynamic analysis, where the net moments are estimated from movement data and external forces. RESULTS: Peak elbow joint moments differed significantly between tasks (P < .01) and movement directions (P < .01). The most and least demanding tasks were, rising from a chair (13.4 Nm extension, 5.0 Nm supination, and 15.2 Nm valgus) and sliding (4.3 Nm flexion, 1.7 Nm supination, and 2.6 Nm varus). Net moments were significantly reduced after instruction only in the chair task (P < .01). CONCLUSION: This study analyzed elbow joint moments in different directions during daily tasks. The outcomes question whether postoperative instruction can lead to decreasing elbow loads. Future research might focus on reducing elbow loads in the flexion-extension and varus-valgus directions.

Prognostic factors associated with failure of total elbow replacement: a protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Total elbow replacement (TER) has higher failure rates requiring revision surgery compared with the replacement of other joints. Understanding the factors associated with failure is essential for informed decision-making between patients and clinicians, and for reducing the failure rate. This review aims to identify, describe and appraise the literature examining prognostic factors for failure of TER. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will be conducted and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. Electronic literature searches will be conducted using Medline, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane. The search strategy will be broad, including a combination of subject headings (MESH) and free text search. This search will be supplemented with a screening of reference lists of the included studies and relevant reviews. Two independent reviewers will screen all search results in two stages (title and abstract, and full text) based on the Population, Index prognostic factor, Comparator prognostic factor, Outcome, Time and Setting criteria. The types of evidence included will be randomised trials, non-randomised trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, registry studies and case-control studies. If the literature lacks enough studies, then case series with 50 or more TERs will be considered for inclusion. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment for included studies will be performed by two independent reviewers using the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies for Prognostic Factors and Quality In Prognostic Studies tools.Meta-analyses of prognostic estimates for each factor will be undertaken for studies that are deemed to be sufficiently robust and comparable. Several challenges are likely to arise due to heterogeneity between studies, therefore, subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to account for the differences between studies. Heterogeneity will be assessed using Q and I2 statistics. If I2>40% then pooled estimates will not be reported. When quantitative synthesis is not possible, a narrative synthesis will be undertaken. The quality of the evidence for each prognostic factor will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023384756.

Revision Arthroplasty in the Challenging Elbow.

Compared with hip and knee arthroplasty, total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has a higher complication rate and lower survivorship. Modern TEA implants most commonly require revision due to implant loosening, infection, and periprosthetic fracture. Concerns with revision TEA include handling of the soft tissues and possible necessity of flap coverage, triceps management, preservation of bone stock, and management of concurrent infection or fracture. In this review, we will discuss preoperative evaluation of the failed elbow arthroplasty, surgical approaches, techniques for revision, outcomes, and complications following revision total elbow arthroplasty.

[Clinical results of total elbow arthroplasty after treatment failure for Monteggia-like injuries]. / Klinische Ergebnisse der Ellenbogentotalendoprothetik nach Therapieversagen bei Monteggia-like-Verletzungen.

BACKGROUND: Monteggia-like fractures (MLF) are complex injuries with high complication rates and frequently unsatisfying clinical results. Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) represents the only option to salvage the functional requirements in some patients with pronounced posttraumatic arthropathy. This case series provides clinical results of TEA following failed treatment of MLF. METHODS: All patients who underwent TEA from 2017 to 2022 for failed treatment of MLF were retrospectively included in this study. Complications and revisions before and after TEA and functional results, measured by the Broberg/Morrey score, were evaluated. RESULTS: In this study 9 patients with a mean age of 68 (±7; 54-79) years were included. The mean follow-up was 12 (±9; 2-27) months. The main reasons leading to posttraumatic arthropathy were chronic infections (44.4%), bony instability due to coronoid deficiency (33.3%) or a combined coronoid and radial head deficiency (22.2%) and non-union of the proximal ulna with radial head necrosis (11.1%). The mean number of surgical revisions between primary fixation and TEA was 2.7 (±1.8; 0-6). The revision rate following TEA was 44%. The mean Broberg/Morrey score at the time of the latest follow-up was 83 (±10; 71-97) points. CONCLUSION: Chronic infection and coronoid deficiency are the main reasons for posttraumatic arthropathy after MLF leading to TEA. While the overall clinical results are satisfying, the indications should be reserved for selected cases due to high revision rates.

Trends in total elbow arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy based on payer status.

INTRODUCTION: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) is often used to manage advanced arthropathies of the elbow caused by inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Recent literature has shown that use of TEA is decreasing in patients with RA, part of which can be attributed to early medical management involving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). However, there is a significant economic barrier to accessing DMARD therapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of TEA between patients with and without DMARD therapy from 2010 to 2020. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using a national insurance claim database to investigate the trends of patients with RA undergoing TEA from 2010-2020. Patients who underwent TEA and had a diagnosis of RA were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes between 2010 and 2020. These patients were then stratified into 2 cohorts: those with DMARD prescription claims and those without. A linear regression, compound annual growth rate (CAGR) analysis, and χ2 analysis were conducted to compare trends and demographic variables, including insurance type, between cohorts. Additionally, a multivariable logistic regression was subsequently performed to observe odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2020, there has been no significant change in the incidence of TEA in RA patients without DMARD prescriptions, whereas there has been a statistically significantly decreasing rate of TEA observed in RA patients with DMARD prescription claims. The analysis showed that there was a CAGR of -4%. For patients with a diagnosis of RA and DMARD prescription claims, the highest incidence of undergoing TEA was seen in the age group of 60-69 years, whereas patients with a diagnosis of RA and no DMARD prescription claims had the highest incidence of undergoing TEA in the age group of 70-79 years. CONCLUSION: The incidence of patients undergoing TEA with a diagnosis of RA and DMARD prescription claims has shown a statistically significant decrease from 2010 to 2020, whereas no significant difference was observed for patients without DMARD prescription claims. There were no statistically significant differences in the insurance plans between cohorts.

Comparison of baseline demographics and risk factors for aseptic loosening following primary total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Aseptic loosening is a feared complication following total elbow arthroplasty (TEA); however, literature regarding factors that may contribute to this complication is limited. The aims of this investigation were to: (1) compare baseline demographics of patients who developed aseptic loosening following primary TEA; and (2) identify patient-specific risk factors for the development of loosening. METHODS: Retrospective analysis using a nationwide claims database was performed to identify patients who underwent primary TEA and developed aseptic loosening within 2 years (study n = 307, control n = 10,741). Multivariate regression analysis generated odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (95% CI), and p-value of risk factors. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Patients who developed aseptic loosening had significant differences in numerous demographics, including age (p = 0.0001), sex (p = 0.0251), and various comorbid conditions such as obesity (15.96% vs. 8.36%, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, the risk factors most associated with aseptic loosening were obesity (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.18-2.28, p = 0.002), male sex (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.13-2.00, p = 0.004), and concomitant opioid use disorder (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.14-2.15, p = 0.004). DISCUSSION: This study is the first to identify demographics and patient-related risk factors associated with aseptic loosening following primary TEA. This evidence could be applied to the clinical setting in order to educate at-risk patients of this potential complication as well as inform their post-operative clinical management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III: Prognostic.

Postoperative outcomes of total elbow replacement in haemophilic elbow arthropathy: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Total elbow replacement (TER) is a surgical treatment option for haemophilic elbow arthropathy. AIM: To review the outcomes of TER in haemophilic elbow arthropathy. The primary outcome measures were perioperative blood loss, postoperative complications, revision rates and length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were elbow range of motion (ROM), functional outcome scores and the visual analogue pain scale (VAS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane register were searched conforming to the PRISMA guidelines. Only studies with a minimum postoperative follow-up of 1 year were included. Quality appraisal was performed utilizing the MINORS criteria. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-eight articles were identified. Following article screening, only seven studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 51 TERs in 38 patients were performed, with the Coonrad-Morrey prosthesis utilized in 51% of cases. The pooled postoperative complication and revision rates were 49% and 29%, respectively. Surgery-related postoperative mortality was 3.9%. The mean preoperative Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS) was 43 ± 20 whereas the mean postoperative MEPS was 89 ± 6. Mean preoperative VAS was 7.2 ± 1.9 while the mean postoperative VAS was 2.0 ± 1.4. Mean preoperative and postoperative elbow flexion arcs were 54 ± 15 and 91 ± 10 degrees, respectively. Mean preoperative and postoperative forearm rotation arcs were 86 ± 40 and 135 ± 19 degrees, respectively. CONCLUSION: TER for haemophilic elbow arthropathy provides good to excellent improvements in pain and elbow ROM postoperatively. However, the overall complication and revision rates are relatively high, when compared to TER performed for other indications.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Total Elbow Arthroplasty Using a Semi-constrained Prosthesis with a Triceps-preserving Approach over a Minimum Follow-up Period of 4 Years.

OBJECTIVE: Complications related to triceps after total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) have become a major surgical concern. The triceps-preserving approach has the advantage of not disturbing the insertion of triceps but is disadvantaged by the reduced exposure of the elbow joint. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and radiological outcomes of TEA with a triceps-preserving approach and to compare the outcomes of TEA to treat arthropathy with that of TEA to treat acute distal humerus fracture. METHODS: From January 2010 to December 2018, 23 patients undergoing primary TEAs were retrospectively reviewed with a mean follow-up time of 92.6 months (range, 52-136 months). Each TEA was performed using the triceps-preserving approach with a semi-constrained Coonrad-Morrey prosthesis. Patient demographics, range of motion (ROM), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and triceps strength (Medical Research Council [MRC] scale) were compared before and after surgery. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, radiographic outcome, and complications were evaluated at follow-up. RESULTS: In total, seven males and 16 females were included in this study, with a mean age of 66.1 years (range:46-85 years). By the last follow-up, pain had been significantly relieved in all patients. The average MEPS in the arthropathy group and fracture group were 90.8 ± 10.3 points (range: 68-98 points) and 91.7 ± 0.4 (range: 76-100 points), respectively. The average DASH of the arthropathy group and fracture group was 37.3 ± 18.8 points (range: 18-52 points) and 38.4 ± 20.1 (range: 16-60 points). At the last follow-up after surgery, the mean flexion arcs in the arthropathy group and fracture group were 100.4° ± 24.1° and 97.8° ± 28.1°, respectively. The mean pro-supination arcs in the arthropathy group and fracture group were 142.4° ± 15.2° and 139.2° ± 17.5°, respectively. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two groups (P ≥ 0.05). Triceps strength was normal (MRC grade V) in 15 elbows and good in eight elbows. None of the cases experienced weakness of the triceps strength, infection, periprosthetic fractures, or prosthesis breakage. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical and radiographical outcomes of TEA with the triceps-preserving approach were satisfactory in patients with distal humerus fracture, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

What factors can reduce the need for repeated revision for humeral loosening in revision total elbow arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the re-revision rate in a cohort of patients who underwent revision total elbow arthroplasty (rTEA) for humeral loosening (HL) and identify factors contributing to re-revision. We hypothesized that proportional increases in the stem and flange lengths would stabilize the bone-implant interface significantly more than a disproportional increase in stem or flange length alone. Additionally, we hypothesized that the indication for the index arthroplasty would impact the need for repeated revision for HL. The secondary objective was to describe the functional outcomes, complications, and presence of radiographic loosening after rTEA. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 181 rTEAs performed from 2000-2021. We included 40 rTEAs for HL performed on 40 elbows that either required a subsequent revision for HL (10 rTEAs) or had a minimum of 2 years of clinical or radiographic follow-up. One hundred thirty-one cases were excluded. Patients were grouped based on stem and flange length to determine the re-revision rate. Patients were divided based on re-revision status into the single-revision group and the re-revision group. The stem-to-flange length (S/F) ratio was calculated for each surgical procedure. The mean length of clinical and radiographic follow-up was 71 months (range, 18-221 months and 3-221 months, respectively). RESULTS: Rheumatoid arthritis was statistically significant in predicting re-revision total elbow arthroplasty for HL (P = .024). The overall re-revision rate for HL was 25% at an average of 4.2 years (range, 1-19 years) from the revision procedure. There was a significant increase in stem and flange lengths from the index procedure to revision, on average by 70 ± 47 mm (P < .001) and 28 ± 39 mm (P < .001), respectively. In the cases of re-revision (n = 10), 4 patients underwent an excisional procedure; in the remaining 6 cases, the size of the re-revision implant increased on average by 37 ± 40 mm for the stem and 73 ± 70 mm for the flange (P = .075 and P = .046, respectively). Furthermore, the average flange in these 6 cases was 7 times shorter than the average stem (S/F ratio, 6.7 ± 2.2). This ratio was significantly different from that in cases that were not re-revised (P = .03; S/F ratio, 4.2 ± 2). Mean range of moion was 16° (range, 0°-90°; standard deviation, 20°) extension to 119° (range, 0°-160°; standard deviation, 39°) flexion at final follow-up. Complications included ulnar neuropathy (38%), radial neuropathy (10%), infection (14%), ulnar loosening (14%), and fracture (14%). None of the elbows were considered radiographically loose at final follow-up. CONCLUSION: We show that a primary diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis and a humeral stem with a relatively short flange relative to the stem length significantly contribute to re-revision of total elbow arthroplasty. The use of an implant where the flange can be extended beyond one-fourth of the stem length may increase implant longevity.

Intraoperative modification of total elbow arthroplasty implants.

BACKGROUND: Modification of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) implants may be necessary in selected patients with substantial anatomic bone deformity or those undergoing revision surgery. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence and consequences of implant modifications during TEA at our institution. We hypothesized that TEA implant modification would be more common in revisions than in primary replacements, and that it would not be associated with worse clinical outcomes or increased rates of radiographic or surgical complications directly related to the implant modification. METHODS: Elbows that had undergone TEA by any of 3 surgeons at our institution with use of intraoperative implant modification between January 1992 and October 2019 were retrospectively reviewed for the type of modification and complications. Complications were classified as definitely related, probably related, possibly related, or nonrelated to the implant's modification according to the consensus review by the 3 senior surgeons. A survey was sent out to surgeons outside of our institution to investigate whether intraoperative modification to TEA implants is a common clinical practice. RESULTS: A total of 106 implant components were modified during 94 of 731 TEA procedures (13%) in 84 of 560 patients. Implant modifications were performed in 60 of 285 revision cases (21%) compared with 34 of 446 (8%) primary cases (P < .0001). These included shortening the stem in 40 (44%), bending the stem in 16 (15%), notching the stem in 16 (15%), tapering the stem in 9 (9%), and a combination of 2 or more of these modifications in 19 implants (17%). Among the 55 index surgeries available for complication analysis, 40 complications occurred in 28 index surgeries (11 primary and 17 revisions; 25 patients), making the overall complication rate 51%. Of these 40 complications, 23 were considered independent of any implant modification. Of the remaining 17 complications, 9 were considered nonrelated to the implant modification, 6 were possibly related, and 2 were probably related to the implant modification. Therefore, the complication rate possibly related or probably related to implant modification was 15% (8 of 55). No complication was classified as definitely related to the implant modification. No implant breakage or malfunction occurred after any modification. A total of 442 survey responses were received representing 29 countries, of which 144 surgeons (39%) performed modification to implants during TEA procedures. DISCUSSION: This study confirmed our hypothesis that modification of TEA implants is not uncommon at our institution, particularly in revision arthroplasty. Surgeons should keep in mind that complications possibly related or probably related to implant modification were at minimum 15% and could have been as high as 30% if the patients lost to follow-up had all had complications. Implant modification may be necessary in some cases but should be exercised with thoughtful consideration and caution.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between the olecranon osteotomy approach and the Bryan-Morrey approach for total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to investigate the clinical efficacy of the olecranon osteotomy approach and the Bryan-Morrey approach in total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). METHODS: In this retrospective study, 49 patients with elbow disease were treated with TEA. A total of 22 patients with TEA by olecranon osteotomy approach were designated as group A, and 27 patients with TEA by Bryan-Morrey approach were designated as group B. There were 22 males and 27 females, aged 32-82 years with a mean age of 62 years. There were 44 cases of unilateral elbow joint, including 27 cases on the left elbow and 17 cases on the right elbow, and 5 cases of the bilateral elbow joint. There were 6 cases of osteoarthritis (7 elbows), 18 cases of rheumatoid arthritis (22 elbows), 14 cases of traumatic arthritis (14 elbows), 7 cases of distal humeral fractures (7 elbows), and 4 cases of elbow tuberculosis (4 elbows). For each group, we recorded the operative time, intraoperative bleeding, elbow flexion, extension, pronation, supination, postoperative complication rates, and Mayo Elbow Performance Score after surgery. RESULTS: Operative time and intraoperative bleeding were less in group A than in group B (53-120 min [70 (62.5, 78) min] vs. 64-105 min [77 (73, 87) min], and 10-200 ml [50 (20, 90) ml] vs. 5-250 ml [100 (50, 150) ml], P < .028). The elbow flexion, pronation activity, and Mayo Elbow Performance Score were higher in group A than in group B, [(121 ± 12)° vs. (112 ± 10)°, 85 (85,85)° vs. 80 (77,85)°, and (94 ± 3) points vs. (91 ± 4) points, P < .036], while elbow extension and supination activity and complication rates were not statistically significant in either group. CONCLUSION: Compared to Bryan-Morrey approach, the olecranon osteotomy approach to TEA provides adequate visualization, saves operative time and reduces bleeding, provides better flexion activity, effectively improves elbow function, and achieves satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Comparison of total elbow arthroplasty complications between various surgical indications at 90-day and 1-year follow-up in 1600 elbows.

BACKGROUND: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) was traditionally a mainstay of treatment for patients with severe inflammatory arthritis. Recently, the indications for TEA have expanded, and TEA has grown into a versatile procedure that can be used to treat several pathologies of the elbow. The objective of this study was to compare complication rates between TEAs performed for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), fracture (FX), or osteoarthritis (degenerative joint disease [DJD]). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the MUExtr data set of the PearlDiver national database was performed. International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes were used to identify patients who underwent TEA from 2010-2020 and to separate them into RA, FX, and DJD cohorts. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and hospital data were identified and compared using analysis of variance. Systemic complications at 90 days and surgical complications at both 90 days and 1 year were compared using multivariable logistic regression. Surgical complications included wound dehiscence, hematoma, deep infection, periprosthetic FX, stiffness, instability, triceps injury, nerve injury, and need for revision. RESULTS: We identified 1600 patients (DJD, 38.9%; FX, 48.8%; and RA, 12.3%). The majority of patients in all 3 cohorts were female patients, with the RA group having a significantly higher percentage of female patients than the FX and DJD groups (87.3% vs. 81.4% and 76.9%, respectively; P = .003). No significant differences in systemic complications and surgical complications were noted between all 3 groups at 90 days postoperatively. After controlling for patient factors, FX patients were more likely to have elbow stiffness (odds ratio, 1.53; P = .006) and less likely to have a triceps injury (odds ratio, 0.26; P < .001) at 1 year than were RA or DJD patients. CONCLUSION: The indications for TEA have expanded over the past 10 years, with nearly half of all cases being performed for FX. At 1 year postoperatively, TEAs performed for FX have a significantly lower rate of triceps injury and higher rate of elbow stiffness than TEAs performed for other indications. This finding is important to consider when preoperatively planning, as well as when discussing expected outcomes with patients prior to surgery, especially with the expanded incidence of TEA for FX being performed over the past decade.