Long-term survival of GSB III elbow prostheses and risk factors for revisions

Prognostic factors associated with failure of total elbow arthroplasty

Aims

The aims of this study were to identify and evaluate the current literature examining the prognostic factors which are associated with failure of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).

Methods

Electronic literature searches were conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane. All studies reporting prognostic estimates for factors associated with the revision of a primary TEA were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool, and the quality of evidence was assessed using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. Due to low quality of the evidence and the heterogeneous nature of the studies, a narrative synthesis was used.

Results

A total of 19 studies met the inclusion criteria, investigating 28 possible prognostic factors. Most QUIPS domains (84%) were rated as moderate to high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was low or very low for all prognostic factors. In low-quality evidence, prognostic factors with consistent associations with failure of TEA in more than one study were: the sequelae of trauma leading to TEA, either independently or combined with acute trauma, and male sex. Several other studies investigating sex reported no association. The evidence for other factors was of very low quality and mostly involved exploratory studies.

Conclusion

The current evidence investigating the prognostic factors associated with failure of TEA is of low or very low quality, and studies generally have a moderate to high risk of bias. Prognostic factors are subject to uncertainty, should be interpreted with caution, and are of little clinical value. Higher-quality evidence is required to determine robust prognostic factors for failure of TEA.

Outcomes following revision of the revision total elbow arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

There is very little information in the literature on the outcomes of revision of revision total elbow arthroplasty (RRTEA). Our aim was to report the outcomes of this rarely performed procedure.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified all patients who had undergone RRTEA between 2007 and 2016. Outcomes were assessed clinically using a number of validated systems, and radiographs were reviewed for prosthesis alignment, cementation by Morrey grading, and heterotopic ossification.

RESULTS

We identified 22 patients who underwent RRTEA. Of these patients, 14 were available for assessment (2 died of unrelated causes, 2 could not be contacted, 2 declined to participate because of travel difficulties, and 2 had incomplete data). At the final review, the median age was 73 years (range, 57-83 years), with a median follow-up period of 4.5 years (range, 2-7 years) since the last surgical procedure. The median number of previous revision arthroplasty procedures per patient was 3 (range, 2-6). The indications for RRTEA were aseptic loosening (60%), bushing wear (16%), fracture (14%), and infection (10%). Of the patients, 30% required extra-long or custom-made implants and 50% needed allograft augmentation. At final clinical assessment, 56% of patients had triceps insufficiency, the median flexion-extension arc was 90°, and the median prono-supination arc was 95°. The functional elbow scores revealed good outcomes in the majority of patients (median visual analog scale score, 5; median Oxford Elbow Score, 22; median Mayo Elbow Performance Index score, 55; and median QuickDASH [short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire] score, 63). Eighty-one percent of patients were satisfied with their RRTEAs. Complications included infection in 2 patients (1 superficial and 1 deep), symptomatic aseptic humeral component loosening in 1, sensory ulnar nerve symptoms in 2, and radial nerve injury in 1. One patient required ulnar nerve release. Radiologic review revealed asymptomatic loosening in 1 patient (humeral component), and overall prosthesis alignment with cementation was adequate in 81%. Heterotopic ossification was present in 38% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

RRTEA is a satisfactory treatment option in these complex cases, with good short- to mid-term survival rates but a relatively high complication rate.

Outcomes following total elbow arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis versus post-traumatic conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the outcome of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) undertaken for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with TEA performed for post-traumatic conditions with regard to implant failure, functional outcome, and perioperative complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We completed a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nine cohort studies investigated the outcome of TEA between RA and post-traumatic conditions. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)) guidelines and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were applied to assess the quality of the included studies. We assessed three major outcome domains: implant failures (including aseptic loosening, septic loosening, bushing wear, axle failure, component disassembly, or component fracture); functional outcomes (including arc of range of movement, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire), and perioperative complications (including deep infection, intraoperative fracture, postoperative fracture, and ulnar neuropathy).

RESULTS

This study included a total of 679 TEAs for RA (n = 482) or post-traumatic conditions (n = 197). After exclusion, all of the TEAs included in this meta-analysis were cemented with linked components. Our analysis demonstrated that the RA group was associated with a higher risk of septic loosening after TEA (odds ratio (OR) 3.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11 to 14.12), while there was an increased risk of bushing wear, axle failure, component disassembly, or component fracture in the post-traumatic group (OR 4.72, 95% CI 2.37 to 9.35). A higher MEPS (standardized mean difference 0.634, 95% CI 0.379 to 0.890) was found in the RA group. There were no significant differences in arc of range of movement, DASH questionnaire, and risk of aseptic loosening, deep infection, perioperative fracture, or ulnar neuropathy.

CONCLUSION

The aetiology of TEA surgery appears to have an impact on the outcome in terms of specific modes of implant failures. RA patients might have a better functional outcome after TEA surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1489-1497.

Functional Outcomes After Salvage Procedures for Wrist Trauma and Arthritis (Four-Corner Fusion, Proximal Row Carpectomy, Total Wrist Arthroplasty, Total Wrist Fusion, Wrist Denervation): A Review of Literature

Background:

Several salvage procedures for the arthritically destroyed wrist exist. Each of these has advantages as well as disadvantages.

Aims:

The aim of this article is to give practical insights for the clinician on: (1) biomechanical and clinical fundamentals of normal and impaired wrist motion; (2) difficulties in assessment of postoperative outcome between measured motion by the surgeon and self-reported outcome by the patient; (3) indications for each procedure; and (4) differences in functional outcome between partial and complete motion-preserving as well as complete motion-restricting salvage procedures.

Methods:

In trend, Proximal Row Carpectomy (PRC) is slightly superior over four-corner fusion (4CF) in terms of functional outcome, but the methodology-related postoperative motion is decreased for both procedures. Furthermore, PRC is easier to perform, needs lower costs, and has fewer complications than 4CF. Total Wrist Arthroplasty (TWA) has the advantage compared to PRC and 4CF that the preoperative motion values are preserved, but it is limited by decreased load-bearing capacity for the wrist. Total Wrist Fusion (TWF) is associated with a higher load-bearing capacity for the wrist than TWA, but it is limited for carrying out essential activities of daily living. Both PRC and 4CF can be combined primarily by wrist denervation. Wrist denervation alone does not impair the movement of the wrist.

Results and Conclusion:

Salvage procedures for the arthritically destroyed wrist should be detected regarding patients age- and gender-related claims in work and leisure. Not all of them can be successfully re-employed in their original occupations associated with high load-bearing conditions.

Why does total elbow arthroplasty fail today? A systematic review of recent literature

BACKGROUND

Total elbow arthroplasty is a relatively uncommon type of arthroplasty, which has undergone several design changes in the past four decades. However, research on improvement requires knowledge of failure mechanisms that can be addressed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review on modes of failure of total elbow arthroplasty.

METHODS

We conducted searches on PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases to identify studies describing modes of failure of primary total elbow arthroplasties. The results were coupled per type of total elbow arthroplasty and individual arthroplasty models.

RESULTS

A total of 70 articles were included in this systematic review. 9308 individual total elbow arthroplasties were identified with 1253 revisions (13.5%). Aseptic loosening was the most prevalent reason for revision (38%), followed by deep infection (19%) and periprosthetic fractures (12%).

CONCLUSION

Revision rates have been found similar to a systematic review published in 2003. The revision percentage of total elbow arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis is significantly higher than for trauma and post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Aseptic loosening was seen less in linked implants. Infections and periprosthetic fractures did not differ between linkage design groups. Aseptic loosening remains the most frequent cause for revision of primary total elbow arthroplasty. Therefore, more research on the occurrence, progression and risk factors of aseptic loosening should be performed and lead to higher implant survival.

Clinical and radiographic outcome of revision surgery of total elbow prosthesis: midterm results in 19 cases

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to report on the midterm outcomes and complications of revision surgery of total elbow arthroplasty.

METHODS

All patients who had undergone total elbow arthroplasty revision surgery between 2009 and 2014 with semiconstrained total elbow prostheses were prospectively enrolled in the study. Records were reviewed for demographic data; baseline measurements; and several follow-up assessments including the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, Oxford Elbow Score, range of motion, satisfaction, and radiographs.

RESULTS

A total of 19 revision arthroplasties were included. At a mean follow-up of 57 months, there had been 1 rerevision and 2 removals. One patient was excluded from follow-up because of confounding comorbidity. At last follow-up, MEPS values and VAS pain scores both improved (P < .01). The rate of combined good and excellent results on the MEPS was 53%. The mean VAS scores for pain at rest and with activity were 2 and 4, respectively. Fair results for the Oxford Elbow Score were reported, with a mean score of 28 points. Range of motion improved to an average flexion-extension arc of 108° (P < .01), and the pronation-supination arc improved to an average of 123° (P < .01). All elbows were stable at last follow-up (P < .01). Radiographs showed nonprogressive osteolysis around the prosthesis in 3 cases (19%) and suspicion of loosening in 1 (6%). In 11 patients postoperative complications occurred. Of 15 patients, 13 (87%) were satisfied with the result of the revision procedure.

CONCLUSION

Revision of total elbow prostheses leads to satisfactory results, less pain, and better elbow function. This procedure is related to a relatively high complication rate.

The long-term outcome of the Gschwend-Scheier-Bähler III elbow replacement

BACKGROUND

The Gschwend-Scheier-Bähler III (GSBIII) is a semiconstrained, sloppy-hinge total elbow replacement. We report the long-term functional and radiological outcome of a cohort of patients more than 10 years after surgery.

METHODS

All GSBIII prostheses implanted from September 1996 to June 2004 were identified from our surgical database. Functional and radiological assessments were performed at routine patient clinic visits, using the Oxford Elbow Score, the 11-item version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (QuickDASH), and plain radiographs.

RESULTS

From 1996 to 2004, 52 elbows in 40 patients were implanted; of these, 18 patients (23 elbows) had died, leaving 22 patients with 29 elbows available for follow-up. Three patients (3 elbows) could not be contacted. Functional and radiological data were available for 19 patients with 26 elbows (90%). Overall survival was a mean of 13.1 years (range, 10.6-16.4 years). Mean age at operation was 63.0 years (range, 49.5-80.6 years). There were 5 male elbows and 21 female elbows. Five total elbow replacements were performed for osteoarthritis and 24 for rheumatoid arthritis. The mean Oxford Elbow Score was 26.9 (range, 18-48). The mean QuickDASH score was 42.6 (range, 2.5-93.2). Of the 52 elbows in 40 patients, 4 elbows (7.7%) required further surgery, 2 (3.8%) of which were revisions. In addition, there was 1 intraoperative complication and 2 postoperative complications not requiring further surgery. Kaplan-Meier 10-year survival shows a 95.9% implant survival with revision as the end point.

CONCLUSIONS

The GSBIII elbow replacement provides good long-term function with a low revision rate and few complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV; Case Series; Treatment Study.