Purpose: We reviewed retrospectively 22 patients with recent and old fractures of the radial head treated with the GUEPAR radial head prosthesis which has a mobile metal cup derived from the GUEPAR gliding total elbow prosthesis.

Material and methods: Among the 22 patients, 13 underwent surgery in an emergency setting and four underwent a secondary procedure. Mean age was 41 years and follow-up was 18 months. The Mayo Clinic score was noted. Fractures were total or disengaged cervical fractures and in 72% of the elbows dislocation was associated. The coronoid process was fixed in one elbow, the olecranon in one and the medial ligaments were repaired in five. The status of the humeral condyle was examined in detail before insertion of the prosthesis. We also were particularly attentive concerning the height position of the prosthesis.

Results: There were no complications. Outcome was good among the patients undergoing an emergency procedure with a mean Mayo Clinic score of 83/100, mean force 75%, good motion, particularly 77° pronation, and 79° supination, with good stability and absence of wrist problems. The patients who underwent a secondary procedure had less satisfactory results, particularly for motion (44° pronation and 54° supination). The distal radioulnar index was not perfectly restored. Finally four patients had arthrolysis for limited flexion/extension, three of them in the secondary group.

Discussion: Resection of the radial head is an alternative for complex fractures that has its inconveniences. The first is that it destabilises the elbow in valgus position in the event of injury to the medial ligaments and the second is the ascension of the radius in the event of injury to the interosseous membrane. Fixation is another alternative, but it is difficult and has not provided good results in our hands or in the literature (we have compared this series with a series of 20 fixations for equivalent fractures). The prosthesis appears to be a good solution: it stabilises the elbow, prevents ascension of the radius, allows early rehabilitation, and provides good subjective outcome, particularly in emergency cases.

Purpose: Trauma to the radial collateral ligaments requires the same attention as trauma to the ulnar ligaments. Damage is uncommon due to the particular anatomic position, but nevertheless a distinct clinical entity.

Material and methods: We report a retrospective analysis of 14 patients, eight who underwent emergency surgery and six with trauma sequelae. Mean follow-up was 22 months and mean age 37 years. Among the recent lesions, the pain score (scale from 1 to 5) was 4.5) and the instability score (scale from 1 to 3) was 3. Palmar subdislocation was 4.8 mm and laxity was 16.7°. Among the old lesions (> 1 month) the corresponding data were pain 3.3, instability 2.5, palmar sub-dislocation 4.2 mm, laxity 19.1°. Two patients had signs of osteoarthritis. At surgery, the phalanx and metacarpus were equally injured. Associated lesions (capsule, short abductor) were present in 78% of the patient. The radial collateral ligaments and the soft tissue were reinserted or retightened in all cases. One patients required arthrodesis due to cartilage damage.

Results: Among the recent injuries, 71% reached a good subjective result: amplitude loss (flexion/extension) was 17°, force was 75% and laxity was 5°. Two patients had palmar subdisloction. Among the older lesions, a good subjective result was achieved in 66%: loss of amplitude case 32°, force was 69% and laxity was 8°. Palmar subdislocation was 2 mm on the average. We had two cases of persistent dysaesthesia.

Discussion: Radial injury appears to be falsely benign because the Stener lesion is not found on this side of the metacarpophalange. The importance of the injury in these traumas is related to the vulnerability of the dorsal region of the medial collateral ligament and is probably the cause of poor outcome after surgery for older lesions with palmar dislocation which is difficult to correct. We advocate emergency surgery for a wide range of indications. We always operate major radial laxity (> 35°) or laxity associated with palmar subdislocation. For other cases, we use the anterior forced drawer view to disclose potential associated dorsal injury.