Determining and accurately restoring the flexion-extension axis of the elbow is essential for functional recovery after total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). We evaluated the effect of morphological features of the elbow on variations of alignment of the components at TEA. Morphological and positioning variables were compared by systematic CT scans of 22 elbows in 21 patients after TEA.

There were five men and 16 women, and the mean age was 63 years (38 to 80). The mean follow-up was 22 months (11 to 44).

The anterior offset and version of the humeral components were significantly affected by the anterior angulation of the humerus (p = 0.052 and p = 0.004, respectively). The anterior offset and version of the ulnar components were strongly significantly affected by the anterior angulation of the ulna (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001).

The closer the anterior angulation of the ulna was to the joint, the lower the ulnar anterior offset (p = 0.030) and version of the ulnar component (p = 0.010). The distance from the joint to the varus angulation also affected the lateral offset of the ulnar component (p = 0.046).

Anatomical variations at the distal humerus and proximal ulna affect the alignment of the components at TEA. This is explained by abutment of the stems of the components and is particularly severe when there are substantial deformities or the deformities are close to the joint.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1539–45.

We report the results of performing a pronating osteotomy of the radius, coupled with other soft-tissue procedures, as part of an upper limb functional surgery programme in tetraplegic patients with supination contractures.

In total 12 patients were reviewed with a mean follow-up period of 60 months (12 to 109). Pre-operatively, passive movement ranged from a mean of 19.2° pronation (−70° to 80°) to 95.8° supination (80° to 140°). A pronating osteotomy of the radius was then performed with release of the interosseous membrane. Extension of the elbow was restored postoperatively in 11 patients, with key-pinch reconstruction in nine.

At the final follow-up every patient could stabilise their hand in pronation, with a mean active range of movement of 79.6° (60° to 90°) in pronation and 50.4° (0° to 90°) in supination. No complications were observed. The mean strength of extension of the elbow was 2.7 (2 to 3) MRC grading.

Pronating osteotomy stabilises the hand in pronation while preserving supination, if a complete release of the interosseous membrane is also performed. This technique fits well into surgical programmes for enhancing upper limb function.

We have compared the functional outcome after glenohumeral fusion for the sequelae of trauma to the brachial plexus between two groups of adult patients reviewed after a mean interval of 70 months. Group A (11 patients) had upper palsy with a functional hand and group B (16 patients) total palsy with a flail hand.

All 27 patients had recovered active elbow flexion against resistance before shoulder fusion. Both groups showed increased functional capabilities after glenohumeral arthrodesis and a flail hand did not influence the post-operative active range of movement. The strength of pectoralis major is a significant prognostic factor in terms of ultimate excursion of the hand and of shoulder strength. Glenohumeral arthrodesis improves function in patients who have recovered active elbow flexion after brachial plexus palsy even when the hand remains paralysed.