Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1539 - 1545
1 Nov 2015
Lenoir H Chammas M Micallef JP Lazerges C Waitzenegger T Coulet B

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.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 8 | Pages 1096 - 1101
1 Aug 2015
Oizumi N Suenaga N Yoshioka C Yamane S

To prevent insufficiency of the triceps after total elbow arthroplasty, we have, since 2008, used a triceps-sparing ulnar approach. This study evaluates the clinical results and post-operative alignment of the prosthesis using this approach.

We reviewed 25 elbows in 23 patients. There were five men and 18 women with a mean age of 69 years (54 to 83). There were 18 elbows with rheumatoid arthritis, six with a fracture or pseudoarthrosis and one elbow with osteoarthritis.

Post-operative complications included one intra-operative fracture, one elbow with heterotopic ossification, one transient ulnar nerve palsy, and one elbow with skin necrosis, but no elbow was affected by insufficiency of the triceps.

Patients were followed for a mean of 42 months (24 to 77). The mean post-operative Japanese Orthopaedic Association Elbow Score was 90.8 (51 to 100) and the mean Mayo Elbow Performance score 93.8 (65 to 100). The mean post-operative flexion/extension of the elbow was 135°/-8°. The Manual Muscle Testing score of the triceps was 5 in 23 elbows and 2 in two elbows (one patient). The mean alignment of the implants examined by 3D-CT was 2.8° pronation (standard deviation (sd) 5.5), 0.3° valgus (sd 2.7), and 0.7° extension (sd 3.2) for the humeral component, and 9.3° pronation (sd 9.7), 0.3° valgus (sd 4.0), and 8.6° extension (sd 3.1) for the ulnar component. There was no radiolucent line or loosening of the implants on the final radiographs.

The triceps-sparing ulnar approach allows satisfactory alignment of the implants, is effective in preventing post-operative triceps insufficiency, and gives satisfactory short-term results.

Cite this article: 2015;97-B:1096–1101.