We present six patients with chronic dislocation of the elbow who were treated by primary semiconstrained total elbow arthroplasty. All were women with a mean age of 65 years (51 to 76), the mean interval between dislocation and surgery was 17 weeks (5 to 52) and the mean follow-up 58 months (24 to 123). The most dramatic improvement was in function. The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score was 5.2 times better (p < 0.001) and the mean total range of movement increased from 33° to 121° (p < 0.001) after operation. Three patients developed wear of polyethylene. One required revision for a periprosthetic fracture, and another required a bushing exchange. Primary semiconstrained elbow arthroplasty provides significant, predictable functional improvement. Potential solutions for wear of polyethylene include a different operative technique or design of implant. Despite the high incidence of such wear, total elbow arthroplasty should be considered as a viable treatment option for chronic dislocation of the elbow in elderly patients

We examined the effects of previous resection of the radial head and synovectomy on the outcome of subsequent total elbow arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Fifteen elbows with a history of resection and synovectomy were compared with a control group of patients who had elbow arthroplasty with an implant of the same design. The mean age in both groups was 63 years. In the study group, resection of the radial head and synovectomy had been undertaken at a mean of 8.9 years before arthroplasty. The mean radiological follow-up for the 13 available patients in the study group was 5.89 years (0.3 to 11.0) and in the control group was 6.6 years (2.2 to 12.6). There were no revisions in either group. The mean Mayo elbow performance score improved from 29 to 96 in the study group, with similar improvement in the control group (28 to 87). The study group had excellent results in 13 elbows and good results in two. The control group had excellent results in seven and good results in six.

Our experience indicates that previous resection of the radial head and synovectomy are not associated with an increased rate of revision following subsequent arthroplasty of the elbow. However, there was a higher rate of complication in the study group compared with the control group.

We reviewed 20 patients who had undergone a Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty after resection of a primary or metastatic tumour from the elbow or distal humerus between 1980 and 2002. Eighteen patients underwent reconstruction for palliative treatment with restoration of function after intralesional surgery and two after excision of a primary bone tumour. The mean follow-up was 30 months (1 to 192).

Five patients (25%) were alive at the final follow-up; 14 (70%) had died of their disease and one of unrelated causes. Local control was achieved in 15 patients (75%). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved from 22 (5 to 45) to 75 points (55 to 95). Four reconstructions (20%) failed and required revision. Seven patients (35%) had early complications, the most frequent being nerve injury (25%). There were no infections or wound complications although 18 patients (90%) had radiotherapy, chemotherapy or both.

The Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty provides good relief from pain and a good functional outcome after resection of tumours of the elbow. The rates of complications involving local recurrence of tumour (25%) and nerve injury (25%) are of concern.

Between 1982 and 1997, 403 consecutive patients (522 elbows) with rheumatoid arthritis underwent Souter-Strathclyde total elbow replacement. By the end of 2007, there had been 66 revisions for aseptic loosening in 60 patients. The mean time of follow-up was 10.6 years (0 to 25) The survival rates at five-, ten, 15 and 19 years were 96% (95%, confidence interval (CI) 95 to 98), 89% (95% CI 86 to 92), 83% (95% CI 78 to 87), and 77% (95% CI 69 to 85), respectively. The small and medium-sized short-stemmed primary humeral components had a 5.6-fold and 3.6-fold risk of revision for aseptic loosening respectively, compared to the medium-sized long-stemmed component. The small and medium-sized all-polyethylene ulnar components had respectively a 28.2-fold and 8.4-fold risk of revision for aseptic loosening, compared to the metal-backed ulnar components.

The use of retentive ulnar components was not associated with an increased risk of aseptic loosening compared to non-retentive implants.

We have investigated the mid-term outcome of total shoulder replacement using a keeled cemented glenoid component and a modern cementing technique with regard to the causes of failure and loosening of the components.

Between 1997 and 2003 we performed 96 total shoulder replacements on 88 patients, 24 men and 64 women with a mean age of 69.7 years (31 to 82). The minimum follow-up was five years and at the time of review 87 shoulders (77 patients) were examined at a mean follow-up of 89.1 months (60 to 127). Cumulative survival curves were generated with re-operations (accomplished and planned), survivorship of the proshesis, loosening of the glenoid (defined as tilt > 5° or subsidence > 5 mm), the presence of radiolucent lines and a Constant score of < 30 as the endpoints.

There were two re-operations not involving revision of the implants and the survival rate of the prosthesis was 100.0% for the follow-up period, with an absolute Constant score of > 30 as the endpoint the survival rate was 98%. Radiological glenoid loosening was 9% after five years, and 33% after nine years. There was an incidence of 8% of radiolucent lines in more than three of six zones in the immediate post-operative period, of 37.0% after the first year which increased to 87.0% after nine years. There was no correlation between the score of Boileau and the total Constant score at the latest follow-up, but there was correlation between glenoid loosening and pain (p = 0.001).

We found that total shoulder replacement had an excellent mid-term survivorship and clinical outcome. The surgical and cementing techniques were related to the decrease in radiolucent lines around the glenoid compared with earlier studies. One concern, however, was the fact that radiolucent lines increased over time and there was a rate of glenoid loosening of 9% after five years and 33% after nine years. This suggests that the design of the glenoid component, and the implantation and cementing techniques may need further improvement.

We report the use of the reverse shoulder prosthesis in the revision of a failed shoulder hemiarthroplasty in 19 shoulders in 18 patients (7 men, 11 women) with severe pain and loss of function. The primary procedure had been undertaken for glenohumeral arthritis associated with severe rotator cuff deficiency.

Statistically significant improvements were seen in pain and functional outcome. After a mean follow-up of 44 months (24 to 89), mean forward flexion improved by 26.4° and mean abduction improved by 35°. There were six prosthesis-related complications in six shoulders (32%), five of which had severe bone loss of the glenoid, proximal humerus or both. Three shoulders (16%) had non-prosthesis related complications.

The use of the reverse shoulder prosthesis provides improvement in pain and function for patients with failure of a hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis and rotator cuff deficiency. However, high rates of complications were associated with glenoid and proximal humeral bone loss.

Over a seven-year period we treated a consecutive series of 58 patients, 20 men and 38 women with a mean age of 66 years (21 to 87) who had an acute complex anterior fracture-dislocation of the proximal humerus. Two patterns of injury are proposed for study based upon a prospective assessment of the pattern of soft-tissue and bony injury and the degree of devascularisation of the humeral head. In 23 patients, the head had retained capsular attachments and arterial back-bleeding (type-I injury), whereas in 35 patients the head was devoid of significant soft-tissue attachments with no active arterial bleeding (type-II injury).

Following treatment by open reduction and internal fixation, only two of 23 patients with type-I injuries developed radiological evidence of osteonecrosis of the humeral head, compared with four of seven patients with type-II injuries.

A policy of primary treatment by open reduction and internal fixation of type-I injuries is justified, whereas most elderly patients (aged 60 years or over) with type-II injuries are best treated by hemiarthroplasty. The best treatment for younger patients (aged under 60 years) who sustain type-II injuries is controversial and an individualised approach to their management is advocated.

We reviewed 39 patients with displaced three- and four-part fractures of the humerus. In 21 patients (group A) we had used an anatomical prosthesis for the humeral head and in 18 (group B) an implant designed for fractures.

When followed up at a mean of 29.3 months after surgery the overall Constant score was 51.9 points; in group A it was 51.5 and in group B 52.4 points. The subjective satisfaction of the patients was assessed using a numerical rating scale and was similar in both groups. In group A complete healing of the tuberosities was found in 29% and 50% in group B. Partial integration was seen in 29% of group A and in only one patient in group B, while resorption was noted in 43% of group A and 44% of group B. The functional outcome was significantly better in patients with complete or partial healing of the tuberosities (p = 0.022). The specific trauma prosthesis did not lead to better healing of the tuberosities. The difference in clinical outcome obtained by the two designs did not reach statistical significance.

Replacement of the shoulder in juvenile idiopathic arthritis is not often performed and there have been no published series to date.

We present nine glenohumeral hemiarthroplasties in eight patients with systemic or polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The mean follow-up was six years (59 to 89 months). The mean age at the time of surgery was 32 years. Surgery took place at a mean of 27 years after diagnosis. The results indicated excellent relief from pain. There was restoration of useful function which deteriorated with time, in part because of progression of the systemic disease in this severely affected group. No patient has required revision to date and there has been no radiological evidence of loosening or osteolysis around the implants.

We discuss the pathoanatomical challenges unique to this group. There was very little space for a prosthetic joint and, in some cases, bony deformity and the small size necessitated the use of custom-made implants.

We studied retrospectively the results of revision arthroplasty of the elbow using a linked Coonrad-Morrey implant in 23 patients (24 elbows) after a mean follow-up period of 55 months. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, 19 elbows were satisfactory, nine were excellent and ten good. The median total score had improved from 35 points (20 to 75) before the primary arthroplasty to 85 points (40 to 100) at the latest follow-up. There was a marked relief of pain, but the range of movement showed no overall improvement. Two patients had a second revision because of infection and two for aseptic loosening. The estimated five-year survival rate of the prosthesis was 83.1% (95% confidence interval 61.1 to 93.3). Revision elbow arthroplasty using the Coonrad-Morrey implant provided satisfactory results but with complications occurring in 13 cases.