Radial head fractures are among the most common fractures around the elbow. Radial head arthroplasty is one of the surgical treatment options after complex radial head fractures. This surgery is usually done under general anaesthesia. However, there is a recent anaesthetic technique - wide awake local anaesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) - that has proven useful in different surgical settings, such as in distal radius or olecranon fractures. It allows a good haemostatic control without the use of a tourniquet and allows the patient to actively collaborate during the surgical procedure. Furthermore, there are no side effects or complications caused by the general anaesthesia and there's an earlier patient discharge. The authors present the case of a seventy-six-year-old woman who presented to the emergency department after a fall from standing height with direct trauma to the left elbow. The radiological examination revealed a complete intra-articular comminuted fracture of the radial head (Mason III). Clinical management: The patient was submitted to surgery with radial head arthroplasty, using WALANT. The surgery was successfully completed without pain. There were no intra or immediate post-operative complications and the patient was discharged on the same day. Six weeks after surgery, the patient had almost full range of motion and was very pleased with the functional outcome, with no limitations on her activities of daily living. The use of WALANT has been expanded beyond the hand and wrist surgery. It is a safe and simple option for patients at high risk of general anaesthesia, allowing similar surgical outcomes without the intraoperative and postoperative complications of general anaesthesia and permitting an earlier hospital discharge. Furthermore, it allows the patient to actively collaborate during the surgery, providing the surgeons the opportunity to evaluate active mobility and stability, permitting final corrections before closing the incision

Background. Radial head fractures are the commonest fractures involving the elbow. The goals of treatment are to restore stability, preserve motion, and maintain the relative length of the radius. Fortunately, most simple uncomplicated fractures can be treated non-operatively. Choosing between fixation and radial head replacement for comminuted fractures remains difficult. Excision of radial head fractures is not an ideal option in unstable elbow injuries. The purpose of this systematic review was to search for and critically appraise articles directly comparing functional outcomes and complications for fixation (open reduction internal fixation, ORIF) versus arthroplasty for comminuted radial head fractures (Mason type 3) in adults. Method. A comprehensive search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases using specific search terms and limits was conducted. Strict eligibility criteria were applied to stringently screen resultant articles. Three comparative studies were identified and reviewed. Results. Three comparative studies were identified and reviewed: two studies found significantly better Broberg & Morrey functional scores after replacement compared with ORIF in Mason type 3 fractures. The third study found no significant differences in Mayo functional score or range of motion, but did find that grip strength was better after ORIF. Complication rates were too heterogenous for conclusion. Conclusion. Fixation with good reduction may be attempted in unstable Mason type 3 fractures, and arthroplasty may be considered if this is not possible. Further randomised comparative trials are required to clarify the decision-making between fixation and replacement. Functional outcomes and complications were conflicting in the studies included here. Ideally, treatment decision should take into account elbow stability and degree of comminution

Introduction. The stability of the elbow joint following an acute elbow dislocation is dependent on associated injuries. The ability to identify these concomitant injuries correctly directs management and improves the chances of a successful outcome. Interpretation of plain radiographs in the presence of either a dislocation or post-reduction films with plaster in-situ is difficult. This study aimed to assess the ability of orthopaedic registrars to accurately identify associated bony injuries on initial plain radiographs using CT as the gold standard for comparison. Methods. Patients over the age of 16 years undergoing an elbow CT scan within one week of a documented elbow dislocation between 1st June 2010 and 1st June 2014 were included in the study. Three orthopaedic registrars independently reviewed both the initial dislocation and immediate post reduction plain radiographs to identify any associated bony injuries. This radiograph review was repeated by each registrar after two weeks. The incidence of associated injuries as well as the inter- and intra-observer variability was calculated. Results. 28 patients were included in the study. 54% of the patients were female and the mean age was 45 years (range 16 to 90 years). The incidence of a radial head fracture was 54%, coronoid fracture 43% and epicondyle avulsion 18% on CT. The inter-observer reliability was only shown to be fair amongst registrars and the intra-observer variability moderate. Conclusions. Computerised tomography is a useful adjunct in the assessment of associated osseous injuries following an elbow dislocation due to the presence of a high number of injuries. Plain radiographs alone have been shown to have only a fair and moderate inter and intra-observer variability respectively, therefore a low threshold to obtain further 3D imaging should be practised. Level of Evidence. IV

Intervention is rare following minimally displaced radial head fractures or positive elbow ‘fat pad’ signs. A pilot study (n=20) found no patient required active treatment after discharge following their first fracture clinic visit. We therefore initiated routine discharge from A&E with an advice sheet, and an ‘open-door policy’ if patients failed to progress. 51 patients were managed by A&E according to this protocol over a six-month period. A standardised assessment of symptoms, satisfaction and functional limitation was completed for 24 patients by phone; average time to follow-up 4.2 months (range 2–9 months). Fourteen (58.4%) reported no pain. The 10 patients (41.6%) with on-going pain reported a median visual analogue score (VAS 0–10) of 0.7 (0–4) at rest, 0.25 (0–4) at night, 3.0 (0–10) carrying heavy objects and 2.75 (0–10) during repetitive movement. 4 of 24 (16.7%) reported minor functional impairment. 3 of 24 (12.5%) patients requested orthopaedic review, but all were satisfied with outcome, seeking reassurance and discharged without any intervention. 3 of 24 (12.5%) were unhappy with their progress, but all had suffered from chronic pain or psychological conditions predating their injury. When offered further review, none of these patients accepted. 22 (91%) were satisfied with their treatment and 23 (95.8%) returned to work and hobbies. This data suggests routine discharge from A&E with advice does not compromise care, as no intervention is usually required beyond advice. These findings have obvious positive clinical and financial implications in streamlining clinical workload

Objectives

“Virtual fracture clinics” have been reported as a safe and effective alternative to the traditional fracture clinic. Robust protocols are used to identify cases that do not require further review, with the remainder triaged to the most appropriate subspecialist at the optimum time for review. The objective of this study was to perform a “top-down” analysis of the cost effectiveness of this virtual fracture clinic pathway.