Outcomes of press-fit radial head arthroplasty following complex radial head fractures

Midterm outcomes of a short-cemented bipolar radial head arthroplasty, in a cohort of 56 cases with minimum 2-years follow-up

BACKGROUND

Radial head prostheses are used in comminuted radial head fractures for elbow stabilisation when reduction and internal fixation is not possible. Several implant designs exist, but no large series exist about a short-cemented and bipolar implant.

HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis was that this prosthesis design shows good clinical, functional, and radiological results, with acceptable rate of complications.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective study included the prostheses with bipolar design and short-cemented stem (Evolutive™), with a minimum 2-years follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All prosthesis implanted in our Traumatology Center were included, with minimum 2-years follow-up. The evaluation consisted of a clinical and functional evaluation, associated with an independent radiographic assessment. All complications were listed, as long as rate and reasons for implant removal.

RESULTS

Fifty-six implants were studied with a mean follow-up of 64.9months (24 to 119). Fifty-three cases were acute injuries with 16% isolated radial head fractures and 76% complex elbow injury such as ulno-humeral, radio-ulnar or longitudinal forearm instability. Fifty (89%) implants were still in place at last follow-up. The main reason for implant removal was during arthrolysis procedure. Ranges of motion were: 126° in flexion, 9° of extension loss, 76° of pronation and 79° of supination. Mean Mayo Elbow Performance Index was 84.1 with 72% of excellent or good results, and the median quick-DASH was rated 18.2. Radiographic evaluation found 12% significant ulno-humeral arthtitis, 64% capitellar osteopenia and 12% loosening. We recorded 5% of implant-related complications.

DISCUSSION

The short-cemented stem bipolar radial head prosthesis presents clinical and functional results similar to other radial head prosthesis with low incidence of elbow arthritis, when treating both isolated radial head fracture or complexes elbow injury. This implant should therefore be valid for treating comminuted radial head fractures in all types of traumatological injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; Retrospective cohort study.

Radial head replacement for acute complex elbow instability: a long-term comparative cohort study of 2 implant designs

BACKGROUND

Radial head fractures not amenable to reconstruction should be treated by radial head replacement (RHR) when there is associated elbow or forearm instability. There are multiple RHR designs with different philosophies, but 2 of the most commonly used implants include the anatomic press-fit radial head system and the loose-fit metallic spacer. There is little information available specifically comparing the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of these 2 systems. The objective of this study was to compare the long-term clinical and radiologic outcomes of 2 RHR designs in the context of complex acute elbow instability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-five patients with an average age of 54 years (range, 21-87 years) underwent an acute RHR (46 press-fit Acumed anatomic and 49 loose-fit Evolve metallic spacer) and were prospectively followed for an average of 61 months (range, 24-157 months). There were 34 terrible triads; 36 isolated RH fractures with medial, lateral, or longitudinal instability; and 25 RH fractures associated with a proximal ulnar fracture. Clinical outcome and disability were evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the Oxford Elbow Score, and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score. Pain and satisfaction were assessed using a visual analog scale. Radiographic analysis included presence of loosening, bone loss, and overstuffing related to the RHR.

RESULTS

Eight patients with an anatomic RHR (2 with overstuffing, 3 for stiffness, and 3 with loose implants) and 1 patient with a spacer (with stiffness) required implant removal. There were no significant differences between spacer RHR and anatomic RHR in arc of motion (120° vs. 113°, P = .14), pain relief (1 vs. 1.7, P = .135), MEPS (94 vs. 88; P = .07), Oxford Elbow Score (42.3 vs. 42.2, P = .4), or DASH score (12.2 vs. 14.4, P = .5). However, patients with a spacer RHR were significantly more satisfied (9 vs. 7.7; P = .004) than those with an anatomic implant. Radiographically, 19 anatomic implants had significant proximal bone loss and 10 showed complete lucent lines around the stem. Lucent lines were common around the spacer RHR. These radiographic changes were not always related to worse clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Both the anatomic and spacer RHR designs can provide good clinical long-term outcomes. However, patients with a spacer showed a higher degree of satisfaction and those with an anatomic press-fit RHR had a higher revision rate, with radiographic changes that warrant continued follow-up.

Radial neck osteolysis after radial head replacement: Functional impact and risk factors

INTRODUCTION

Onset of radial neck osteolysis (RNO) has been reported after radial head replacement (RHR), but data are sparse regarding impact and risk factors. We therefore conducted a retrospective study, 1) to quantify RNO after RHR, 2) to assess clinical and radiological impact, and 3) to identify risk factors.

HYPOTHESIS

RNO prevalence is high, but functional impact is limited.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A single-center retrospective study included all patients undergoing RHR for acute radial head fracture between 2008 and 2017: 53 patients, with a mean age of 53.8±15.7 years [range, 21-85 years]. At a minimum 2 years' follow-up, patients were assessed clinically on joint range of motion and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and radiologically on standard radiographs. Associations between RNO and various parameters were assessed.

RESULTS

At a mean 46.7±19.8 months' follow-up [range, 24-84 months], RNO was found in 54.7% of cases (29/53), with mean 4.0 ±2.8mm distal extension [range, 1.2-13.4mm], corresponding to 13.4±7.3% of stem height [range, 2.7-27.7%]. RNO at last follow-up was not significantly associated with reduced flexion-extension (121.9° versus 114.0°; p=0.11), pronation-supination (152.6° versus 138.3°; p=0.25) or MEPS (84.7 versus 84.8; p=0.97), or with higher rates of postoperative complications (11/29 (37.9%) versus 7/24 (29.2%); p=0.782) or surgical revision (11/29 (37.9%) versus 10/24 (41.7%); p=0.503). RNO was significantly associated with cementless fixation (19/29 (65.5%) versus 7/24 (29.2%); p=0.01), unipolar prosthesis (21/29 (72.4%) versus 7/24 (29.2%); p=0.002), high filling-ratio, whether proximal (88% versus 77%; p=0.002), middle (84% versus 75%; p=0.007) or distal (69% versus 59%; p=0.032), and shorter radial stem (33.2mm versus 46.3mm; p=0.011). No demographic parameters showed significant association with RNO at last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

RNO was frequent after RHR, but without clinical or radiological impact in the present series. The risk factors identified here argue for involvement of stress shielding.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, cohort study.

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.

After failed radial head arthroplasty, what are the options? Risk factors and results of revisions in a multicenter study

Introduction

Few multicenter studies have analyzed the outcome of revision surgery of radial head arthroplasties (RHA) in the medium term follow up. The objective is twofold: to determine the factors associated with revision of RHAs and to analyze the results of revision with 2 surgical techniques: isolated removal of the RHA or revision with a new RHA (R-RHA).

Hypothesis

There are associated factors of RHA revision and RHA revision results in satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes.

Methods

Twenty-eight patients were included in this multicenter retrospective study, with all surgical indications for initial RHA being traumatic/post-traumatic. The mean age was 47 ± 13 years with a mean follow-up of 70 ± 48 months. This series included two groups: the isolated RHA removal group (n = 17) and the revision RHA with new radial head prosthesis (R-RHA) group (n = 11). Evaluation was clinical and radiological with univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results

Two factors associated with RHA revision were identified: a pre-existing capitellar lesion (p = 0.047) and a RHA placed for a secondary indication (<0.001). Revision for all 28 patients resulted in improved pain (pre-op Visual Analog Scale 4.7 ± 3 vs. post-op 1.57 ± 2.2, p < 0.001), mobilities (pre-op flexion 118 ± 20 vs. post-op 130 ± 13, p = 0.03; pre-op extension -30 ± 21 vs post-op -20 ± 15, p = 0.025; pre-op pronation 59 ± 12 vs post-op 72 ± 17, p = 0.04; pre-op supination 48 ± 2 vs post-op 65 ± 22, p = 0.027) and functional scores. Mobility and pain control were, for stable elbows, satisfactory in the isolated removal group. When the initial or revision indication was instability, the DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand = 10 ± 5) and MEPS (Mayo Elbow Performance score = 85 ± 16) scores were satisfactory in the R-RHA group.

Discussion

In the case of a radial head fracture, RHA is a satisfactory first-line solution without pre-existing capitellar injury, its results being much weaker in the case of ORIF failure and fracture sequelae. In case of RHA revision, isolated removal or R-RHA adapted according to the pre-operative radio-clinical exam.

Level of evidence

IV.

Revision of Failed Radial Head Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Revision of radial head arthroplasty (RHA) may be indicated in cases of prosthesis loosening and malposition. Inherent difficulties in revision surgery include poor bone stock and disrupted soft tissue envelope. Although cases of RHA used for revision of failed RHA are rare, there is reasonable expectation for increasing frequency of these cases due to the increasing incidence of primary RHA. Furthermore, there is an increasing demand for postoperative recovery of function; thus, surgeons may consider revising a failed RHA to a new RHA. We report on series of failed RHA which were revised to a new radial head prosthesis.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed at multiple institutions for a single radial head prosthesis used for revision of a failed radial head prosthesis. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were collected with a minimum of 1 year of follow-up.

RESULTS

Across 11 patients at a mean follow-up of 45.1 months, the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 81.7; mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were 24.4; and mean Visual Analog Scale for pain was 0.6. Radiographic analysis yielded no evidence of capitellar wear or stem loosening.

CONCLUSION

A radial head prosthesis can produce satisfactory results when used for revision of a failed prosthesis. Inherent difficulties in revision surgery include the potential for reduced bone stock and a disrupted soft tissue envelope. Elements of prosthesis design which may contribute to effectively managing revision surgery include a long stem with in-growth surface and prosthetic head alignment to the axis of forearm rotation.

Survivorship of anatomic press-fit short-stem radial head replacement with a pyrocarbon bearing

BACKGROUND

Restoring the radial head as a stabiliser of the elbow is considered important in cases where there is an associated bony or ligamentous injury. A variety of radial head prostheses are available. There are no reports of the survivorship of a short-stem press-fit radial head prostheses with pyrocarbon bearing.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

With institutional review board approval, a retrospective case-note analysis was performed of a consecutive single-surgeon case series of the Integra LifeScience pyrocarbon radial head prostheses (Carbon Modular Radial Head) from October 2010 to October 2019 in a tertiary referral centre. The series was divided into acute trauma and salvage cohorts. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

36 patients were included, 23 (64%) for acute injuries and 13 (36%) for failed initial treatment. Of the acute injuries, 20 (87%) had a Wrightington type-C elbow fracture-dislocation. Reoperation was performed in 4 (11%) patients; 10 (28%) had possible loosening on radiographs. The implant survival rate was 94% at shortest follow-up of 17 months (mean 70 months).

DISCUSSION

Treatment of complex radial head fractures using a pyrocarbon-bearing, anatomic press-fit design provides satisfactory short-term survivorship in this case series. The implant should be used with caution in salvage cases, due to higher rates of loosening seen in this cohort.

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).

Radial head fractures

Radial head fractures are the commonest fractures in the elbow. They are often associated with other injuries: ligamentous, cartilaginous or other fractures. Associated injuries are important determinant of the management of the radial head fracture. These should be carefully looked for, diagnosed and treated. The original Mason classification for this fracture has been modified to include the associated injuries and their treatment. CT scan is a helpful diagnostic tool and should be used if available. Radial head fractures can be treated either conservatively or operatively (by excision, open reduction and internal fixation or prosthetic replacement). Undisplaced or minimally displaced fractures should be treated non-operatively. Internal fixation by headless cannulated screws is the preferred treatment for displaced fractures. It provides satisfactory biomechanical stability, can be done through a smaller incision, has less complications and lesser requirement of later removal of screws. Small number of fractures with comminution of neck would require plate fixation. Unfixable fractures in elderly can be treated by excision while such fractures in younger population or associated with significant soft tissue or bony injuries would require prosthetic replacement.