Aims. In patients with a failed radial head arthroplasty (RHA), simple removal of the implant is an option. However, there is little information in the literature about the outcome of this procedure. The aim of this study was to review the mid-term clinical and radiological results, and the rate of complications and removal of the implant, in patients whose initial RHA was undertaken acutely for trauma involving the elbow. Methods. A total of 11 patients in whom removal of a RHA without reimplantation was undertaken as a revision procedure were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 8.4 years (6 to 11). The range of motion (ROM) and stability of the elbow were recorded. Pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The functional outcome was assessed using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the
Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of complex radial head fractures at mid-term follow-up, and determine whether open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or radial head arthroplasty (RHA) should be recommended for surgical treatment. Methods. Patients who underwent surgery for complex radial head fractures (Mason type III, ≥ three fragments) were divided into two groups (ORIF and RHA) and propensity score matching was used to individually match patients based on patient characteristics. Ultimately, 84 patients were included in this study. After a mean follow-up of 4.1 years (2.0 to 9.5), patients were invited for clinical and radiological assessment. The Mayo Elbow Performance
We developed a questionnaire to assess patient-reported outcome after surgery of the elbow from interviews with patients. Initially, 17 possible items with five response options were included. A prospective study of 104 patients (107 elbow operations) was carried out to analyse the underlying factor structure, dimensionality, internal and test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the questionnaire items. This was compared with the Mayo Elbow performance score clinical scale, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and the Short-Form (SF-36) General Health Survey. In total, five questions were considered inappropriate, which resulted in the final 12-item questionnaire, which has been referred to as the
Aims. To evaluate the outcomes of terrible triad injuries (TTIs) in mid-term follow-up and determine whether surgical treatment of the radial head influences clinical and radiological outcomes. Methods. Follow-up assessment of 88 patients with TTI (48 women, 40 men; mean age 57 years (18 to 82)) was performed after a mean of 4.5 years (2.0 to 9.4). The Mayo Elbow Performance
Aims. Acute distal biceps tendon repair reduces fatigue-related pain and minimizes loss of supination of the forearm and strength of flexion of the elbow. We report the short- and long-term outcome following repair using fixation with a cortical button techqniue. Methods. Between October 2010 and July 2018, 102 patients with a mean age of 43 years (19 to 67), including 101 males, underwent distal biceps tendon repair less than six weeks after the injury, using cortical button fixation. The primary short-term outcome measure was the rate of complications. The primary long-term outcome measure was the abbreviated Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score. Secondary outcomes included the
Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of Monteggia-like lesions at midterm follow-up and to determine whether the surgical treatment of the radial head influences the clinical and radiological results. Patients and Methods. A total of 78 patients with a Monteggia-like lesion, including 44 women and 34 men with a mean age of 54.7 years (19 to 80), were available for assessment after a mean 4.6 years (2 to 9.2). The outcome was assessed using the Mayo Elbow Performance
Medium-term results of the Discovery elbow replacement
are presented. We reviewed 51 consecutive primary Discovery total
elbow replacements (TERs) implanted in 48 patients. The mean age
of the patients was 69.2 years (49 to 92), there were 19 males and
32 females (37%:63%) The mean follow-up was 40.6 months (24 to 69).
A total of six patients were lost to follow-up. Statistically significant
improvements in range movement and
Arthroplasties of the elbow, including total elbow arthroplasty, radial head arthroplasty, distal humeral hemiarthroplasty, and radiocapitellar arthroplasty, are rarely undertaken. This scoping review aims to outline the current research in this area to inform the development of future research. A scoping review was undertaken adhering to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines using Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and trial registries, limited to studies published between 1 January 1990 and 7 February 2021. Endnote software was used for screening and selection, and included randomized trials, non-randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies, analytical cross-sectional studies, and case series of ten or more patients reporting the clinical outcomes of elbow arthroplasty. The results are presented as the number of types of studies, sample size, length of follow-up, clinical outcome domains and instruments used, sources of funding, and a narrative review.Aims
Methods
The primary aim of this retrospective study was to identify the
incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO) following elective and
trauma elbow arthroplasty. The secondary aim was to determine clinical
outcomes with respect to the formation of heterotopic ossification. A total of 55 total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) (52 patients)
performed between June 2007 and December 2015 were eligible for
inclusion in the study (29 TEAs for primary elective arthroplasty
and 26 TEAs for trauma). At review, 15 patients (17 total elbow
arthroplasties) had died from unrelated causes. There were 14 men
and 38 women with a mean age of 70 years (42 to 90). The median
clinical follow-up was 3.6 years (1.2 to 6) and the median radiological follow-up
was 3.1 years (0.5 to 7.5).Aim
Patients and Methods
We review our experience of Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty
(TEA) for fractures of the distal humerus in non-rheumatoid patients
with a minimum of ten years follow-up. TEA through a triceps splitting approach was peformed in 37 non-rheumatoid
patients for a fracture of the distal humerus between 1996 and 2004.
One patient could not be traced and 17 had died before the tenth
anniversary of their surgery. This left 19 patients with a minimum
follow-up of ten years to form the study group. Of these, 13 patients
were alive at the time of final review. The other six had died,
but after the tenth anniversary of their elbow arthroplasty. Their
clinical and radiological data were included in the study. Aims
Patients and Methods
The best method of managing a fracture of the
distal humerus in a frail low-demand patient with osteoporotic bone remains
controversial. Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has been recommended
for patients in whom open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF)
is not possible. Conservative methods of treatment, including the
‘bag of bones’ technique (acceptance of displacement of the bony
fragments and early mobilisation), are now rarely considered as
they are believed to give a poor functional result. We reviewed 40 elderly and low-demand patients (aged 50 to 93
years, 72% women) with a fracture of the distal humerus who had
been treated conservatively at our hospital between March 2008 and
December 2013, and assessed their short- and medium-term functional
outcome. In the short-term, the mean Broberg and Morrey score improved
from 42 points (poor; 23 to 80) at six weeks after injury to 67
points (fair; 40 to 88) by three months. In the medium-term, surviving patients (n = 20) had a mean Oxford
elbow score of 30 points (7 to 48) at four years and a mean Disabilities
of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score of 38 points (0 to 75): 95%
reported a functional range of elbow flexion. The cumulative rate
of fracture union at one year was 53%. The mortality at five years approached
40%. Conservative management of a fracture of the distal humerus in
a low-demand patient only gives a modest functional result, but
avoids the substantial surgical risks associated with primary ORIF
or TEA. Cite this article:
Orthopaedic outcome measures are used to evaluate the effect of operative interventions. They are used for audit and research. Knowledge of these measures is becoming increasingly important with league tables comparing surgeons and hospitals being made accessible to the profession and the general public. Several types of tool are available to describe outcome after hip surgery such as generic quality-of-life questionnaires, disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaires, hip-specific outcome measures and general short-term clinical measures. We provide an overview of the outcome measures commonly used to evaluate hip interventions.