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.

Purpose: The indication to perform a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) versus a hemiarthroplasty is guided by a patient’s intended level of activity after surgery. It is unclear what activities patients actually perform following shoulder replacement, therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the self-reported activities of patients following either a TSA or hemiarthroplasty.

Method: Two groups of 75 patients each, following TSA or hemiarthroplasty, were matched for a variety of demographic variables. A mailed activity questionnaire asked patients to report their level of pain, motion, strength, and a choice of 70 different activities. Reported activities were classified as high (i.e. tennis) or low (i.e. fishing) demand, and categorized as household (i.e. cooking), yard work (i.e. gardening), sporting (i.e. golf), or musical (i.e. piano).

Results: Ninety-six (64%) patients completed the survey, 50 in the TSA group (27F:19M, avg. 53.2 yrs), and 46 in the HA group (29F:21M, avg. 53.5 yrs). Pain was not different between groups (3.6/10 TSA: 3.9/10 HA), yet a significant difference was reported in forward flexion (145° TSA: 120° HA, P< .002) and strength (6.3/10 TSA: 5.3/10 HA, P< .01). Across all categories whether it be high or low demand, the TSA group (10.4 activities/person) reported more activities compared with the hemiarthroplasty group (8.6 activities/person).

Conclusion: The conventional understanding that a hemiarthroplasty provides the possibility for more activity following surgery is not supported by our data. Patients following a TSA reported better motion and strength and were more active than the hemiarthroplasty group.

Purpose: Resection elbow arthroplasty is a salvage procedure typically considered as a last resort when other reconstructive options have failed. It was the intent of this study to evaluate the long-term outcome of patients following resection elbow arthroplasty.

Method: Fifty-four elbow resections performed between 1975 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed. Pre and post-operative elbow function was evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and additional follow-up data was compiled using the Disability of Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score. All patients in this study had a resection following a failed total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Nineteen patients had died at time of follow-up, and 5 patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 30 of the surviving 34 patients (88%) available for long-term evaluation.

Results: The main indication for resection in this study was infection (50 of 54 elbows). The average MEPS prior to resection was 36. The long-term results in 30 patients at an average of 11 yrs (range 2.7–28 yrs) demonstrated an average MEPS score of 60, and a DASH score of 71. Complications were common including persistent infection requiring re-operation (44%), intra-operative fracture (32%), transient (11%) or permanent (5.5%) nerve damage, and one case of vascular injury requiring amputation. Achieving a stable resected elbow correlated strongly with a good long-term MEPS score (r=0.75).

Conclusion: This study emphasizes the difficulty in treating patients with a failed total elbow arthroplasty. Resection arthroplasty is a salvage procedure indicated primarily for persistently infected TEA and results in satisfactory outcomes in this population.

Purpose: This study reviews the early results of elbow hemiarthroplasty for distal humeral fractures.

Method: Elbow hemiarthroplasty was performed on 30 patients (mean 65 years; 29–91) for unreconstruc-table 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 Lattitude (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.

Results: At follow up of 28 patients mean flexion deformity was 25 degrees, flexion 128 degrees, range of pro-nosupination 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 pain on loading (two with prosthesis or pin loosening), four had laxity associated with column fractures (two symptomatic) and ten had asymptomatic laxity only. The triceps on approach had worse laxity 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 and two were flexed. Two elbows had early degenerative changes and 15 developed an osteophytic lip on the medial trochlea.

Conclusion: Early results of elbow hemiarthroplasty show good outcomes after complex distal humeral fractures, despite a technically demanding procedure, met-alware removal in 40%, symptomatic laxity in 12% and column non-union in 8%. Better results are obtained for treatment in the acute setting and with use of an olecranon osteotomy.

This study reviews the early results of elbow hemiarthroplasty for distal humeral fracture. Elbow hemiarthroplasty 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 6 and an olecranon osteotomy in 24. A Sorbie Questor prosthesis (Wright Medical Technology) was used in 14 patients and a Lattitude (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%); 2 revisions to a linked prosthesis for periprosthetic fracture and aseptic loosening at 53 and 16 months, 12 metalwork removals and 4 ulnar nerve procedures. Posterolateral rotatory instability was present in one elbow, 4 had laxity and pain on loading (2 with prosthesis or pin loosening), 4 had laxity associated with column fractures (2 symptomatic) and 10 had asymptomatic laxity only. The triceps on approach had worse laxity and clinical scores. Uncomplicated union occurred in all olecranon osteotomies and 86% of column fractures. One elbow had an incomplete cement mantle and 7 had lucencies > 1 mm; one was loose but acceptable. 5 prostheses were in slight varus and 2 were flexed. 2 elbows had early degenerative changes and 15 an osteophytic lip on the medial trochlea. Elbow hemiarthroplasty has good early results after complex distal humeral fractures, despite a demanding procedure, metalware removal in 40%, symptomatic laxity in 12% and column non-union in 8%. Better results are obtained for treatment in the acute setting and with use of an olecranon osteotomy.

Introduction and Aims: Chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures have traditionally been treated with a biceps to brachialis tenodesis. The use of a semitendinosus autograft to reconstruct the distal biceps tendon for chronic rupture has been described. This study evaluates the functional outcome of a group of patients treated with autograft reconstruction.

Method: This retrospective study identified six patients who underwent a late reconstruction of a biceps tendon rupture using a semitendinosis autograft. Functional outcome was evaluated objectively and subjectively. Clinical subjective evaluation included the MAYO elbow score and the outcome questionnaire from the Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (SSES). Objective outcomes were assessed by measurement of peak torque for both elbow flexion and supination using a Cybex II Isokinetic machine. Comparisons were made with the opposite limb.

Results: Six right-handed male patients aged 42±7 yrs (range 34–48 yrs) were evaluated in this study, five of which achieved a good to excellent MAYO performance score (average 87 ±12), and SSES score (average 86±21). Peak torque obtained during maximal elbow flexion was 44±17 Nm (vs. 55 ±16 Nm opposite elbow) during supination was 8±4Nm (vs. 10±2Nm opposite elbow).

Conclusion: This study represents a series of patients with autograft reconstruction of the chronic distal biceps rupture. It is the first study to quantitatively measure the recovery of strength of elbow flexion and supination. The semitendinosus autograft provides a strong and reliable reconstructive option in the majority of patients with chronic biceps tendon ruptures. Recovery of elbow flexion and supination power is nearly normal.