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%

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

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

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

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