1
|
Gracitelli ME, Guglielmetti CL, Botelho CA, Malavolta EA, Assunção JH, Ferreira Neto AA. Surgical Treatment of Post-traumatic Elbow Stiffness by Wide Posterior Approach. Rev Bras Ortop 2020; 55:570-578. [PMID: 33093721 PMCID: PMC7575365 DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1700827] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2019] [Accepted: 07/23/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To demonstrate the clinical outcomes and complication rates of the surgical release with a single posterior approach in the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness. Methods A prospective study with patients submitted to surgery between May 2013 and June 2018 in a single center. The access to the elbow was made through the posterior approach. The patients were followed up by an occupational therapy team, and were submitted to a standardized rehabilitation protocol, with static progressive orthoses and dynamic orthoses. The primary outcome was the range of flexion-extension of the elbow after 6 months. Results A total of 26 patients completed the minimum follow-up of 6-months. The mean range of flexion-extension of the elbow at the end of 6 months was of 98.3 ± 22.0°, with an amplitude gain of 40.0 ± 14.0° in relation to the pre-operative period ( p < 0.001). The average flexion-extension gain at the end of 6 months was of 51.7% ± 17.1% ( p < 0.001). The mean pronosupination at the end of 6 months was of 129.0 ± 42.7° ( p < 0.001). Half of the cases had moderate and severe stiffness in the pre-operative period, compared with 7.7% at 6 months post-operatively ( p < 0.001). The mean score for the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) instruments was 74.4 ± 16.8 points and 31.7 ± 21.9 points respectively ( p < 0.001 for both). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score presented no statistically significant difference compared to the pre-operative period ( p = 0.096). Complications were observed in 6 (23%) patients, and no new surgical procedures were necessary. Conclusions The surgical release of the elbow associated with a rehabilitation protocol is a safe technique, with satisfactory results and low rate of complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mauro E.C. Gracitelli
- Shoulder and Elbow Group, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - César L.B. Guglielmetti
- Shoulder and Elbow Group, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Caio A.S. Botelho
- Shoulder and Elbow Group, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Eduardo A. Malavolta
- Shoulder and Elbow Group, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Jorge H. Assunção
- Shoulder and Elbow Group, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Arnaldo A. Ferreira Neto
- Shoulder and Elbow Group, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
To evaluate patients undergoing arthroscopic release of a stiff elbow, with discussion of the technique, possible difficulties and risks. Methods: Twenty-four elbow arthroscopy procedures were performed. All the patients were evaluated using goniometry before the operation and six months afterwards and were rated using the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS). Results: Fifteen men and nine women underwent surgery (14 right elbows and ten left elbows). Their mean age was 34.58 years and length of follow-up, 38.41 months. Their mean gain of range of motion was 43.3° and of MEPS, 85.4. Conclusion: Arthroscopic release might enable better intra-articular viewing and enhance the options for changing strategy during surgery, reducing surgical trauma and enabling early rehabilitation. This technique can reach similar or better results than open surgery. The disadvantages of arthroscopy are the long learning curve and higher cost of the procedure. Neurovascular complications are reported with both techniques. To avoid such problems, the protocol for portal construction must be rigorously followed. Arthroscopic release was shown to be a safe and effective option for achieving range-of-motion gains in cases of post-traumatic stiff elbow.
Collapse
|