Long-term outcome and survival rate of monopolar radial head replacement

Update on elbow arthroplasties with emphasis on imaging

Elbow arthroplasty is increasing in popularity and can be used to treat many conditions, such as trauma, primary and secondary osteoarthritis, inflammatory arthritis, and osteonecrosis. Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) is reserved for patients with severe symptoms refractory to more conservative management. In addition to TEA, hemi-arthroplasty, interposition arthroplasty, and resection arthroplasty also play roles in the management of elbow pain. There are specific indications for each type of arthroplasty. Postoperative complications may occur with elbow arthroplasties and may be surgery or hardware related. Imaging is important in both pre-operative planning as well as in post-surgical follow-up. This article reviews the different types of elbow arthroplasties, their indications, their normal postoperative imaging appearances, and imaging findings of potential complications.

Mid-term outcome following radial head arthroplasty in acute trauma: risk factors for poor outcome

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were to evaluate the outcomes of a single type of radial head implant in a large cohort of patients at mid-term follow-up and to determine the associated risk factors for inferior functional outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective follow-up assessment of 65 patients (33 women and 32 men; mean age, 53.3 years [range, 22-81 years]) who underwent radial head arthroplasty (RHA) for acute trauma between 2012 and 2018, after a minimum follow-up period of 3 years. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Oxford Elbow Score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, and Mayo Modified Wrist Score were evaluated, and all available radiographs were analyzed. All complications and revision procedures were assessed. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify potential risk factors for a poor outcome following RHA.

RESULTS

After an average follow-up period of 4.1 years (range, 3-9.4 years), the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 77.2 (standard deviation [SD], 18.9); mean Oxford Elbow Score, 32.0 (SD, 10.6); mean Mayo Modified Wrist Score, 74.6 (SD, 13.7); and mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, 29.0 (SD, 21.2). Average range of motion measured 10° (SD, 15°) in extension, 125° (SD, 14°) in flexion, 81° (SD, 14°) in pronation, and 63° (SD, 24°) in supination. The overall complication and reoperation rates were 38.5% and 30.8%, respectively, with severe elbow stiffness being the most common reason for revision. Patient age >50 years, the use of an external fixator, the presence of accompanying medial collateral ligament injuries, and the development of higher-grade osteoarthritis were associated with a poor outcome.

CONCLUSION

Satisfactory medium-term outcomes can be achieved using a monopolar, long-stemmed RHA in patients with acute trauma. However, complication and revision rates are high, frequently leading to inferior outcome scores. Additionally, a higher patient age, the use of an external fixator, the presence of accompanying medial collateral ligament injuries, and the occurrence of higher-grade osteoarthritis were associated with a poor outcome; these factors should raise awareness by the treating trauma surgeon.

Radial Head Arthroplasty for Fracture: Implant Survivorship and Outcomes at Mean Follow-up of 8 Years

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate implant survivorship and clinical outcomes following radial head arthroplasty for fracture at long-term follow-ups.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult patients who underwent primary uncemented radial head arthroplasty for radial head or neck fractures between 2012 and 2015. Medical records were reviewed to collect information regarding demographics, injury characteristics, reoperations, and revisions requiring implant removal. A bivariate analysis was conducted to identify potential risk factors for reoperation. A Kaplan-Meier curve was created to determine implant survival rates. Eligible patients were contacted to confirm any reoperations and obtain Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores at long-term follow-ups.

RESULTS

A total of 89 patients were eligible for analysis and assessed at a mean of 97 months after surgery (range, 81-128). Reoperation rate was 16% (14 of 89 patients), including 5% of patients requiring implant removal or revision. However, 93% of reoperations occurred within the first 12 months of the index surgery. Fracture dislocations of the elbow had a higher rate of reoperation. A Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated an implant survival rate of 96% at 10-year follow-up. Of the patients who responded, the mean Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score was 8.7 ± 10.3, with none requiring additional reoperations or revisions. There were otherwise similar outcome scores among patients requiring reoperation versus those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Although radial head arthroplasty for fractures has a high potential for reoperation within the first year, survival rates with uncemented implants remain high at 10 years, and patients report excellent Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores at long-term follow-ups, despite any need for reoperation. Fractures with associated elbow dislocation may be at a higher risk for reoperation, and it is important to provide this prognostic information to patients who are likely to require arthroplasty for more extensive injuries.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Variation in radial head fracture treatment recommendations in terrible triad injuries is not influenced by viewing two-dimensional computed tomography

BACKGROUND

We analyzed association between viewing two-dimensional computed tomography (2D CT) images in addition to radiographs with radial head treatment recommendations after accounting for patient and surgeon factors in a survey-based experiment.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-four surgeons reviewed 15 patient scenarios with terrible triad fracture dislocations of the elbow. Surgeons were randomized to view either radiographs only or radiographs and 2D CT images. The scenarios randomized patient age, hand dominance, and occupation. For each scenario, surgeons were asked if they would recommend fixation or arthroplasty of the radial head. Multi-level logistic regression analysis identified variables associated with radial head treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

Reviewing 2D CT images in addition to radiographs had no statistical association with treatment recommendations. A higher likelihood of recommending prosthetic arthroplasty was associated with older patient age, patient occupation not requiring manual labor, surgeon practice location in the United States, practicing for five years or less, and the subspecialties "trauma" and "shoulder and elbow."

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that in terrible triad injuries, the imaging appearance of radial head fractures has no measurable influence on treatment recommendations. Personal surgeon factors and patient demographic characteristics may have a larger role in surgical decision making. Level of evidence: Level III, therapeutic case-control study.

Radial head replacement - A comprehensive review

Background

Radial head fractures represent 1-4% of all adult fractures and 1/3rd of elbow fractures (Kaas et al., 2010). Radial head is an important secondary stabilier of the elbow. The aim of the treatment of radial head fractures is to achieve stability and good functional outcome. Radial head replacement (RHR) is indicated when robust reconstruction and fixation of the fracture fragments is not possible.

Methods

This article explores history and evolution, anatomical considerations, biomechanics, implant designs, indications, surgical outcomes and controversies in radial head replacement based on current evidence.

Results

There is a wide range of RHR designs available without conclusive evidence to support the superiority of one design over the other. Ranges of motion, functional outcomes and complication were comparable among different designs with a high incidence of complications reported in many studies.

Conclusion

RHR remains a good option in unreconstructible radial head fractures, with potential to regain excellent function. It is imperative to continue with the quest to innovate and improve on current designs, to reduce complications in the long term.

The comparative performance of radial head prostheses in patients younger than and older than 50 years: a systematic review

Background

Patient age may play a role in the surgeon's decision between radial head arthroplasty (RHA) and open reduction internal fixation in radial head fracture treatment. Though large sample reports have detailed outcomes of radial head replacement for a mean age younger than 50 years, the age ranges are widely distributed. Patient outcomes are not uniform across a broad age distribution. Therefore, treatment decisions should be evaluated within the confines of a narrower age bracket. An understanding of clinical outcomes for radial head replacement in younger adults will provide value for guiding treatment decisions. We performed a systematic review comparing the clinical outcomes for radial head replacement in patients younger and older than 50 years of age. Further analysis compared outcomes between RHA performed as a primary procedure and as a secondary procedure in patients younger and older than 50 years of age.

Methods

PubMed was queried for articles which delineated individual patient data for age, surgical treatment, and appropriate outcome metrics. Articles were grouped based on patient age of under 50 and over 50 years and within those age groups, based on the arthroplasty being performed as a primary or as a secondary procedure.

Results

There were no significant differences between the under 50 and the over 50 groups for Mayo Elbow Performance Score (P = .79) and for implant revision/removal (P = .32). In the under 50 group, RHA done as a primary procedure had significantly higher (P = .001) mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score than RHA done as a secondary procedure. In the over 50 group, relative risk was 2.39 (95% confidence interval, 2.12-2.69) for implant revision/removal (P = .11) when comparing primary and secondary procedures.

Discussion

At a mean follow-up of 48 months, RHA in patients under the age of 50 years had satisfactory outcomes which were comparable to outcomes in patients over the age of 50 years. Across both age groups, arthroplasty performed as a primary procedure demonstrated superior outcomes compared to arthroplasty performed as a secondary procedure. Our findings provide guidance to surgeons who face a multifaceted decision when encountering younger adult patients with radial head fracture patterns that may not be amenable to fixation. Awareness of the age-specific performance of radial head implants is an important component of the decision for surgical treatment.

[Radial head prosthesis for acute fractures]

Non-reconstructible radial head fractures with concomitant injuries and resultant instability of the elbow are often treated by implantation of a radial head prosthesis. Various prosthetic designs and implantation techniques are available. Several pitfalls have to be respected during implantation. This article provides tips and tricks for successful implantation and aftercare and gives an overview of long-term outcomes and revision rates.

Radial head arthroplasty: a descriptive study of 970 patients in an integrated health care system

BACKGROUND

Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is commonly performed for isolated comminuted radial head fractures and in conjunction with traumatic elbow instability. However, there is a paucity of literature directly describing the characteristics and outcomes of patients who undergo RHA in a community-based setting. We describe a cohort of 970 RHA performed in the California regions of a US integrated health care system over a 9-year period. Patient demographics, implant selection, 90-day acute postoperative events, and cumulative reoperation/revision rates are included.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent primary RHA were identified (2009-2017). Patient characteristics and demographics, including age, body mass index, gender, diabetes status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, primary diagnosis, and concomitant procedures were described. Crude cumulative revision and reoperation probabilities were calculated as 1 minus the Kaplan-Meier estimator, with follow-up time calculated as the time from the index RHA to revision/reoperation date for those with the outcome of interest and time from index RHA to censoring date (eg, date of death, health care termination, study end date [March 31, 2018]) for those without the outcome. Ninety-day postoperative incidence of emergency department (ED) visit, readmission, and mortality was calculated as the number of patients with the event of interest over the number of patients at risk.

RESULTS

A total of 970 patients underwent primary unilateral RHA by 205 surgeons during the study period. Annual procedure volume increased from 53 procedures in 2009 to 157 procedures in 2017. More patients were female, without diabetes, and had an ASA classification of 1 or 2. Fracture was the predominant indication for RHA (98.4%) and more than half (54.3%) had concomitant procedures performed. Most implants were press fit (63.2%) over loose fit, and >90% were monopolar. Three-year cumulative revision and reoperation probabilities following RHA were 6.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.0%-8.5%) and 8.2% (95% CI = 6.5%-10.3%), respectively. Revisions and reoperations tended to occur within the first postoperative year. Of the 970 RHA patients, 83 (8.5%) had a 90-day ED visit, 58 (6.0%) had a 90-day readmission, and 1 (0.1%) died within a 90-day postoperative period.

CONCLUSION

This large cohort of RHA patients provides information about the practice of RHA at large and in the community. Surgeons are performing more RHA over time and choosing press fit stems more often. Revisions and reoperations tended to occur early. Readmission and ED visits were low but not negligible, with pain being the most common reason for ED visit.

Autologous replacement of the head of the radius-proximal fibula versus second metatarsal base: an anatomic feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

This study investigated the anatomic feasibility of a new surgical therapy option for radial head arthrosis using an autologous vascularized bone graft of the second metatarsal and proximal fibula to recreate the proximal radiohumeral joint.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Upper and lower extremities of eleven body donors were evaluated using CT prior to anatomic dissection. Several distinct anatomic parameters were measured on the ipsi- and contralateral radial and fibular head and the second metatarsal base: bone diameter, articular surface diameter, head height, metaphyseal (neck) diameter, articular surface radius, total articular surface area, and angulation of the articular surfaces (facet). Each dissection phase was photographed in a standardized fashion and all measurements were repeated by direct caliper-measurements.

RESULTS

When comparing the proximal radius and fibula to search for anatomic similarities, similar values were found in the maximum articular surface diameter and minimum and maximum measures of the neck diameter. Comparing the proximal radius and the second metatarsal, statistically similar values were found in the maximum neck diameter performing direct measurements and CT evaluation, the maximum head diameter in CT evaluation and the articular facet angulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither the proximal fibula nor the base of the second metatarsal are ideal bone grafts for replacement of the head of the radius. The base of the second metatarsal might be a bit more suitable as a potential donor since the angulation of the proximal articular facet is similar to that of the radius.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, anatomic study.

Long-term outcomes of open arthrolysis combined with radial head arthroplasty for post-traumatic elbow stiffness: results are durable over 8 years

BACKGROUND

Post-trauma elbow stiffness (PTES) is a common complication after elbow trauma that causes severe upper limb disability. Open elbow arthrolysis (OEA) with radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is an effective method to treat PTES with rotation limitation, or persistent pain/instability after radial head resection. However, no long-term results have been reported for this technique. This study aimed to show the clinical and radiographic outcomes of OEA with RHA over 8 years and compare its efficacy at 3 years (short-term).

METHODS

Patients with PTES treated by OEA with RHA between September 2010 and December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Seventeen patients were followed up over 8 years (range, 100-106 months). A bipolar prosthesis of RHA was performed during OEA. Preoperative, 3-year, and 8-year elbow and forearm motion, upper limb function, radiographic outcomes, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Clinically important improvements in elbow motion and forearm rotation were obtained, from 34° and 58° preoperatively, to 109° and 135° at 3 years, which were maintained over 8 years, to 113° (P = .262) and 134° (P = .489). The Mayo Elbow Performance Index had clinically important increases from the preoperative level of 58 to 94 points at 3 years, and was maintained over 8 years (95 points, P = .422), with 100% reporting excellent to good outcomes. Pain and nerve symptoms were also improved. Complications consisted of new-onset ulnar nerve symptoms in 1 patient, nonclinically significant heterotopic ossification recurrence in 3, humeroulnar arthritis exacerbation in 4, and periprosthetic lucency in 8.

CONCLUSIONS

OEA with RHA yielded satisfactory short-term outcomes for PTES at 3 years, with substantial improvements in elbow mobility and function, and the results were durable over the long term (8 years).

Long-term outcomes of radial head arthroplasty for radial head fractures-a systematic review at minimum 8-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to evaluate the functional outcomes, radiologic outcomes, and revision rates following radial head arthroplasty (RHA) at a minimum of 8 years follow-up.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed a literature search using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Only studies reporting on outcomes of RHA with a minimum of mean 8 years' follow-up were considered for inclusion.

RESULTS

Our search found 10 studies including 432 elbows (51% males), with average age of 50 years (15-93) and mean follow-up of 117 months (98-145) met our inclusion criteria. At final follow-up, the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score were 83 (45-100) and 17 (0-63) respectively, and 86% of patients reported having no or minimal pain. The overall dislocation, subluxation, ulnar neuritis, and infection rates were 2%, 4%, 3%, and 3%, respectively. The rates of radiologic loosening, radiolucency, degenerative change, and heterotopic ossification were 9%, 46%, 27%, and 38%, respectively. The overall surgical revision rates were 20%, with 3%, 15%, and 5% requiring RHA implant revision, removal of metal or implants, and arthrolysis, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our systematic review established that RHA results in satisfactory clinical outcomes and modest complication and revision rates at long-term follow-up, despite high levels of radiologic degenerative changes over the same period.