Background

Long term success of any shoulder joint reconstruction procedure involving subscapularis attachment take down is dictated by the way one chooses to release and repair/reconstruct the subscapularis insertion. There are several methods that were reported in the literature without any preset guidelines which are easily reproducible.

To study the surgical outcome of multi-fragmentary, un-reconstructable radial head fractures managed acutely by a radial head prosthetic replacement, we retrospectively reviewed nineteen radial head fractures that were treated acutely with a radial head replacement, over a four-year period in three district general hospitals. Nineteen patients were clinically and radiologically assessed for this study. Functional assessment was performed with the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS).

No patient achieved full functional range of motion. The average range of flexion was 110° (range 80° to 120°), average extension deficit of 35° (range 30° to 45°), average pronation was 35° (range 0° to 65°), and average supination was 50° (range 30° to 85°). Complications included implant removal due to loosening (n=1), elbow stiffness (n=2), and instability (n=1), the latter case requiring a revision of the radial head prosthesis. Some degree of persistent discomfort was noticed in all cases. Five patients were tolerant of the final functional outcome. The average Mayo elbow score was 68/100 (range 55 to 80). One patient had an intra-operative fracture of the radial metaphysis during insertion of the implant.

Radial head fractures with fragment displacement should be reduced and fixed, when classified as Mason II type injuries. We describe a method of arthroscopic fixation which is performed as a day case trauma surgery, and compare the results with a more traditional fixation approach, in a case controlled manner.

We prospectively reviewed six Mason II radial head fractures which were treated using an arthroscopic reduction and fixation technique. The technique allows the fracture to be mobilised, reduced, and anatomically fixed using headless screws. All arthroscopic surgeries were conducted as day-cases. We retrospectively collected age and sex matched cases of open reduction and fixation of Mason II fractures using headless screws.

The arthroscopic cases required less analgesia, shorter hospital admissions, and had fewer complications. The averaged final range of follow-up, at 1 year post-operation was 15 to 140 degrees in the arthroscopic group and 35 to 120 degrees in the open group. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 95/100 and 90/100 respectively. No acute complications were noted in the arthroscopic group, and a radial nerve neuropraxia [n=1], superficial wound infection [n=1], and loose screw [n=1]. Two patients of the arthroscopic group required secondary motion gaining operations [n=1 arthroscopic anterior capsulectomy for a fixed flexion contracture of 35 degrees, and n=1 loss of supination requiring and arthroscopic radial scar excision]. Three patients in the open group required secondary surgery [n=2 arthroscopic anterior capsulectomy for fixed flexion deformities, and n=1 arthroscopic anterior capsulectomy for fixed flexion deformities, and n=1 arthroscopic radial head excision for prominent screws, loss of forearm rotation, and radiocapitellar arthrosis pain].

The technique of arthroscopic fixation of Mason II radial head fractures appears to be valid, with respect to anatomical restoration of the fracture, minimal hospital admission, reduction in analgesia requirement, fewer complications, and a decreased need for secondary surgery.

Aim: Description of and Prospective analysis of long-term outcomes of arthroscopic tennis elbow release.

Materials and Methods: 70 patients (72 elbows) with lateral epicondylitis, recalcitrant to a minimum of 6 months of supervised conservative management, underwent arthroscopic lateral epicondylar release. Each patient was clinically evaluated pre operatively and post-operatively and a quantitative assessment of the grip strength was collected on both sides with a dynamometer, in full elbow extension and in 90 degrees flexion. Functional assessment with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score and dynamometer grip strengths were collected for the first two years post-operation.

Results: Postoperative follow-up averaged 36 months (range 24–45months). The average MEPS increased from 57/100 to 89/100. 66 patients were graded as excellent outcomes, and 4 patients were noted to have fair outcomes. The latter 4 patients were assessed to have type 2 failure, with two subsequently requiring PIN releases, one requiring an osteochondroma excision from the distal laeral humerus, and one patient lost to follow-up. Dynamometr strength returned to above pre-operative level at an average of 3 months and were and average of 35% greater than the pre-operative level at final review. Complications consisted of synovial fistulae (n=8) all of which spontaneously resolved within one month, 2 portal superficial infections, 1 mild anterior capsular contracture, and no neurovascular injuries. Concurrent intra-articular pathology that was noted included radio-capitellar chondrosis (n=22), lateral trochlear chondrosis (n=20), anterolateral synovial plicae (n=17), synovitis (n=13), radial head instability (n=3), and synovial osteochondromatosis (n=1).

Conclusion: Arthroscopic tennis elbow release is a valid technique for the treatment of recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis.

Background Various methods of analgesia have been described for shoulder surgery, and we routinely used inter-scalene analgesia. We hypothesised that inter-scalene analgesia provided better pain control than intra-bursal analgesia.

Methods We prospectively collected data over a consecutive two year period, with the first year patients (n=65) all having inter-scalene and the second year patients (n=79) having intra-bursal catheters. The interscalene 16F catheters were placed with the patient anaesthetised and an electrical Touhy needle. The intra-bursal 16F catheters were placed at the end of the arthroscopic shoulder operation, under direct vision, exiting from the posterior portal. Pain parameters collected were pain scores, visual analogue scales, analgesia useage, and whether or not the patients were comfortably able to go home the same day as surgery.

Results Pain and visual analogue scores showed no statistical differences between the two groups. Analgesia useage was greater in the inter-scalene group than the intra-bursal group, but was not statistically different. 32/65 (49%) of patients with inter-scalene catheters and 75/79 (95%) of patients with intra-bursal catheters were able to comfortably go home on the day of surgery, 28/33 (84%) of the inter-scalene patients were hospitalised due to post-operative pain, and 5/33 (15%) due to anaesthetic or medical problems. 2/4 (50%) of hospitalised intra-bursal patients had post-anaesthetic complications, and 2/4(50%) had pre-operative medical problems.

Discussion Inter-scalene analgesia is widely published as the most-effective route for post-shoulder surgery pain control. Our data does not support this view, and intra-bursal analgesia administration was found to be more effective at returning a comfortable patient home on the day of surgery. Our practice now routinely utilises intra-bursal catheters for either bolus analgesia or continuous pumps.

Aims: Intra-bursal versus inter-scalene post-operative effective pain control for Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery

Methods: We prospectively collected data over a consecutive two year period, the first year patients (n=65) all having inter-scalene and the second year patients (n=79) having intra-bursal catheters. The interscalene 16F catheters were placed with the patient anaesthetised and an electrical Touhy needle. The intra-bursal 16F catheters were placed at the end of the arthroscopic shoulder operation, under direct vision, exiting from the posterior portal. Pain parameters collected were pain scores, visual analogue scales, analgesia usage, and whether or not the patients were comfortably able to go home the same day as surgery.

Results: Pain and visual analogue scores showed no statistical differences between the two groups. Analgesia usage was greater in the inter-scalene group than the intra-bursal group, but was not statistically different. 32/65 (49%) of patients with inter-scalene catheters and 75/79 (95%) of patients with intra-bursal catheters were able to comfortably go home on the day of surgery, 28/33 (84%) of the inter-scalene patients were hospitalised due to post-operative pain, and 5/33 (15%) due to anaesthetic or medical problems. 2/4 (50%) of hospitalised intra-bursal patients had post-anaesthetic complications, and 2/4(50%) had pre-operative medical problems.

Conclusions: Inter-scalene analgesia is widely published as the most effective for post-shoulder surgery pain control. Our data does not support this view, intra-bursal analgesia administration was found to be more effective at returning a comfortable patient home on the day of surgery. Our practice now routinely utilises intra-bursal catheters for either bolus analgesia or continuous pumps.

Purpose: To calculate a clinically relevant and intra-operatively accessible measure of olecranon length that could be reliably applied by the operating surgeon to optimise comminuted olecranon fracture fixation.

Materials: One hundred normal adult anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of the elbow were studied with respect to the proximal olecranon width (OW), greater sigmoid notch width (SW) on lateral views, trans-epicondylar distance (TED), and trochlear width distance (TWD) on AP views. The mean ratios of TWD/SW and TED/SW and an index OW X SW/TED along with their standard deviation and normal ranges were calculated.

Results: The average olecranon width was 24mm (range 21mm–28mm), sigmoid width was 25.8 mm (range 21mm–32 mm), trans-epicondylar distance was 58.53mm (range 49mm–74 mm), and the trochlear width distance was 27.1mm (range 22mm–32 mm). The average ratio of TWD: SW was 1.05 with a standard deviation of 0.09 and that of TED: SW was 2.27 with a standard deviation of 0.19. The average index worked out to be 10.58 with a standard deviation of 0.2.

Conclusions: Comminuted fractures of olecranon are a surgical challenge since it is often impossible to gauge the correct length of the olecranon process. There have been no objective data described to prevent shortening or lengthening of the greater sigmoid notch after reconstruction. Our data can be easily applied to the clinical situation, by taking intra-operative radiographs, and calculating the index as demonstrated above. This index will guide the surgeon to obtain a more reliable length of the olecranon, and devolve surgical guesswork from the final outcome.

Introduction and Aims: To evaluate the results of radial head replacement in the primary management of radial head fractures.

The recommended indications for prosthetic radial head replacement include unreconstructable Mason 3 fractures associated with ligament disruption or axial forearm instability.

Method: We retrospectively reviewed all radial head fractures that were treated with a radial head replacement, over a four-year period, in two district general hospitals. All seven patients were finally assessed specifically for this study, either in person or by telephone/ postal questionnaire, with final radiographs obtained for this study.

Results: Routine clinical follow-up was three months, following which the patient was discharged. No patient achieved full functional range of motion. The average range of flexion was 110 degrees (range 80 to 120 degrees), average extension deficit of 35 degrees (range 30 to 45 degrees), average pronation was 35 degrees (range 0 to 65 degrees), and average supination was 50 degrees (range 30 to 85 degrees). Three patients required implant removal due to loosening (1/3), elbow stiffness (2/3), and instability (1/3), the latter case requiring a revision of the radial head prosthesis. Persistent discomfort was noticed in all cases. Four patients were tolerant of the final functional outcome, although the average Mayo elbow score was 78/100 (range 55 to 80).

Conclusion: Radial head replacement in general orthopaedic, low volume, practice failed to achieve satisfactory results. Contrary to popular belief, it is a technically demanding operation, for which surveillance should be continued for a minimum of one year. Strict indications for prosthetic replacement should be followed and implant selection has yet to be proven to make a significant positive contribution

Purpose- To study the surgical outcome of multi-fragmentary, un-reconstructable radial head fractures managed acutely by a radial head prosthetic replacement.

Materials- We retrospectively reviewed fifteen radial head fractures that were treated acutely with a radial head replacement, over a four-year period, in three district general hospitals. Fifteen patients were clinically and radiologically assessed for this study. Functional assessment was performed with the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS).

Results- No patient achieved full functional range of motion. The average range of flexion was 110° (range 80° to 120°), average extension deficit of 35° (range 30° to 45°), average pronation was 35° (range 0° to 65°), and average supination was 50° (range 30° to 85°). Complications included implant removal due to loosening (n=1), elbow stiffness (n=2), and instability (n=1), the latter case requiring a revision of the radial head prosthesis. Some degree of persistent discomfort was noticed in all cases. Five patients were tolerant of the final functional outcome. The average Mayo elbow score was 68/100 (range 55 to 80). One patient had an intra-operative fracture of the radial metaphysis during insertion of the implant.

Conclusions- Radial head replacement in general orthopaedic, low volume, practice failed to achieve satisfactory results. Contrary to popular belief, it is a technically demanding operation, for which surveillance should be continued for a minimum of one year. Strict indications for prosthetic replacement should be followed and implant selection has yet to be proven to make a significant positive contribution.

Our review highlights the need for a stricter adherence to indications, surgery should not be under-estimated and devolved to trainees, and our understanding of the radial axis of the elbow and forearm remains relatively rudimentary.

Purpose: Distal humeral fractures are often difficult injuries to treat. We hypothesise that more complex distal humeral fractures have unacceptable functional outcomes due to multi-factorial reasons.

Methods: 42 patients with AO/ASIF type B and C fractures of the distal humerus who were treated with open reduction and internal fixation over a six year period were included in the study. All patients were from a single district general hospital. 37 (88%) were clinically, radiologically, and functionally assessed for this study, with the remainder either lost to follow-up or expired.

Results: There were 21 type B and 16 type C fractures, all managed by open reduction and internal fixation. Various fixation techniques were utilised. These were performed by consultant surgeons in 14 cases and by surgeons in training in 23 cases. Average follow up was 38 months (range 22–54 months). The arc of elbow motion was 94 degrees (range 58–130), with an average extension deficit of 28 degrees (range 20–55) and an average flexion deficit of 32 degrees (range 15–45). The average arc of forearm rotation was 136 degrees (range 45–140), with an average supination of 68 (range 35–85) and an average pronation of 72 (range 45–90). The complications (n=20/37) included superficial skin infection (n=4), ulnar nerve neurapraxia (n=3), non-union of the humerus fracture (n=2), non-union of olecranon osteotomy site (n=1), intra-articular screw placement (n=1), loosened plate (n=1), loose/backed out screw (n=2), fixed flexion deformity (n=4) and mild elbow instability (n=2). Second surgery was performed in 24% (n=9/37), revision of metal work (n=2), bone grafting (n=2), anterior capsulectomy (n=4), and removal of screw (n=1).

Conclusions: Fractures of the distal humerus are often more complex than appreciated, and challenging to treat, with respect to fracture union and functional outcome. A generalist practice appears adequate for achieving bony union, but inadequate for obtaining low complication rates and functional outcomes. Our data suggest that such injuries may constitute a fracture group requiring the acute intervention by centres that have specific sub-specialisation and adequate rehabilitation facilities

Aim: Complex radial head fractures are often underestimated in their complexity with consequent poor outcomes.

Method: We retrospectively reviewed thirty-two Mason 2 and 3 radial head fractures treated surgically with open reduction and internal fixation by generalist orthopaedic surgeons and trainees over a four-year period. They were clinically, radiologically and functionally assessed for this study. Functional assessment was done using the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS).

Results: There were fourteen Mason 2 and eighteen Mason 3 radial head fractures. The Mason 2 were fixed by K-wires (n=2), Herbert TM screws (n=5), Acutrack TM screws (n=3), and T-plates (n = 4). The Mason 3 were fixed by Herbert TM screws (n=6), Acutrack TM screws (n=4) and T plates.

Average follow up was 47 months (range 22–65 months). The arc of elbow motion was 1040 (range 680_1400), with an average extension deficit of 230 (range 00–500) and an average flexion deficit of 200 (range 100–400). The average arc of forearm rotation was 1300 (range 00–1400), with an average supination of 660 (range 00–750), and an average pronation of 680 (range 00–800 ). The complications (N=17/32) included superficial skin infection (n=2), transient posterior interosseous nerve palsy (n=4), broken T -plate (n=1), intra-articular placement of a screw (n=1), loose and backed out screw (n=1), non-, union of radial head (n=2). Fixed flexion deformity if elbow (n=4) and mild elbow in stability (n=2). Second surgery was preformed in 18.7 % (n=6/32)(radial head replacement n=1, anterior capsulectomy n=4 and removal of screw n=1).

Conclusion: Radial head trauma surgery is an underestimated source of poor clinical outcomes. Complex radial head fractures should be clinically and radiologically evaluated with the knowledge that they are difficult to accurately and comprehensively assess. The treatment of such fractures may warrant management by a sub-specialist, although this latter conclusion has not been corroborated to date.

Background: Heterotopic ossification about the elbow joint can lead to considerable functional disability, including the loss of forearm rotation. Many procedures have been described for the treatment of proximal radio-ulnar synostoses. Varying degrees of success have been achieved, regarding the improvement of the flexion arc, with fewer successful reports concerning the restoration of forearm rotation. The success correlates to the extent of the process, soft-tissue scarring, and anatomical distortion. A new and simple technique to address the non-resectable processes is reported.

Methods: Seven patients were treated by a proximal radial resection procedure, distal to the synostosis, and followed for an average of 80 months (range 24 to 144 months).

Results: The forearm rotation improved from an average fixed pronation of 5_ to an arc of 101_ (range 40_ to 175_). Functional scores improved from an average pre-operative score of 58 (range 50 to 75) to 81 (range 60 to 100) at final review. Complications encountered included one case in which the resection site partially re-ankylosed, resulting in a poor arc of rotation, and one case of a sensory ulnar nerve neurapraxia.

Conclusions: Proximal radial shaft transection provides a safe and reliable method of improving forearm rotation by an average of 100_ and functional scores by an average of 40%. A single technical factor that seems to positively influence this result is the application bone wax at the transection site, although other factors are discussed. The features of proximal radio-ulnar synostoses that are considered to be indications for this simple new procedure are 1) lesions too extensive to allow a safe and discrete resection, 2) involvement of the articular surface, and 3) the presence of anatomical deformation.