Aims

The aim of this study is to report the implant survival and factors associated with revision of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) using data from the Dutch national registry.

Despite being one of the most common injuries around the elbow, the optimal treatment of olecranon fractures is far from established and stimulates debate among both general orthopaedic trauma surgeons and upper limb specialists. It is almost universally accepted that stable non-displaced fractures can be safely treated nonoperatively with minimal specialist input. Internal fixation is recommended for the vast majority of displaced fractures, with a range of techniques and implants to choose from. However, there is concern regarding the complication rates, largely related to symptomatic metalwork resulting in high rates of implant removal. As the number of elderly patients sustaining these injuries increases, we are becoming more aware of the issues associated with fixation in osteoporotic bone and the often fragile soft-tissue envelope in this group. Given this, there is evidence to support an increasing role for nonoperative management in this high-risk demographic group, even in those presenting with displaced and/or multifragmentary fracture patterns. This review summarizes the available literature to date, focusing predominantly on the management techniques and available implants for stable fractures of the olecranon. It also offers some insights into the potential avenues for future research, in the hope of addressing some of the pertinent questions that remain unanswered.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(2):112–123.

Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is a disabling condition that remains challenging for upper limb surgeons. Open elbow arthrolysis is commonly used for the treatment of stiff elbow when conservative therapy has failed. Multiple questions commonly arise from surgeons who deal with this disease. These include whether the patient has post-traumatic stiff elbow, how to evaluate the problem, when surgery is appropriate, how to perform an excellent arthrolysis, what the optimal postoperative rehabilitation is, and how to prevent or reduce the incidence of complications. Following these questions, this review provides an update and overview of post-traumatic elbow stiffness with respect to the diagnosis, preoperative evaluation, arthrolysis strategies, postoperative rehabilitation, and prevention of complications, aiming to provide a complete diagnosis and treatment path.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-9:576–584.

Olecranon Osteotomy is a common approach used in the management of intraarticular distal humerus fractures. Significant complication rates have been associated with this procedure, including non-union rates of 0–13% and implant removal rates between 12–86%. This study is a multicentre retrospective study involving the largest cohort of olecranon osteotomies in the literature, examining implant fixation types, removal rates and associated complications. Patients were identified between 2007 and 2017 (minimum one year follow-up) via Canadian Classification of Health Interventions (CCI) coding and ICD9/10 codes by our health region's data information service. CCI intervention codes were used to identify patients who underwent surgery for their fracture with an olecranon osteotomy. Reasons for implant removal were identified from a chart review. Our primary outcome was implant removal rates. Categorical data was assessed using Chi square test and Fischer's Exact test. Ninety-nine patients were identified to have undergone an olecranon osteotomy for treatment of a distal humerus fracture. Twenty patients had their osteotomy fixed with a plate and screws and 67 patients were fixed with a tension band wire. Eleven patients underwent “screw fixation”, consisting of a single screw with or without the addition of a wire. One patient had placement of a cable-pin system. Of patients who underwent olecranon osteotomy fixation, 34.3% required implant removal. Removal rates were: 28/67 for TBW (41.8%), 6/20 plates (30%), 0/1 cable-pin and 0/11 for osteotomies fixed with screw fixation. Screw fixation was removed less frequently than TBW p<.006. TBW were more commonly removed than all other fixation types p<.043. Screws were less commonly removed than all other fixation types p<.015. TBW were more likely to be removed for implant irritation than plates, p<.007, and all other implants p<.007. The average time to removal was 361 days (80–1503 days). A second surgeon was the surgeon responsible for the removal in 10/34 cases (29%). TBWs requiring removal were further off the olecranon tip than those not removed p=.006. TBWs were associated with an OR of 3.29 (CI 1.10–9.84) for implant removal if implanted further than 1mm off bone. Nonunion of the osteotomy occurred in three out of 99 patients (3%). K-wires through the anterior ulnar cortex did not result in decreased need for TBW removal. There was no relation between plate prominence and the need for implant removal. There was no association between age and implant removal. The implant removal rate was 34% overall. Single screw fixation was the best option for osteotomy fixation, as 0/11 required hardware removal, which was statistically less frequent than TBW at 28/67. Screw fixation was removed less frequently than TBW and screw fixation was less commonly removed than all other fixation types. Only 6/20 (30%) plates required removal, which is lower than previously published rates. Overall, TBW were more commonly removed than all other fixation types and this was also the case if hardware irritation was used as the indication for removal. Nonunion rates of olecranon osteotomy were 3%

Aims. The aim of this study is to report the results of a case series of olecranon fractures and olecranon osteotomies treated with two bicortical screws. Methods. Data was collected retrospectively for all olecranon fractures and osteotomies fixed with two bicortical screws between January 2008 and December 2019 at our institution. The following outcome measures were assessed; re-operation, complications, radiological loss of reduction, and elbow range of flexion-extension. Results. Bicortical screw fixation was used to treat 17 olecranon fractures and ten osteotomies. The mean age of patients being treated for olecranon fracture and osteotomy were 48.6 years and 52.7 years respectively. Overall, 18% of olecranon fractures were classified as Mayo type I, 71% type II, and 12% type III. No cases of fracture or osteotomy required operative re-intervention. There were two cases of loss of fracture reduction which occurred in female patients ≥ 75 years of age with osteoporotic bone. In both cases, active extension and a functional range of movement was maintained and so the loss of reduction was managed non-operatively. For the fracture fixation cohort, at final follow-up mean elbow extension and flexion were -5. °. ± 5. °. and 136. °. ± 7. °. , with a mean arc of motion of 131. °. ± 11. °. . Conclusion. This series has shown that patients regain near full range of elbow flexion-extension and complication rates are low following bicortical screw fixation of olecranon fractures and osteotomy. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-7:376–382

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate two hypotheses. First, that disruption of posterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament (PMCL) has to occur for the elbow to subluxate in cases of posteromedial rotatory instability (PMRI) and second, that ulnohumeral contact pressures increase after disruption of the PMCL.

Intraarticular fractures of the distal humerus comprise 1% of all fractures in adults. Triceps reflecting and olecranon osteotomy approach provide adequate exposure in intraarticular fracture with its own advantage and disadvantages. Forty consecutive patients with fractures of the distal humerus were treated over a 36-month period. The patients were randomly allotted into two groups; group A consists of twenty patients with olecranon osteotomy and group B consists of twenty patients with triceps reflecting approach. In both the groups fracture was fixed using orthogonal or parallel plating techniques. Clinical outcome was assessed using the DASH SCORE, radiological union and complications was noted in both the group and compared. In group A the mean DASH score was 15.9 points. Three patients underwent a second procedure for hardware removal, 2 patients had non-union at osteotomy site, one patient had transient ulna nerve neuropraxia and one patient had superficial infection. In group B the mean DASH score was 14 points. There was no statistical significance between both groups regarding final outcome except complications were more in osteotomy approach. We conclude both approach is an effective procedure with an excellent or good functional outcome but osteotomy approach has more complications

We retrospectively reviewed 89 consecutive patients (45 men and 44 women) with a mean age at the time of injury of 58 years (18 to 97) who had undergone external fixation after sustaining a unilateral fracture of the distal humerus. Our objectives were to determine the incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO); identify risk factors associated with the development of HO; and characterise the location, severity and resultant functional impairment attributable to the presence of HO.

HO was identified in 37 elbows (42%), mostly around the humerus and along the course of the medial collateral ligament. HO was hazy immature in five elbows (13.5%), mature discrete in 20 (54%), extensive mature in 10 (27%), and complete bone bridges were present in two elbows (5.5%). Mild functional impairment occurred in eight patients, moderate in 27 and severe in two. HO was associated with less extension (p = 0.032) and less overall flexion-to-extension movement (p = 0.022); the flexion-to-extension arc was < 100º in 21 elbows (57%) with HO compared with 18 elbows (35%) without HO (p = 0.03). HO was removed surgically in seven elbows.

The development of HO was significantly associated with sustaining a head injury (p = 0.015), delayed internal fixation (p = 0.027), the method of fracture fixation (p = 0.039) and the use of bone graft or substitute (p = 0.02).HO continues to be a substantial complication after internal fixation for distal humerus fractures.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1681–7.

In order to achieve satisfactory reduction of complex distal humeral fractures, adequate exposure of the fracture fragments and the joint surface is required. Several surgical exposures have been described for distal humeral fractures. We report our experience using the anconeus pedicle olecranon flip osteotomy approach. This involves detachment of the triceps along with a sliver of olecranon, which retains the anconeus pedicle. We report the use of this approach in ten patients (six male, four female) with a mean age of 38.4 years (28 to 51). The mean follow-up was 15 months (12 to 18) with no loss to follow-up. Elbow function was graded using the Mayo Score. The results were excellent in four patients, good in five and fair in one patient. The mean time to both fracture and osteotomy union was 10.6 weeks (8 to 12) and 7.1 weeks (6 to 8), respectively. We found this approach gave reliably good exposure for these difficult fractures enabling anatomical reduction and bicondylar plating without complications. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1252–7

Adequate exposure is a prerequisite for treatment of distal humeral fractures. In this study, we compared the clinico-radiological and functional outcome of TRAP approach with that of olecranon osteotomy for distal humerus fractures. 27 patients with distal humerus fractures were randomized into 2 groups: Group 1 (n=14, TRAP approach), Group 2 (n=13, Olecranon osteotomy). All patients were operated with bi-columnar fixation. All patients were mobilized from day 2. Follow-up evaluation was done at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. All patients achieved union. The mean surgical time was higher in group 1 (120 min) as compared to group 2 (100 min). The final ROM was higher in group 1 (1160) as compared to group 2 (850). Two patients in group 2 needed posterior release. 5 patients in group 2 had hardware complications related to olecranon osteotomy and needed removal. Two patients in Group 1 had transient ulnar nerve paraesthesias. There was no difference in triceps power in both groups. Our results demonstrate that TRAP approach is extensile and safe enough in treating these complex fractures with better final ROM and fewer complications

Introduction. Adequate exposure is a prerequisite for treatment of distal humeral fractures. In this study, we compared the clinico-radiological and functional outcome of TRAP approach with that of olecranon osteotomy for distal humerus fractures. Material & Methods. 27 patients with distal humerus fractures were randomized into 2 groups: Group 1 (n=14, TRAP approach), Group 2 (n=13, Olecranon osteotomy). All patients were operated with bi-columnar fixation. All patients were mobilized from day 2. Follow-up evaluation was done at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Results. All patients achieved union. The mean surgical time was higher in group 1 (120 min) as compared to group 2 (100 min). The final ROM was higher in group 1 (1160) as compared to group 2 (850). Two patients in group 2 needed posterior release. 5 patients in group 2 had hardware complications related to olecranon osteotomy and needed removal. Two patients in Group 1 had transient ulnar nerve paraesthesias. There was no difference in triceps power in both groups. Conclusion. Our results demonstrate that TRAP approach is extensile and safe enough in treating these complex fractures with better final ROM and fewer complications

This study reviews the early results of Distal Humeral Hemiarthroplasty(DHH) for distal humeral fracture and proposed a treatment algorithm incorporating the use of this technique in the overall management of distal humeral fractures. DHH was performed on 30 patients (mean 65 years; 29-91) for unreconstructable fractures of the distal humerus or salvage of failed internal fixation. A triceps on approach was used in six and an olecranon osteotomy in 24. A Sorbie Questor prosthesis (Wright Medical Technology) was used in 14 patients and a Latitude (Tornier) in 16. Clinical review at a mean of 25 months (3–88) included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons elbow outcomes instrument (ASES), Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and radiological assessment. At follow up of 28 patients mean flexion deformity was 25 degrees, flexion 128 degrees, range of pronosupination 165 degrees, mean ASES 83, MEPI 77 and satisfaction 8/10. Acute cases scored better than salvage cases. Re- operation was required in 16 patients (53%); two revisions to a linked prosthesis for periprosthetic fracture and aseptic loosening at 53 and 16 months, 12 metalwork removals and four ulnar nerve procedures. Posterolateral rotatory instability was present in one elbow, four had laxity and mild pain on loading (two with prosthesis or pin loosening), four had laxity associated with column fractures (two symptomatic) and 10 had asymptomatic mild laxity only. The triceps on approach had worse instability and clinical scores. Uncomplicated union occurred in all olecranon osteotomies and 86% of column fractures. One elbow had an incomplete cement mantle and seven had lucencies >1 mm; one was loose but acceptable. Five prostheses were in slight varus. Two elbows had early degenerative changes and 15 developed a medial spur on the trochlea. This is the largest reported experience of DHH. Early results of DHH show good outcomes after complex distal humeral fractures, despite a technically demanding procedure. Better results are obtained for treatment in the acute setting and with use of an olecranon osteotomy. As a result of this experience anatomical and clinical pre-requisites and advise on technique are outlined. An algorithm for use of DHH in relation to total elbow arthroplasty and ORIF for the treatment of complex intra-articular distal humeral fractures with or without column fractures is proposed

Avulsion fractures of the tip of the olecranon are a common traumatic injury. Kirshner-wire fixation (1.6mm) with a figure of eight tension band wire (1.25mm) remains the most popular technique. Hardware removal mat be required in up to 80% of cases. Modern suture materials have very high tensile strength coupled with excellent usability. In this study we compare a repair using 1.6mm k-wires with a 1.25mm surgical steel, against a repair that uses two strands of 2 fibrewire. Twelve Pairs of cadaveric arms were harvested. A standard olecranon osteotomy was performed to mimic an avulsion fracture. In each pair one was fixed using standard technique, 2 × 1.6mm transcortical ?-wire plus figure of 8 loop of 1.25mm wire. The other fixed with the same ?-wires with a tension band suture of 2.0 fibrewire (two loops, one figure of 8 and one simple loop). The triceps tendon was cyclically loaded (10-120 Newtons) to simulate full active motion 2200 cycles. Fracture gap was measured with the ‘Smart Capture’ motion analysis system. The arm was fixed at 90 degrees and triceps tendon was loaded until fixation failure, ultimate load to failure and mode of failure was noted. The average gap formation at the fracture site for the suture group was 0.91mm, in the wire group 0.96mm, no specimen in either group produced a significant gap after cyclical loading. Mean load to failure for the suture group was 1069 Newtons (SD=120N) and in the wire group 820 Newtons (SD=235N). Both types of fixation allow full early mobilisation without gap formation. The Suture group has a significantly higher load to failure (p=0.002, t-test). Tension Band suture allows a lower profile fixation, potentially reducing the frequency of wound complications and hardware removal

Osteotomy through the bare area of olecranon minimises the damage to articular cartilage in the trans-olecranon approach to the distal humerus. In this study we have identified a reliable and easily reproducible anatomical land mark to make sure that the osteotomy passes through the bare area. Two methods were used to determine the line for the osteotomy, in the first a line from the lateral epicondyle perpendicular to the olecranon and in the second an intra-articular marker was used to determine the osteotomy. In 5 cadavers the osteotomy with lateral epicondylar line as a marker went 2 mm proximal to the bare area. Of the 5 cadavers dissected with a marker passed to the angle of olecranon the osteotomy went through the bare area of olecranon in three specimens and just proximal in the other two. In conclusion a cheveron osteotomy with the base of the chevron on the lateral epicondylar line will be the ideal site to make sure that the osteotomy passes through the bare area of the olecranon

In light of the growing number of elderly osteopenic patients with distal humeral fractures, we discuss the history of their management and current trends. Under most circumstances operative fixation and early mobilisation is the treatment of choice, as it gives the best results. The relative indications for and results of total elbow replacement versus internal fixation are discussed.

Purpose: This study reviews the early results of elbow hemiarthroplasty for distal humeral fractures. Method: Elbow hemiarthroplasty was performed on 30 patients (mean 65 years; 29–91) for unreconstruc-table fractures of the distal humerus or salvage of failed internal fixation. A ‘triceps on’ approach was used in six and an olecranon osteotomy in 24. A Sorbie Questor prosthesis (Wright Medical Technology) was used in 14 patients and a Lattitude (Tornier) in 16. Clinical review at a mean of 25 months (3–88) included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons elbow outcomes instrument (ASES), Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and radiological assessment. Results: At follow up of 28 patients mean flexion deformity was 25 degrees, flexion 128 degrees, range of pro-nosupination 165 degrees, mean ASES 83, MEPI 77 and satisfaction 8/10. Acute cases scored better than salvage cases. Re-operation was required in 16 patients (53%); two revisions to a linked prosthesis for periprosthetic fracture and aseptic loosening at 53 and 16 months, 12 metalwork removals and four ulnar nerve procedures. Posterolateral rotatory instability was present in one elbow, four had laxity and pain on loading (two with prosthesis or pin loosening), four had laxity associated with column fractures (two symptomatic) and ten had asymptomatic laxity only. The triceps on approach had worse laxity and clinical scores. Uncomplicated union occurred in all olecranon osteotomies and 86% of column fractures. One elbow had an incomplete cement mantle and seven had lucencies > 1 mm; one was loose but acceptable. Five prostheses were in slight varus and two were flexed. Two elbows had early degenerative changes and 15 developed an osteophytic lip on the medial trochlea. Conclusion: Early results of elbow hemiarthroplasty show good outcomes after complex distal humeral fractures, despite a technically demanding procedure, met-alware removal in 40%, symptomatic laxity in 12% and column non-union in 8%. Better results are obtained for treatment in the acute setting and with use of an olecranon osteotomy

Purpose: Tension band wiring is the most common surgical procedure for fixation of fractures of the Olecranon, but it is associated with high rate of metal work complications and implant failure leading to re-operation. Method: We present a new fixation technique for olecranon fractures that avoids reoperation to remove hardware as compared with the standard fixation technique with Kirschner wires and tension band wiring as advocated by the AO technique. We describe fixation of displaced transverse and oblique olecranon fractures with anchor sutures, each of which has two pairs of suture strands. Prior to the insertion of the anchor sutures, the fracture is reduced through a standard open approach. Results: Twelve patients have been treated with this technique so far, with a mean follow-up of 6 months. The mean age of the patients was 46.7 years (range 14–75 yrs). We have followed all these patients till union of the fractures. No immediate complications have been noted. Radiographic results are good, with no loss of reduction. Conclusion: This technique avoids the need for reop-eration for hardware removal without compromising the quality of reduction. It may be argued that anchor sutures may cost more than tension band wiring which is a very low cost procedure. At the same time, we should also consider the future cost involved because of reoperation rate and morbidity. Our newly described technique would be particularly useful in dealing with olecranon fractures in children where it is undesirable to cross the physeal plate by metal work. It would also be of great value in dealing with intra articular distal humeral fractures where fixation is planned initially but conversion to total elbow replacement becomes essential intra-operatively. In such cases an olecranon osteotomy can be fixed by this technique, even in presence of a total elbow replacement

The aim of the current study was to assess the amount of the distal humerus articular surface exposed through the Newcastle approach, a posterior triceps preserving exposure of the elbow joint. 24 cadaveric elbows (12 pairs) were randomized to receive one of the four posterior surgical approaches: triceps reflecting, triceps splitting, olecranon osteotomy and Newcastle approach. The ratio of the articular surface exposed for each elbow was calculated and compared. The highest ratio observed was for Newcastle approach (0.75 ± 0.12) followed by olecranon osteotomy (0.51 ± 0.1), triceps reflecting (0.37 ± 0.08) and triceps splitting (0.35 ± 0.07). The differences between Newcastle approach and other approaches were statistically significant (p=0.003 vs osteotomy and < 0.0001 vs triceps reflecting and splitting). The Newcastle approach sufficiently exposes the distal humerus for arthroplasty or fracture fixation purposes. Its use is supported by the current study