The February 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Does indomethacin prevent heterotopic ossification following elbow fracture fixation?; Arthroscopic capsular shift in atraumatic shoulder joint instability; Ultrasound-guided lavage with corticosteroid injection versus sham; Combined surgical and exercise-based interventions following primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis; Are vascularized fibula autografts a long-lasting reconstruction after intercalary resection of the humerus for primary bone tumours?; Anatomical versus reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with limited forward elevation; Tension band or plate fixation for simple displaced olecranon fractures?; Is long-term follow-up and monitoring in shoulder and elbow arthroplasty needed?

The April 2023 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Arthroscopic Bankart repair in athletes: in it for the long run?; Functional outcomes and the Wrightington classification of elbow fracture-dislocations; Hemiarthroplasty or ORIF intra-articular distal humerus fractures in older patients; Return to sport after total shoulder arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty; Readmissions after shoulder arthroplasty; Arthroscopic Bankart repair in the longer term; Bankart repair with(out) remplissage or the Latarjet procedure? A systematic review and meta-analysis; Regaining motion among patients with shoulder pathology: are all exercises equal?

The October 2023 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Arthroscopic capsular shift surgery in patients with atraumatic shoulder joint instability: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial; Superior capsular reconstruction partially restores native glenohumeral loads in a dynamic model; Gene expression in glenoid articular cartilage varies in acute instability, chronic instability, and osteoarthritis; Intra-articular injection versus interscalene brachial plexus block for acute-phase postoperative pain management after arthroscopic shoulder surgery; Level of pain catastrophizing rehab in subacromial impingement: secondary analyses from a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (the SExSI Trial); Anterosuperior versus deltopectoral approach for primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a study of 3,902 cases from the Dutch National Arthroplasty Registry with a minimum follow-up of five years; Assessment of progression and clinical relevance of stress-shielding around press-fit radial head arthroplasty: a comparative study of two implants; A number of modifiable and non-modifiable factors increase the risk for elbow medial ulnar collateral ligament injury in baseball players: a systematic review

The October 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup360 looks at: Proximal humeral fractures with vascular compromise; Outcomes and challenges of revision arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review; Evaluating treatment effectiveness for lateral elbow tendinopathy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis; Tendon transfer techniques for irreparable subscapularis tears: a comparative review; Impact of subscapularis repair in reverse shoulder arthroplasty; Isolated subscapularis tears strongly linked to shoulder pseudoparesis; Nexel and Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasties show comparable revision rates in New Zealand study; 3D MRI matches 3D CT in assessing bone loss and shoulder morphology in dislocation cases

Aims. The aim of this study was to develop and internally validate a prognostic nomogram to predict the probability of gaining a functional range of motion (ROM ≥ 120°) after open arthrolysis of the elbow in patients with post-traumatic stiffness of the elbow. Methods. We developed the Shanghai Prediction Model for Elbow Stiffness Surgical Outcome (SPESSO) based on a dataset of 551 patients who underwent open arthrolysis of the elbow in four institutions. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected from medical records. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model was used to optimize the selection of relevant features. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to build the SPESSO. Its prediction performance was evaluated using the concordance index (C-index) and a calibration graph. Internal validation was conducted using bootstrapping validation. Results. BMI, the duration of stiffness, the preoperative ROM, the preoperative intensity of pain, and grade of post-traumatic osteoarthritis of the elbow were identified as predictors of outcome and incorporated to construct the nomogram. SPESSO displayed good discrimination with a C-index of 0.73 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.81). A high C-index value of 0.70 could still be reached in the interval validation. The calibration graph showed good agreement between the nomogram prediction and the outcome. Conclusion. The newly developed SPESSO is a valid and convenient model which can be used to predict the outcome of open arthrolysis of the elbow. It could assist clinicians in counselling patients regarding the choice and expectations of treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(4):486–494

Aims. Heterotopic ossification (HO) is a common complication after elbow trauma and can cause severe upper limb disability. Although multiple prognostic factors have been reported to be associated with the development of post-traumatic HO, no model has yet been able to combine these predictors more succinctly to convey prognostic information and medical measures to patients. Therefore, this study aimed to identify prognostic factors leading to the formation of HO after surgery for elbow trauma, and to establish and validate a nomogram to predict the probability of HO formation in such particular injuries. Methods. This multicentre case-control study comprised 200 patients with post-traumatic elbow HO and 229 patients who had elbow trauma but without HO formation between July 2019 and December 2020. Features possibly associated with HO formation were obtained. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model was used to optimize feature selection. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was applied to build the new nomogram: the Shanghai post-Traumatic Elbow Heterotopic Ossification Prediction model (STEHOP). STEHOP was validated by concordance index (C-index) and calibration plot. Internal validation was conducted using bootstrapping validation. Results. Male sex, obesity, open wound, dislocations, late definitive surgical treatment, and lack of use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were identified as adverse predictors and incorporated to construct the STEHOP model. It displayed good discrimination with a C-index of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.75 to 0.84). A high C-index value of 0.77 could still be reached in the internal validation. The calibration plot showed good agreement between nomogram prediction and observed outcomes. Conclusion. The newly developed STEHOP model is a valid and convenient instrument to predict HO formation after surgery for elbow trauma. It could assist clinicians in counselling patients regarding treatment expectations and therapeutic choices. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):963–971

Aims. Management of displaced paediatric supracondylar elbow fractures remains widely debated and actual practice is unclear. This national trainee collaboration aimed to evaluate surgical and postoperative management of these injuries across the UK. Methods. This study was led by the South West Orthopaedic Research Division (SWORD) and performed by the Supra Man Collaborative. Displaced paediatric supracondylar elbow fractures undergoing surgery between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2019 were retrospectively identified and their anonymized data were collected via Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). Results. A total of 972 patients were identified across 41 hospitals. Mean age at injury was 6.3 years (1 to 15), 504 were male (52%), 583 involved the left side (60%), and 538 were Gartland type 3 fractures (55%). Median time from injury to theatre was 16 hours (interquartile range (IQR) 6.6 to 22), 300 patients (31%) underwent surgery on the day of injury, and 91 (9%) underwent surgery between 10:00 pm and 8:00 am. Overall, 910 patients (94%) had Kirschner (K)-wire) fixation and these were left percutaneous in 869 (95%), while 62 patients (6%) had manipulation under anaesthetic (MUA) and casting. Crossed K-wire configuration was used as fixation in 544 cases (59.5%). Overall, 208 of the fixation cases (61%) performed or supervised by a paediatric orthopaedic consultant underwent lateral-only fixation, whereas 153 (27%) of the fixation cases performed or supervised by a non-paediatric orthopaedic consultant used lateral-only fixation. In total, 129 percutaneous wires (16%) were removed in theatre. Of the 341 percutaneous wire fixations performed or supervised by a paediatric orthopaedic consultant, 11 (3%) underwent wire removal in theatre, whereas 118 (22%) of the 528 percutaneous wire fixation cases performed or supervised by a non-paediatric orthopaedic consultant underwent wire removal in theatre. Four MUA patients (6%) and seven K-wire fixation patients (0.8%) required revision surgery within 30 days for displacement. Conclusion. The treatment of supracondylar elbow fractures in children varies across the UK. Patient cases where a paediatric orthopaedic consultant was involved had an increased tendency for lateral only K-wire fixation and for wire removal in clinic. Low rates of displacement requiring revision surgery were identified in all fixation configurations. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):82–87

The June 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Reverse versus anatomical total shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis? A UK national picture; Acute rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (ARTISAN): pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial; acid for rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Metal or ceramic humeral head total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of data from the National Joint Registry; Platelet-rich plasma has better results for long-term functional improvement and pain relief for lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Quantitative fatty infiltration and 3D muscle volume after nonoperative treatment of symptomatic rotator cuff tears: a prospective MRI study of 79 patients; Locking plates for non-osteoporotic proximal humeral fractures in the long term; A systematic review of the treatment of primary acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis

Aims. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate machine-learning-based computerized adaptive tests (CATs) for the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and its subscales. Methods. We developed CAT algorithms for the OHS, OKS, OSS, overall OES, and each of the OES subscales, using responses to the full-length questionnaires and a machine-learning technique called regression tree learning. The algorithms were evaluated through a series of simulation studies, in which they aimed to predict respondents’ full-length questionnaire scores from only a selection of their item responses. In each case, the total number of items used by the CAT algorithm was recorded and CAT scores were compared to full-length questionnaire scores by mean, SD, score distribution plots, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation (ICC), and the Bland-Altman method. Differences between CAT scores and full-length questionnaire scores were contextualized through comparison to the instruments’ minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Results. The CAT algorithms accurately estimated 12-item questionnaire scores from between four and nine items. Scores followed a very similar distribution between CAT and full-length assessments, with the mean score difference ranging from 0.03 to 0.26 out of 48 points. Pearson’s correlation coefficient and ICC were 0.98 for each 12-item scale and 0.95 or higher for the OES subscales. In over 95% of cases, a patient’s CAT score was within five points of the full-length questionnaire score for each 12-item questionnaire. Conclusion. Oxford Hip Score, Oxford Knee Score, Oxford Shoulder Score, and Oxford Elbow Score (including separate subscale scores) CATs all markedly reduce the burden of items to be completed without sacrificing score accuracy. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):786–794

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of application of a 3D-printed megaprosthesis with hemiarthroplasty design for defects of the distal humerus or proximal ulna following tumour resection. Methods. From June 2018 to January 2020, 13 patients with aggressive or malignant tumours involving the distal humerus (n = 8) or proximal ulna (n = 5) were treated by en bloc resection and reconstruction with a 3D-printed megaprosthesis with hemiarthroplasty, designed in our centre. In this paper, we summarize the baseline and operative data, oncological outcome, complication profiles, and functional status of these patients. Results. Preparation of the prosthesis was a mean of 8.0 days (SD 1.5), during which time no patients experienced tumour progression. The mean operating time and intraoperative blood loss were 158.1 minutes (SD 67.6) and 176.9 ml (SD 187.8), respectively. All of the prostheses were implanted successfully. During a mean follow-up of 25.7 months (SD 7.8), no patients died, but four had complications (two superficial wound problems, one temporary palsy of radial nerve, and one dislocation). No aseptic loosening, structural failure, infection, heterotopic ossification, or degenerative arthritis was seen in this study. The mean flexion of the elbow was 119.6° (SD 15.9°) and the mean extension lag was 11.9° (SD 13.8°). The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society 93 score and Mayo Elbow Performance Score were 28.4 (SD 0.9) and 97.7 (SD 4.4), respectively. Conclusion. The custom-made, 3D-printed megaprosthesis with hemiarthroplasty is a feasible option for functional reconstruction after resection of a tumour in the distal humerus or proximal ulna. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):747–757

The December 2015 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup360 looks at:

The August 2013 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360 . looks at: the sternoclavicular joint revisited; surgical simulators: more than just a fancy idea?; arthroscopic tennis elbow release; costly clavicle stabilisation; a better treatment for tennis elbow?; shock news: surgeons and radiologists agree; overhead athletes and SLAP repair; and total shoulder arthroplasty more effective than hemiarthroplasty

The June 2013 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360 . looks at: whether suture anchors are still the gold standard; infection and revision elbow arthroplasty; the variable success of elbow replacements; sliding knots; neurologic cuff pain and the suprascapular nerve; lies, damn lies and statistics; osteoarthritis; and one- or two-stage treatment for the infected shoulder revision

The April 2013 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360 . looks at: biceps, pressure and instability; chronic acromio-clavicular joint instability; depression and shoulder pain; shoulder replacement and transfusion; cuff integrity and function; iatropathic plexus injury; the accuracy of acromio-clavicular joint injection; and tennis as a risk factor for tennis elbow

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

Hinged elbow orthoses (HEO) are often used to allow protected motion of the unstable elbow. However, biomechanical studies have not shown HEO to improve the stability of a lateral collateral ligament (LCL) deficient elbow. This lack of effectiveness may be due to the straight hinge of current HEO designs which do not account for the native carrying angle of the elbow. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a custom-designed HEO with adjustable valgus angulation on stabilizing the LCL deficient elbow. Eight cadaveric upper extremities were mounted in an elbow motion simulator in the varus position. An LCL injured (LCLI) model was created by sectioning of the common extensor origin, and the LCL. The adjustable HEO was secured to the arm and its effect with 0°, 10°, and 20° (BR00, BR10, BR20) of valgus angulation was investigated. Varus-valgus angles and ulnohumeral rotations were recorded using an electromagnetic tracking system during simulated active elbow flexion with the forearm pronated and supinated. We examined 5 elbow states, intact, LCLI, BR00, BR10, BR20. There were significant differences in varus and ER angulation between different elbow states with the forearm both pronated and supinated (P=0 for all). The LCLI state with or without the brace resulted in significant increases in varus angulation and ER of the ulnohumeral articulation compared to the intact state (P 0.05). The difference between each of the brace angles and the LCLI state ranged from 1.1° to 2.4° for varus angulation and 0.5° to 1.6° for ER. Although there was a trend toward decreasing varus and external rotation angulation of the ulnohumeral articulation with the application of this adjustable HEO, none of the brace angles examined in this biomechanical investigation was able to fully restore the stability of the LCL deficient elbow. This lack of stabilizing effect may be due to the weight of the brace exerting unintentional varus and torsional forces on the unstable elbow. Previous investigations have shown that the varus arm position is highly unstable in the LCL deficient elbow. Our results demonstrate that application of an HEO with an adjustable carrying angle does not sufficiently stabilize the LCL deficient elbow in this highly unstable position and varus arm position should continue to be avoided in the rehabilitation programs of an LCL deficient elbow