The aim of this abstract is to show that acute osteomyelitis is one of the most feared complication of orthopedic surgery. A rapid and aggressive treatment is mandatory in order to avoid significant bone loss, joint destruction and, in most cases, salvage of the limb. After apparent cure of the infection, sequelae must be addressed. In this case, the joint destruction was important, so reconstruction procedures where impossible. In a superficial and relatively small joint such as the elbow, it is preferred to do an arthrodesis than an arthroplasty because the risk of reactivation of the infection with implant involvement is very important.

We present a case report of a 69 years old woman, who had a supra-intra-condylar fracture (AO 13-C1) of the right humerus. She was treated with open reduction and internal fixation with 2 internal lag screws and 2 external lag screws. After 6 weeks, she was admitted with a dislocated elbow associated with pain, loss of limb function, cubita nerve palsy and a purulent discharge from the surgical wound. She started vancomycin and was submitted to surgery with debriment, hardware removal and fixation with an external fixator was used. The local signs of infection disappeared progressively. After normalization of the laboratory parameters of infection, the patient was submitted to an elbow arthrodesis using a posterior contour plate.

The elbow achieved solid fixation and infection was eradicated, at least for the time being, allowing the patient to use the upper limb in her daily live activities.

The treatment of post operative acute osteomyilits is challenging, In this case, after apparent solution of the infection, a solid fixation of the elbow was achieved, allowing the use of the upper limb in the patient daily activities.

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%

Purpose of the study. To evaluate the outcome of the Modified French osteotomy for the correction of cubitus varus resulting from a supracondylar distal humerus fracture in children. Description of methods. A retrospective review of 90 children, aged 3 to 14, who underwent a modified French osteotomy between 1986 and 2012 for the correction of cubitus varus as a result of a supracondylar distal humerus fracture. Case notes and radiographs were reviewed. The carrying angle was measured clinically and radiologically pre-operatively, post-operatively and at latest follow up. Comparison was made with the unaffected side. The outcome was graded as good if the correction of the carrying angle was within 5 degrees of the unaffected side, satisfactory if the correction was more than 5 degrees of the unaffected side but cubitus valgus was restored and poor if there was persistence of cubitus varus post correction. Any intra-operative and post-operative complications were documented. Summary of results. The average age at the time of osteotomy was 8 years. Sixty-two percent of the patients were male. The left elbow was affected 61% of the time. The average delay from time of fracture to osteotomy was 24 months. The average post-operative follow up was 3.5 months. With regard to the correction of the cubitus varus, 83% of patients had a good outcome, 17% had a satisfactory outcome, with no poor outcomes. Post-operative complications were documented in 6 patients, 3 of which required re-operation. Conclusion. The modified French osteotomy has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for cubitus varus following supracondylar distal humerus fractures in children. NO DISCLOSURES

We aimed to assess the functional outcomes of elderly patients with isolated comminuted distal humerus fractures that were managed non-operatively. Retrospective analysis of patients over 65 years presenting to our unit between 2005–2015 was undertaken. 67 patients were identified, 7 had immediate TEA, 41 died and 5 were lost to follow-up leaving 14 available for review. Mean Follow-up was 55 months(range 17–131) Patient functional outcomes were measured using VAS scores for pain at rest and during activity, and the Oxford Elbow Score (OES). Need for conversion to TEA and complications were recorded. The mean age at injury was 76 years(range 65–90) of which 79%(11/14) were females. The mean score on the OES was 46(range 29 – 48). The mean VAS score at rest was 0.4(range 0–6) and the mean VAS score during activity was 1.3(range 0–9). 93%(13/14) of patients reported no pain (0 out of 10 on the numeric scale for pain) in their injured elbow at rest and 79%(11/14) reported no pain during activity. No patients converted to TEA and there were no complications. Non-operative management of comminuted distal humerus fractures should be considered for elderly patients, avoiding surgical risks whilst giving satisfactory functional outcomes in this low demand group

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

Background. Level 1 studies for fracture management of upper extremity fractures remains rare. The influence of these studies on management trends has yet to be evaluated. The purpose of this study was to examine alterations in national trends managing mid-shaft clavicle and intra-articular distal humerus fractures (DHF) surrounding recent Level 1 publications. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed a comprehensive Medicare (2005–2012) and Humana (2007–2014) patient population database within the PearlDiver supercomputer (Warsaw, IN, USA) for DHF and mid-shaft clavicle fractures, respectively. Non-operative management and open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) were reviewed for mid-shaft clavicle fractures. ORIF and total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) were reviewed for DHF. Total use and annual utilization rates were investigated using age limits defined in the original Level 1 studies. Results. A total of 4,929 clavicle patients between 15 and 59 years, and 106,535 DHF patients greater than 65 years of age were coded. There was no significant change in annual volume of mid-shaft clavicle fractures and DHF coded (p=0.078 and p=0.614, respectively). Among clavicle patients there was a significant increase in ORIF utilization following the publication of the Level 1 study (p=0.002), and a strong, positive correlation was evident (p=0.007). No significant change in annual TEA (p=0.515) utilization for DHF was seen. Conclusion. A significant increase in the utilization of ORIF for clavicular fractures was observed following the publication of supporting Level 1 evidence. This was not observed following similar evidence in managing DHF, as no increase in utilization of TEA was observed

The problem of retained drain fragments is a well known but under reported complication in the literature. The authors present the case of a 66 years old male, who suffered a right distal humerus fracture luxation six years ago that was treated conservatively. He went to the emergency service with fever and right elbow purulent drainage. Physical examination showed deformity, swelling and fluctuation of the right elbow with purulent drainage through cutaneous fistula. The x-ray showed instable inveterate pseudarthrosis of the distal humerus. Leucocytosis and neutrophylia with increased CRP were presente in the blood tests and the patient started empiric treatment with Ceftiaxone IV. A MRSA was isolated in cultural exam of the exsudate, and a six weeks treatment with Vancomycin IV was iniciated. Exhaustive surgical cleaning was performed and two plastic foreing bodies (fragmented drains) were removed. At the time of discharge the patient was afebrile, with normal analytical parameters and negative culture tests. The orthopaedic surgeon should considerate the presence of a foreign body in patients with infected abcess and traumatic or surgery previous history

Introduction:. Distal humerus fractures as well as elbow fracture dislocation are often accompanied by soft tissue damage that warrants early fixation with an external fixator. The distal humerus is a hazardous area for placement of an external fixator due to the close proximity of the radial nerve to the humerus in this area. No known safe zone has been identified on the lateral border of the humerus to avoid radial nerve damage. The aim of this study was to record the incidence of radial nerve damage by placing two 4 mm pins into the humerus and to note the relation of the nerve to the pins. Methods:. Two 4 mm pins used to fix an external fixator were drilled into the lateral border of the humerus at points 100 mm and 70 mm proximal to the lateral epicondyle of both arms of 39 cadavers. The 30 mm interval between the pins is the interval between the pins in a pinblock of a commonly-used external fixator. The arms were dissected by medical students and the incidence of radial nerve damage was recorded. Statistical analysis was done using a Fischer's exact test to identify the incidence of nerve damage relative to pin insertion. The number of damaged nerves was compared to the number of non-damaged nerves. A design based Chi Square test was carried out to test left and right arms. The proportions of interest were estimated along a 95% confidence interval. Results:. The radial nerve was hit (damaged) by 56.4% of the proximal and 20.5% of the distal pins. The radial nerve ran posterior to the proximal pin in 2.57% of arms and 0% to the distal pin. Conclusion:. Although no clear safe zone could be established, pins should be placed closer than 100 mm from the lateral epicondyle and as posterior on the humerus as possible to minimize the risk for radial nerve damage. Keywords: Radial nerve, external fixation, humerus fractures

Background. The procedures of total elbow and shoulder replacements increased 6% to 13% annually from 1993 to 2007 with revision-related burden increasing from 4.5% to 7%. The revisions of the shoulder and elbow prostheses due to aseptic loosening, periprosthetic fractures, infections have led to the use of standard or custom-made implants due to significant bone loss. This study reports our experience in the management of complicated primary and revisions of total shoulder and elbow replacements with significant humeral bone loss and in metabolic diseases of the elbow and shoulder treated with bone resection using The Mosaic Humeral Replacement System. Patients and Materials. A total of 20 patients underwent total elbow or shoulder arthroplasty using the Mosaic Humeral Replacement System (Biomet, UK). The Mosaic system was used in 8 shoulder arthroplasties (Group A) and in 12 elbow arthroplasties (Group B). The underlying pathologis in Group A included 2 malunited proximal humerus fracture, 1 humeral osteomyelitis, 1 shoulder chondrosarcoma, 1 aggressive Gigantic Cell Tumor with prosthetic fracture, 2 metastatic lytic lesion, and 1 failed fixation of non-union proximal humerus. Figure 1 shows Mosaic implant after complex fracture of proximal humerus. Reasons for Mosaic arthroplasty in Group B included 3 humeral component revisions due to periprosthetic fracture, 1 prosthesis breaking-up with fractures, 1 revision of loose Souter Strathclyde prosthesis, 1 loose prosthesis due to infection, 1 highly comminuted elbow fracture, 1 aseptic loosening of humeral component of total elbow replacement, 3 revision of total elbow replacement due loosening and 1 pathological distal humerus fracture due to metastasis. Figure 2&3 shows pre- and post-operative Mosaic implant following complex periprosthetic fracture of distal humerus. Clinical Observation/Discussion. The Mosaic Humeral Replacement System is a complete system for complex revision, salvage/oncology, and complex humeral fractures. It is a completely modular system which can be adapted to different patient anatomies and indications. It has been designed to face several surgical challenges, including reattaching soft tissues, properly tensioning the glenohumeral joint and restoring joint function. It is a cost-effective procedure with the benefits of a custom made humeral component in a standard tray. Our study shows that good results can be achieved with this form of treatment. Radiological assessment of all patients showed a satisfactory position of the implant with appropriate margin of bony resection. One patient with proximal and another one with distal humeral Mosaic replacement had late infection. One patient had aseptic loosening 3 years after distal humeral replacement. Most of the patients had satisfactory improvement in range of movement and chronic pain. While primary clinical observations and imaging results indicate acceptable results with Mosaic arthroplasty; a realistic assessment can only be achieved in long-term using the appropriate outcome measures. At the present we continue to regularly assess the patients clinically and radiologically and by means of Liverpool elbow score for distal and Quick- DASH for proximal Mosaic Humeral Replacement System and plan to report the long-term results in due time