Therapeutic options for acute and chronic elbow instability

Lateral elbow ligament reconstruction for posterolateral rotatory instability: 10 years follow-up in 32 patients

Background

Posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI) is the most frequent form of both acute and chronic elbow instability. It is due to mechanical incompetence of the lateral collateral ligament. O'Driscoll et al described treatment of this instability by autologous reconstruction of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament. The aim of our study was to evaluate the medium and long-term clinical, functional and radiological results of patients who were surgically treated for PLRI by this technique. We hypothesized that such ligament reconstruction restores a functional joint complex and durably stabilizes the elbow and limits the long-term risk of osteoarthritis.

Methods

All patients treated for symptomatic PLRI by ligament reconstruction since January 1995 and who had a minimum follow-up of 36 months were retrospectively included.

Results

Thirty-two patients (32 elbows) underwent clinical and radiological evaluation with a mean follow-up of 112 months (range, 36-265 months). The success rate of the procedure was 97% with one patient requiring revision reconstruction. Twenty-four patients (75%) were free from pain. Pain was significantly greater in patients with associated lesions (P = .03) and those with morbid obesity (body mass index ≥40) (P = .03). Twenty-nine (91%) patients had resumed their previous activities. Twenty-eight patients (87%) were satisfied or very satisfied. The mean Mayo Clinic score was 96/100 and the QuickDash 14.7/100. Two patients (6%) with accompanying lesions developed severe osteoarthritis.

Conclusion

Elbow ligament reconstruction by the technique of O'Driscoll et al effectively restores stability and limits progression to osteoarthritis in the long term. The only failure in our series was due to several technical errors. Patients who had dislocation with associated lesions or morbid obesity are at risk of poorer functional results.

Locking suture repair versus ligament augmentation-a biomechanical study regarding the treatment of acute lateral collateral ligament injuries of the elbow

BACKGROUND

Lateral collateral ligament (LCL) tears are frequently observed in fractures and dislocations of the elbow. Recent biomechanical evidence suggests that additional ligament augmentation may improve repair stability. The aim of this biomechanical in-vitro study was to compare the resistance of a locking suture repair of the LCL with a ligament augmentation technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eight fresh frozen cadaveric elbows were evaluated for stability against varus/posterolateral rotatory forces (3 Nm). A strain gauge (µm/m; negative values) was placed at the origin and insertion of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) and cyclic loading was performed for 1000 cycles. We analyzed three distinct scenarios: (A) native LCL, (B) locking transosseou suture repair of the LCL, (C) simple LCL repair with additional ligament augmentation of the LUCL.

RESULTS

The mean measured strain was - 416.1 µm/m (A), - 618 µm/m (B) and - 288.5 µm/m (C) with the elbow flexion at 90°; the strain was significantly higher in scenario B compared to C (p = .01). During the cyclic load (1000) the mean measured strain was - 523.1 µm/m (B) and - 226.3 µm/m (C) with the elbow flexion at 60°; the strain was significantly higher in scenario B compared to C (p = .01). No significant difference between the first and the last cycles was observed (p = .09; p = .07). One failure of the LCL repair was observed after 1000 cycles; none of the ligament augmentations failed.

CONCLUSION

Ligament augmentation (C) provides higher resistance compared to the native LCL (A) and to the locking suture repair technique (B). Both techniques, however, hold up during 1000 cycles. While ligament augmentation might enhance the primary stability of the repair, future clinical studies have to show whether this increase in resistance leads to negative effects like higher rates of posttraumatic elbow stiffness.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Basic science study, biomechanics.

Prospective clinical results of an additive ligament bracing for stabilizing simple and complex elbow instabilities

INTRODUCTION

Ligament bracing augments ligament repair using a non-absorbable suture tape. Although biomechanically an increase in primary stability has been proven, there is a lack of clinical evidence. Purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical results of patients treated with ligament bracing due to primary elbow instability, including an analysis of complications. Furthermore, clinical results for patients treated with and without early functional mobilization were compared.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective case-series evaluated clinical and functional results from patients treated with ligament bracing due to primary elbow instability. Clinical outcome measures were range of motion (ROM) as well as objective and subjective elbow scores [Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS); Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH score)]. Stability was evaluated sonographically by humero-radial gapping under varus stress.

RESULTS

This study involved 34 patients treated with ligament bracing. After a mean follow-up of 12.9 months ROM was 112° ± 29, MEPS 88 ± 13 points, DASH 91 ± 11 points, and 84% were satisfied with their result. Lateral joint gapping was 2.4 mm. No significant difference was observed regarding a postoperative mobilization with and without limitations. Most common complication after ligament bracing was elbow stiffness including heterotopic ossifications in four patients (12%).

CONCLUSION

Operatively treated elbow instability with additional ligament bracing results in good clinical outcomes with high patient satisfaction and recovery of elbow stability. The high primary stability of the ligament bracing allows early functional mobilization without bracing, which facilitates postoperative rehabilitation. Elbow stiffness with heterotopic ossification seems to be a potential complication. Furthermore, the optimal tensioning of the ligament bracing remains challenging, including the risk of an over tensioning.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

LUCL internal bracing restores posterolateral rotatory stability of the elbow

PURPOSE

Posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI) of the elbow occurs from an insufficient lateral collateral ligament complex (LCLC). For subacute LCLC injuries, lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) internal bracing rather than reconstruction may be a viable option. The purpose of the study was to compare the stabilizing effects of LUCL internal bracing to triceps tendon graft reconstruction in simulated PLRI.

METHODS

Sixteen cadaveric elbows were assigned for either LUCL internal bracing (n = 8) or reconstruction with triceps tendon graft (n = 8). Specimen were mounted and a valgus rotational torque was applied to the ulna to test posterolateral rotatory stability. Posterolateral rotation was measured at 0°, 30°, 60°, 90° and 120° of elbow flexion. Cyclic loading was performed for 1000 cycles at 90° of elbow flexion. Three conditions were compared in each specimen: intact elbow, LUCL and radial collateral ligament (RCL) transected, and then either LUCL internal bracing or reconstruction with triceps tendon graft.

RESULTS

Transection of the LUCL and RCL significantly increased posterolateral rotation in all degrees of elbow flexion compared to the intact condition (P < 0.05). Both LUCL internal bracing and reconstruction restored posterolateral rotatory stability to the native state between 0° and 120° of elbow flexion, with no significant difference in improvement between groups. Similarly, LUCL internal bracing and reconstruction groups showed no significant difference in posterolateral rotation compared to the intact condition during cyclic loading.

CONCLUSIONS

At time zero, both LUCL internal bracing and reconstruction with triceps tendon graft restored posterolateral rotatory stability. As such, this study supports the use of internal bracing as an adjunct to primary ligament repair in subacute PLRI.

Elbow Dislocations in Contact Sports

Elbow dislocations are more common in athletes than in the general population. Simple elbow dislocations should be managed with early range of motion and early return to sport, even with high-level contact athletes. Patients with instability on examination or with complex elbow dislocations may require surgical intervention. Overall, the outcomes after simple elbow dislocations are excellent and athletes should be able to return to play without significant limitations.