Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 81 - 100 of 139
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 79-B, Issue 5 | Pages 770 - 772
1 Sep 1997
Lee BPH Morrey BF

The short-term assessment of 14 arthroscopic synovectomies of the elbow in 11 patients with rheumatoid arthritis showed that 93% achieved a short-term rating of excellent or good on the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. At the most recent assessment at an average of 42 months, however, only 57% maintained excellent or good results; four had required total elbow replacement. Although rehabilitation is facilitated by an arthroscopic procedure the results deteriorate more rapidly than after open synovectomy. This may be due to the limitations of the arthroscopic technique and is consistent with experience of the similar procedure in the knee. Recognition of the short-term gain and the potential for serious nerve injury should be considered when offering arthroscopic synovectomy


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 69-B, Issue 4 | Pages 652 - 655
1 Aug 1987
Ross A Sneath R Scales J

Between 1969 and 1985 26 patients with destructive lesions of the distal humerus were treated by endoprosthetic replacement; each implant was custom-made and incorporated part of the distal humerus or the entire bone as well as a hinged total elbow replacement. Recurrence occurred in three of the patients with tumours, and three prostheses were removed because of deep infection in patients with previously compound injuries of the elbow. Another three loosened without infection, but none needed revision or removal and no amputations resulted. Other complications included nerve palsies, but the only deaths were from metastases. A useful range of elbow movement, with a stable arm and good hand function, was achieved in every patient


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 5 | Pages 32 - 35
1 Oct 2020


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 82-B, Issue 2 | Pages 233 - 238
1 Mar 2000
Cheng SL Morrey BF

Between 1986 and 1994, 13 patients with mobile painful arthritic elbows were treated by distraction interposition arthroplasty using fascia lata. The mean period of follow-up was 63 months. An elbow distractor/fixator was applied for three to four weeks to separate the articular surfaces and to protect the fascial graft. Nine of the 13 patients (69%) had satisfactory relief from pain; eight (62%) had an excellent or good result by the objective criteria of the Mayo Elbow Performance score. Four have required revision to total elbow arthroplasty at a mean of 30 months with good results to date. Instability of the elbow, both before and after surgery, was found to be associated with unsatisfactory results. The rate of success when the procedure was performed for inflammatory arthritis was similar to that for post-traumatic arthritis, about 67%. Eight complications occurred in six patients, all in the group with post-traumatic arthritis. Two of these required further surgical procedures such as transposition of the ulnar nerve or repair of hernia of the fascia lata. Although less reliable than prosthetic replacement, distraction interposition arthroplasty is a useful option in the treatment of young, high-demand patients with arthritis of the elbow. It is rarely indicated in the presence of generalised inflammatory arthritis, but may be of value in those patients in whom the disease is limited primarily to the elbow


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 4 | Pages 30 - 33
1 Aug 2020


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 10, Issue 1 | Pages 28 - 31
1 Feb 2021


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 2 | Pages 366 - 372
1 Feb 2021
Sun Z Li J Luo G Wang F Hu Y Fan C

Aims

This study aimed to determine the minimal detectable change (MDC), minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) under distribution- and anchor-based methods for the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and range of movement (ROM) after open elbow arthrolysis (OEA). We also assessed the proportion of patients who achieved MCID and SCB; and identified the factors associated with achieving MCID.

Methods

A cohort of 265 patients treated by OEA were included. The MEPI and ROM were evaluated at baseline and at two-year follow-up. Distribution-based MDC was calculated with confidence intervals (CIs) reflecting 80% (MDC 80), 90% (MDC 90), and 95% (MDC 95) certainty, and MCID with changes from baseline to follow-up. Anchor-based MCID (anchored to somewhat satisfied) and SCB (very satisfied) were calculated using a five-level Likert satisfaction scale. Multivariate logistic regression of factors affecting MCID achievement was performed.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1620 - 1628
1 Dec 2020
Klug A Nagy A Gramlich Y Hoffmann R

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 Score (MEPS), Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score were evaluated. Radiographs of all patients were analyzed. Fracture types included 13 Mason type I, 16 type II, and 59 type III. Surgical treatment consisted of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in all type II and reconstructable type III fractures, while radial head arthroplasty (RHA) was performed if reconstruction was not possible.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 1 | Pages 32 - 35
1 Feb 2020


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 1, Issue 9 | Pages 576 - 584
18 Sep 2020
Sun Z Liu W Li J Fan C

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.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 8, Issue 6 | Pages 26 - 29
1 Dec 2019


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 3 | Pages 273 - 275
1 Mar 2020
Ahmed SS Haddad FS


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 2 | Pages 46 - 48
1 Apr 2020
Evans JT Whitehouse MR


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 2 | Pages 27 - 30
1 Apr 2020


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 9, Issue 2 | Pages 3 - 6
1 Apr 2020
Myint Y Ollivere B


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1362 - 1369
1 Nov 2019
Giannicola G Calella P Bigazzi P Mantovani A Spinello P Cinotti G

Aims

The aim of this study was to analyze the results of two radiocapitellar prostheses in a large case series followed prospectively, with medium-term follow-up.

Patients and Methods

A total of 31 patients with a mean age of 54 years (27 to 73) were analyzed; nine had primary osteoarthritis (OA) and 17 had post-traumatic OA, three had capitellar osteonecrosis, and two had a fracture. Overall, 17 Lateral Resurfacing Elbow (LRE) and 14 Uni-Elbow Radio-Capitellum Implant (UNI-E) arthroplasties were performed. Pre- and postoperative assessment involved the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (Q-DASH) score, and the modified American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons (m-ASES) score.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 5 | Pages 21 - 24
1 Oct 2018


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 8, Issue 2 | Pages 26 - 29
1 Apr 2019


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 6 | Pages 26 - 28
1 Dec 2018


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 2 | Pages 23 - 25
1 Apr 2018