Thermal injury to the radial nerve caused by cement leakage is a rare complication after revision elbow arthroplasty. Several reports have described nerve palsy caused by cement leakage after hip arthroplasty. However, little information is available regarding whether radial nerve injury due to cement leakage after humeral stem revision will recover. In a recent study, radial nerve palsy occurred in 2 of 7 patients who had thermal injury from leaked cement during humeral component revisions. These patients did not regain function of the radial nerve after observation. We present a case of functional recovery from a radial nerve palsy caused by cement leakage after immediate nerve decompression in revision elbow arthroplasty[Fig. 1.2]

Purpose:. Tuberosity healing in hemiarthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures remains problematic. Improved implant design and better techniques for tuberosity fixation have not been met with improved clinical results. The etiology for tuberosity failure is multifactorial; however thermal injury to host bone is a known effect of using polymethylmethacrylate for implant fixation. We hypothesized that the effect of thermal injury at the tuberosity shaft junction could be diminished by utilizing an impaction grafting technique for hemiarthroplasty stems. Methods:. Five matched pairs of cadaveric humeri were skeletonized and hemiarthroplasty stems were implanted in the proximal humeri in two groups. The first group had full cementation utilized from the surgical neck to 2 cm distal to the stem (cement group) and the second group had distal cementation with autologous cancellous bone graft impacted in the proximal 2.5 cm of the stem (impaction grafting group). Thermocouples were used to measure the inner cortical temperature at the tip of the stem, surgical neck, and at the level of the cement-graft interface for both treatment groups (see Fig. 1). Experiments were initiated with the humeri fully submerged in 0.9% sodium chloride and all three thermocouples registering a temperature of 37 ± 1°C. Statistical analyses were performed with a one-sided, paired t-test. Results:. The maximum recorded cortical bone temperature at the surgical neck was significantly decreased by 23% from 52.4 ± 8.1°C in the cement group to 40.4 ± 4.8°C in the impaction grafting group (p = 0.037). We identified no significant differences in maximum recorded temperature at the cement-graft interface between the impaction grafting group (44.3 ± 6.3°C) and the cement group (47.4 ± 6.4°C) (p = 0.254). A similar finding was observed between groups at the tip of the hemiarthroplasty stem (impaction grafting group 54.2 ± 5.7°C; cemented group 52.3 ± 7.3°C, p = 0.303). Conclusion:. Given the known threshold of 47°C as the onset of permanent thermal injury to bone,. 1. impaction grafting maintains the temperature at the surgical neck during cementation below this critical value. Impaction grafting may serve as a beneficial surgical technique to mitigate the effects of thermal injury on tuberosity healing in proximal humeral hemiarthroplasty for fracture

Bone cement reaches high temperatures while polymerising. Bone has been shown to be sensitive to thermal injury with osteonecrosis reported after one minute at 47°C. Necrosis during cementing might compromise the bone-cement interface. Some surgeons fill the joint cavity with irrigation fluid to provide a heatsink during cementing, but this has not been supported by research. We used a model acetabulum in a bovine humerus to allow measurement of bone temperatures in cementing. Models were prepared with a 50mm diameter acetabulum and three temperature probe holes. Four warmed models were cemented with Palacos RG using a standard mixing system and a 10mm UMHWPE disc to represent an acetabular component. Two of the acetabular models were filled with room temperature water to provide a heatsink. An electronic probe measured temperature at 5 second intervals from the moment of cementing. In the models with no heatsink, peak temperature was 40.3°C. The highest temperature rise was 7.5°C. In the models with a heatsink, there was a mean fall of 4.4°C. These results suggest that using a heatsink while cementing prostheses may reduce the peak bone temperature

The well-fixed cemented femoral stem and surrounding cement can be challenging to remove. Success requires evaluation of the quality of the cement mantle (interface lucency), position of the stem, extent of cement below the tip of the stem and skill with the specialised instruments and techniques needed to remove the stem and cement without perforating the femur. Smooth surfaced stems can usually be easily removed from the surrounding cement mantle with a variety of stem extractors that attach to the trunnion or an extraction hole on the implant. Roughened stems can be freed from the surrounding cement mantle with osteotomes or a narrow high speed burr and then extracted with the above instruments. Following this, the well-fixed cement mantle needs to be removed. Adequate exposure and visualization of the cement column is essential to remove the well-fixed cement without damage to the bone in the femur. This is important since fixation of a revision femoral component typically requires at least 4 cm of contact with supportive cortical bone, which can be difficult to obtain if the femur is perforated or if the isthmus damaged. Proximally, cement in the metaphyseal region can be thinned with a high speed burr, then split radially and removed piecemeal. It is essential to remember that both osteotomes and high speed burrs will cut thru bone easier than cement and use of these instruments poses a substantial risk of unintended bone removal and perforation of the femur if done improperly. These instruments should, as a result, be used under direct vision. Removal of more distal cement in the femur typically requires use of an extended femoral osteotomy (ETO) to allow for adequate access to the well-fixed cement in the bowed femoral canal. An ETO also facilitates more efficient removal of cement in the proximal femur. The ETO should be carefully planned so that it is distal enough to allow for access to the end of the cement column and still allow for stable fixation of a new implant. Too short of an ETO increases the risk of femoral perforation since the straight cement removal instruments cannot negotiate the bowed femoral canal to access the end of the cement column without risk of perforation. An ETO that is too distal makes cement removal easier, but may not allow for sufficient fixation of a new revision femoral stem. Cement below the level of the ETO cannot be directly visualised and specialised instruments are necessary to safely remove this distal cement. Radiofrequency cement removal devices use high frequency (ultrasonic) radio waves to melt the cement within the canal. Although cement removal with these devices is time consuming and tedious, they do substantially reduce the chances of femoral perforation. These devices can, however, generate considerable heat locally and can result in thermal injury to the bone and surrounding tissues. Once the distal end of the cement mantle is penetrated, backbiting or hooked curettes can be use to remove any remaining cement from within the canal. It is important that all cement be removed from the femur since reamers used for preparation of the distal canal will be deflected by any retained cement, which could result in eccentric reaming and inadvertent perforation of the femur and make fixation of a new implant very challenging. An intra-operative x-ray can be very helpful to insure that all cement has been removed before reaming is initiated. One should always plan for a possible femoral perforation and have cortical strut grafts and a stem available that will safely bypass the end of the cement column and the previous cement restrictor

The well-fixed cemented femoral stem and surrounding cement can be challenging to remove. Success requires evaluation of the quality of the cement mantle (interface lucency), position of the stem, extent of cement below the tip of the stem and skill with the specialised instruments and techniques needed to remove the stem and cement without perforating the femur. Smooth surfaced stems can usually be easily removed from the surrounding cement mantle with a variety of stem extractors that attach to the trunnion or an extraction hole on the implant. Roughened stems can be freed from the surrounding cement mantle with osteotomes or a narrow high speed burr and then extracted with the above instruments. Following this, the well fixed cement mantle needs to be removed. Adequate exposure and visualization of the cement column is essential to remove the well-fixed cement without damage to the bone in the femur. This is important since fixation of a revision femoral component typically requires at least 4cm of contact with supportive cortical bone, which can be difficult to obtain if the femur is perforated or if the isthmus damaged. Proximally, cement in the metaphyseal region can be thinned with a high speed burr, then split radially and removed piecemeal. It is essential to remember that both osteotomes and high speed burrs will cut thru bone easier than cement and use of these instruments poses a substantial risk of unintended bone removal and perforation of the femur if done improperly. These instruments should, as a result, be used under direct vision. Removal of more distal cement in the femur typically requires use of an extended femoral osteotomy (ETO) to allow for adequate access to the well-fixed cement in the bowed femoral canal. An ETO also facilitates more efficient removal of cement in the proximal femur. The ETO should be carefully planned so that it is distal enough to allow for access to the end of the cement column and still allow for stable fixation of a new implant. Too short of an ETO increases the risk of femoral perforation since the straight cement removal instruments cannot negotiate the bowed femoral canal to access the end of the cement column without risk of perforation. An ETO that is too distal makes cement removal easier, but may not allow for sufficient fixation of a new revision femoral stem. Cement below the level of the ETO cannot be directly visualised and specialised instruments are necessary to safely remove this distal cement. Radiofrequency cement removal devices (OSCAR) use high frequency (ultrasonic) radio waves to melt the cement within the canal. Although cement removal with these devices is time consuming and tedious, they do substantially reduce the chances of femoral perforation. These devices can, however, generate considerable heat locally and can result in thermal injury to the bone and surrounding tissues. Once the distal end of the cement mantle is penetrated, backbiting or hooked curettes can be used to remove any remaining cement from within the canal. It is important that all cement be removed from the femur since reamers used for preparation of the distal canal will be deflected by any retained cement, which could result in eccentric reaming and inadvertent perforation of the femur and make fixation of a new implant very challenging. An intraoperative x-ray can be very helpful to insure that all cement has been removed before reaming is initiated

The causes of a stiff elbow are numerous including: post-traumatic elbow, burns, head injury, osteoarthritis, inflammatory joint disease and congenital. Types of stiffness include: loss of elbow flexion, loss of elbow extension and loss of forearm rotation. All three have different prognoses in terms of the timing of surgery and the likelihood of restoration of function. Contractures can be classified into extrinsic and intrinsic (all intrinsic develop some extrinsic component). Functional impairment can be assessed medicolegally; however, in clinical practice the patient puts an individual value on the arc of motion. Objectively most functions can be undertaken with an arc of 30 to 130 degrees. The commonest cause of a Post-traumatic Stiff elbow is a radial head fracture or a complex fracture dislocation. Risk factors for stiffness include length of immobilisation, associated fracture with dislocation, intra-articular derangement, delayed surgical treatment, associated head injury, heterotopic ossification. Early restoration of bony columns and joint stability to allow early mobilisation reduces incidence of joint stiffness. Heterotopic ossification (HO) is common in fracture dislocation of the elbow. Neural Axis trauma alone causes HO in elbows in 5%. However, combined neural trauma and elbow trauma the incidence is 89%. Stiffness due to thermal injury is usually related to the degree rather than the site. The majority of patients have greater than 20% total body area involved. Extrinsic contractures are usually managed with a sequential release of soft tissues commencing with a capsular excision (retaining LCL/MCL), posterior bundle of the MCL +/− ulna nerve decompression (if there is loss of flexion to 100 degrees). This reliably achieved via a posterior incision, a lateral column exposure +/− ulna nerve mobilisation. A medial column exposure is a viable alternative. Arthroscopic capsular release although associated with a quicker easier rehabilitation is associated with increased neural injury. Timing of release is specific to the type of contracture, i.e. flexion contractures after approx. six months, extension contractures ASAP but after four months, loss of forearm rotation less 6 to 24 months. The use of Hinged Elbow Fixators is increasing. The indications include reconstructions that require protection whilst allowing early movement, persistent instability or recurrent/late instability or interposition arthroplasty. Post-operative rehabilitation requires good analgesia, joint stability and early movement. The role of CPM is often helpful but still being evaluated