Purpose. In total elbow arthroplasty (TEA), especially for elbows with condyle defect due to rheumatoid arthritis or trauma, determination of rotation alignment of implants is often difficult. To develop a navigation system for TEA, selecting bony landmarks that can be identified intraoperatively is important. Therefore, we developed a new roentgen free navigation system such as special alignment jigs for TEA based on CT data of normal elbows. The aim of this study was to evaluate alignments of implants after MIS-TEA using the new systems. And also, we reported that 6 bony landmarks on the elbow showed small variability in normal elbows by CT examinations and were considered to be usable as intraoperative landmarks for determining rotational position of implants last year. Especially in RA elbow, posterior aspect of humerus and ulnar aspect of proximal part of ulna were able to be identified even if there is a large bone defect that extends to the lateral or/and medial epicondyle. We used a new roentgen free navigation system in TEA with using Solar elbow from 2009. The aim of this study was to evaluate alignments of implants after MIS-TEA using the new systems by CT examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS. For determination of alignment and anatomical landmarks to develop the jigs, 3D-CT data of 11 normal elbows was investigated. The posterior aspect of humeral shaft and ulnar aspect of proximal ulna were selected as bony landmarks. Because these can be identified intraoperatively and remain in elbows with extensive bone loss. MIS-TEA with Solar Elbow (Stryker) using these new systems were investigated with postoperative 3D-CT in 14 elbows of 13 patients. Their average age was 68.8 years old. Basic diseases were 10 rheumatoid arthritis and 4 distal humerus injuries. The alignments of humeral and ulnar component were measured on postoperative 3D-CT. RESULTS. Rotational alignment (humerus / ulna) was pronation 6.8° ± 5.7° / pronation 4.6° ± 9.1°; frontal alignment was valgus 0.1° ± 2.7° / valgus 0.1° ± 3.7°; and sagittal alignment was extension 0.6° ± 3.0° / extension 8.9° ± 2.5°. In condyle-defect group (n=5), comparable alignment with condyle-preserved group was obtained. DISCUSSION. The new systems were effective in determining intraoperative alignment even in elbows with extensive bone defect. Extension alignment of the ulna component is because the short component of Solar Elbow was placed along the center axis of the proximal ulna, which inclines in the extension direction relative to the axis of distal ulna

Previous biomechanical studies of lateral collateral ligament (LCL) injuries and their surgical repair, reconstruction and rehabilitation have primarily relied on gravity effects with the arm in the varus position. The application of torsional moments to the forearm manually in the laboratory is not reproducible, hence studies to date likely do not represent forces encountered clinically. The aim of this investigation was to develop a new biomechanical testing model to quantify posterolateral stability of the elbow using an in vitro elbow motion simulator. Six cadaveric upper extremities were mounted in an elbow motion simulator in the varus position. A threaded screw was then inserted on the dorsal aspect of the proximal ulna and a weight hanger was used to suspend 400g, 600g, and 800g of weight from the screw head to allow torsional moments to be applied to the ulna. An LCL injured (LCLI) model was created by sectioning of the common extensor origin, and the LCL. Ulnohumeral rotation was recorded using an electromagnetic tracking system during simulated active and passive elbow flexion with the forearm pronated and supinated. A repeated measures analysis of variance was performed to compare elbow states (intact, LCLI, and LCLI with 400g, 600g, and 800g of weight). During active motion, there was a significant difference between different elbow states (P=.001 pronation, P=.0001 supination). Post hoc analysis showed that the addition of weights did not significantly increase the external rotation (ER) of the ulnohumeral articulation (10°±7°, P=.268 400g, 10.5°±7.1°, P=.156 600g, 11°±7.2°, P=.111 800g) compared to the LCLI state (8.4°±6.4°) with the forearm pronated. However, with the forearm supinated, the addition of 800g of weight significantly increased the ER (9.2°±5.9°, P=.038) compared to the LCLI state (5.9°±5.5°) and the addition of 400g and 600g of weights approached significance (8.2°±5.7°, P=.083 400g, 8.7°±5.9°, P=.054 600g). During passive motion, there was a significant difference between different elbow states (P=.0001 pronation, P=.0001 supination). Post hoc analysis showed that the addition of 600g and 800g but not 400g resulted in a significant increase in ER of the ulnohumeral articulation (9.3°±7.8°, P=.103 400g, 11.2°±6.2°, P=.004 600g, 12.7°±6.8°, P=.006 800g) compared to the LCLI state (3.7°±5.4°) with the forearm pronated. With the forearm supinated, the addition of 400g, 600g, and 800g significantly increased the ER (11.7°±6.7°, P=.031 400g, 13.5°±6.8°, P=.019 600g, 14.9°±6.9°, P=.024 800g) compared to the LCLI state (4.3°±6.6°). This investigation confirms a novel biomechanical testing model for studying PLRI. Moreover, it demonstrates that the application of even small amounts of torsional moment on the forearm with the arm in the varus position exacerbates the rotational instability seen with the LCL deficient elbow. The effect of torsional loading was significantly worse with the forearm supinated and during passive elbow motion. This new model allows for a more provocative testing of elbow stability after LCL repair or reconstruction. Furthermore, this model will allow for smaller sample sizes to be used while still demonstrating clinically significant differences. Future biomechanical studies evaluating LCL injuries and their repair and rehabilitation should consider using this testing protocol

Fracture or resection of the radial head can cause unbalance and long-term functional complications in the elbow. Studies have shown that a radial head excision can change elbow kinematics and decrease elbow stability. The radial head is also important in both valgus and varus laxity and displacement. However, the effect of radial head on ulnohumeral joint load is not known. The objective of this experimental study was to compare the axial loading produced at the ulnohumeral joint during active flexion with and without a radial head resection. Ten cadaveric arms were used. Each specimen was prepared and secured in an elbow motion simulator. To simulate active flexion, the tendons of the biceps, brachialis, brachioradialis, and triceps were attached to servo motors. The elbow was moved through a full range of flexion. To quantify loads at the ulnohumeral joint, a load cell was implanted in the proximal ulna. Testing was conducted in the intact then radial head resected case, in supination in the horizontal, vertical, varus and valgus positions. When comparing the average loads during flexion, the axial ulnar load in the horizontal position was 89±29N in an intact state compared to 122±46N during radial head resection. In the vertical position, the intact state produced a 67±16N load while the resected state was 78±23N. In the varus and valgus positions, intact state resulted in loads of 57±26N and 18±3N, respectively. Conversely, with a radial head resection, varus and valus positions measured 56±23N and 54±23N loads, respectively. For both joint configurations, statistical differences were observed for all flexion angles in all arm positions during active flexion (p=0.0001). When comparing arm positions and flexion angle, statistical differences were measured between valgus, horizontal and vertical (p<0.005) except for varus position (p=0.64). Active flexion caused a variation in loads throughout flexion when comparing intact versus radial head resection. The most significant variation in ulnar loading occurred during valgus and horizontal flexion. The vertical and varus position showed little variation because the position of the arm is not affected by the loss of the radial head. However, in valgus position, the resected radial head creates a void in the joint space and, with gravity, causes greater compensatory ulnar loading. In the horizontal position, the forearm is not directly affected by gravitational pull and cannot adjust to counterbalance the resected radial head, therefore loads are localised in the ulnohumeral joint. These findings prove the importance of the radial head and that a radial head resection can overload the ulnohumeral side

Introduction. Hemiarthroplasty is a treatment option for comminuted fractures and non-unions of the distal humerus. Unfortunately, the poor anatomical fit of off-the-shelf distal humeral hemiarthroplasty (DHH) implants can cause altered cartilage contact mechanics. The result is reduced contact area and higher cartilage stresses, thus subsequent cartilage erosion a concern. Previous studies have investigated reverse-engineered DHH implants which reproduce the shape of the distal humerus bone or cartilage at the articulation, but still failed to match native contact mechanics. In this study, design optimization was used to determine the optimal DHH implant shape. We hypothesized that patient-specific optimal implants will outperform population-optimized designs, and both will optimize simple reverse-engineered designs. Methods. The boney geometries of six elbow joints were created based on cadaver arm CT data using a semi-automatic threshold technique in 3D Slicer. CT scans were also obtained with the elbows denuded and disarticulated, such that the high contrast between hydrated cartilage and air could be exploited in order to reconstruct cartilage geometry. Using this 3D model data, finite element contact models were created for each elbow, where bones (distal humerus, proximal ulna and radius) were modelled as rigid surfaces covered by non-uniform thickness layers of cartilage. Cartilage was modelled as a Neo-Hookean hyperelastic material (K = 0.31 MPa, G = 0.37 MPa), and frictionless contact was assumed. In order to simulate hemiarthroplasty, the distal humerus cartilage surface was replaced by either a rigid surface in the shape of the subchondral bone (bone reverse engineered or BRE design), or a surface offset from the bone by some distance, which was defined parametrically and modified by an optimization algorithm. Simple flexion-extension with constant balanced muscle loads was simulated in ABAQUS (Fig 1), and resulting contact areas and contact stresses were calculated. For each specimen, the contact mechanics of the intact and DHH reconstructed joints were calculated. A design optimization algorithm in Matlab was used to determine the optimal offset distance which resulted in contact stress distributions on the ulna and radius which most closely resembled their intact conditions. This procedure was repeated in order to generate specimen-optimal offsets, as well as population-optimal offsets. Results. The population-optimal offset distance was 0.72 mm; whereas the specimen-optimal offsets ranged from 0.52 to 1.04 mm. Compared to the BRE design, which is effectively an offset distance of 0 mm, contact area generally increased at both the ulna (Fig 2) and radius (Fig 3) when either optimized design was used. On average, the specimen-optimal implant designs yielded only slightly larger contact areas than the population-optimal offsets, and only at mid-flexion (40–60 deg). Neither optimization strategy increased contact areas to those of the intact joint. Conclusions. Design optimization is a promising technique for improving patient-specific implants by offering customization in terms of contact mechanics, instead of simply reproducing osseous geometry. In this study, our models predict a large increase in contact area if optimal offsets are used when designing subject-specific DHH, and a population-optimal offset distance seems to be just as good as a subject-optimal offset. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly (see Info & Metrics tab above).

We report the case of a 12-year-old boy with flexion loss in the left elbow caused by deficient of the concavity corresponding to the coronoid fossa in the distal humerus. The range of motion (ROM) was 15°/100°, and pain was induced by passive terminal flexion. Plain radiographs revealed complete epiphyseal closure, and computed tomography (CT) revealed a flat anterior surface of the distal humerus; the coronoid fossa was absent. Then, the bony morphometric contour was surgically recreated using a navigation system and a three-dimensional elbow joint model. A three-dimensional model of the elbow joint was made preoperatively and the model comprising the distal humerus was milled so that elbow flexion flexion of more than 140° could be achieved against the proximal ulna and radius. Navigation-assisted surgery (contouring arthroplasty) was performed using CT data from this milled three-dimensional model. Subsequently, an intraoperative passive elbow flexion of 135° was obtained. However, active elbow flexion was still inadequate one year after operation, and a triceps lengthening procedure was performed. At the final follow-up one year after triceps lengthening, a considerable improvement in flexion was observed with a ROM of −12°/125°. Plain radiographs revealed no signs of degenerative change, and CT revealed the formation of the radial and coronoid fossae on the anterior surface of the distal humerus. Navigation-assisted surgery for deformity of the distal humerus based on a contoured three-dimensional model is extremely effective as it facilitates evaluation of the bony morphometry of the distal humerus. It is particularly useful as an indicator for milling the actual bone when a model of the mirror image of the unaffected side cannot be applied to the affected side as observed in our case

Purpose. Assess and report the functional and post-operative outcomes of complex acute radial head fractures with elbow instability treated by arthroplasty using an uncemented modular anatomic prosthesis. Methods. Over a 3-year period (2007–2010), 21 patients (mean age 51.9 years) were treated primarily with modular radial head arthroplasty (mean follow up of 27.1 months). Data was collected retrospectively using clinical notes, operation documentation and prospectively using validated scoring systems namely the Oxford Elbow Index, Quick DASH and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Associated elbow fractures, ligamentous injury and short to mid term post-operative outcomes including radiographic assessment were recorded. Results. The mean Oxford Elbow Score was 34.80 (range 20–48). The mean Quick Dash score was 26.01 (range 0–68.2). The Mayo Performance score showed 6 scored excellent, 5 scored good, 3 scored fair and 2 scored poor. Regarding post-operative outcomes, 1 patient had a radial head dislocation, 1 patient had prosthesis removal for ongoing pain and 1 patient had a total elbow replacement due to associated proximal ulna fracture non-union. 11 patients had an associated ligamentous injury of which 6 had an associated coronoid fracture. Of note, 7 patient's radiographs showed early signs of implant loosening; this was mainly asymptomatic. Conclusions. With regard to complex radial head fractures with elbow instability, patient outcome measures showed good functionality and overall patient satisfaction despite radiographic evidence of loosening. Post-operative complication rates were low. These findings support the use of this radial head prosthesis in arthoplasty surgery for the treatment of complex acute radial head fractures with elbow instability

Aims

Elective surgery has been severely curtailed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is little evidence to guide surgeons in assessing what processes should be put in place to restart elective surgery safely in a time of endemic COVID-19 in the community.