REVISION OF TOTAL ELBOW ARTHROPLASTY BY EXCHANGE CEMENTATION

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to report our experience with revision of total elbow arthroplasty by exchange cementation. Between 1982 and 2004 at our institution, forty six elbows were treated with exchange cementation of a total elbow arthroplasty into the existing cement mantle or debrided bone interface, without the use of an osteotomy, bone graft or prosthetic augmentation. Indications for the procedure were aseptic loosening (17), second stage after septic loosening (14), instability (7), prosthetic fracture (4), periprosthetic fracture (2), failed hemiarthroplasty (1) and ulnar component wear (1). Both components were exchanged in 18 elbows, the humerus alone in 25 and the ulna in 3. Mean follow up was 90.5 months (10 to 266 months);18 patients had died with the prosthesis in situ. Complications were noted in 22 elbows; periprosthetic fracture of ulna (6) and humerus (2), humeral component fracture (1), aseptic loosening (4), non-union (1), heterotrophic ossification (2), soft tissue contracture (2) and soft tissue failure (2), delayed wound healing (1) and bushing failure (1). Reoperation was required in 10 elbows for revision of both components (2), ulna (3), humerus (1), bushing revision (2), soft tissue debridement (1) and soft tissue repair (1). There were no septic recurrences in previously infected elbows; however the reoperation rate in this group was 29% versus 19% after re-cementation for other causes. Revision of total elbow arthroplasty by exchange cementation is a reasonable treatment for those elbows with adequate bone stock for secure prosthetic fixation; however careful consideration should be given to augmentation of the ulna due to the high rate of periprosthetic fracture in this series. Re-cementation following débridement for infection is effective despite having a higher rate of revision operation compared to re-cementation in the aseptic elbow.