The Assessment and Management of Simple Elbow Dislocations

Distal Radius Fracture with Ipsilateral Elbow Dislocation: A Rare but Challenging Injury

Distal radius fractures are common and account for approximately 14% to 18% of all adult extremity injuries. On rare occasions, ipsilateral elbow dislocation can be observed additionally. However, this can be missed without careful examination, especially in patients experiencing altered mental status. The aim of this study was to analyze the mechanism, level of injury, demographics, and associated injuries in distal radius fracture with ipsilateral elbow dislocation. Between 2012 and 2019, we searched our trauma database for distal radius fracture with ipsilateral elbow dislocation. All patients older than 18 years old were included. Data on demographics, mechanism of injury, level of energy, and subsequent treatment were collected. A total of seven patients were identified. The mean age in this cohort was 68.7 ± 13.3 years old, and the left side was involved in 71.4% of the patients. Females were affected in 85.7% (n = 6/7) of cases, all of whom suffered from low-energy monotrauma at a mean age of 71.5 ± 12.3 years old. One male patient suffered from high-energy trauma (52 years old). Mainly, posterior elbow dislocations were observed (66.7%; n = 4/6). Distal radius fracture patterns, in accordance with the AO classification, included two C2-, two C3-, one C1-, and one B1-type fractures. In the patient suffering from high-energy trauma, the closed distal radius fracture was classified as type C3. Associated injures included open elbow dislocation, ulnar artery rupture, and damage to the flexor digitorum superficialis. Although distal radius fracture with ipsilateral elbow dislocation is thought to be from high-energy trauma, this study shows that most patients were elderly females suffering from low-energy mechanisms. It is important for clinicians to maintain a high level of suspicion for any concomitant injury in this population.

Early functional mobilization for non-operative treatment of simple elbow dislocations: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review aims to elucidate a non-operative rehabilitation program that optimizes recovery based on published approaches and outcomes.

METHODS

Searches of four databases from inception to 1 January 2020 were performed to identify clinical studies addressing the non-operative management of simple elbow dislocations.

RESULTS

Of 2435 studies that were eligible for title screen, 15 studies satisfied inclusion criteria. Three randomized control studies demonstrated that early mobilization expedited the return of range of motion, function and return to work or activities, however, resulted in increased pain within the six-week rehabilitation period compared to Plaster of Paris casting for 21 days. Patients returned to work sooner after early mobilization (10 vs. 18 days; p = 0.02) compared to Plaster of Paris casting. In all studies, early mobilization resulted in similar re-dislocation rates of 1.3% (3/237) versus 2.2% (12/549) in those with Plaster of Paris casting as well as lower incidence of heterotopic ossification (36% vs. 54%). No significant differences between rehabilitation protocols were determined; however, the large majority of recent papers utilized rehabilitation protocols.

CONCLUSION

Early mobilization of simple elbow dislocations results in early return of Range-of-Motion, function and return to work with no increase in complication rates; however, increased pain during the rehabilitation period.

Simple traumatic elbow dislocations; benefit from early functional rehabilitation: A systematic review with meta-analysis including PRISMA criteria

INTRODUCTION

Elbow dislocation is the second most frequent joint dislocation after shoulder dislocation. They have a high relevance because they can result in subsequent damage and limitations in range of motion. The treatment options are controversially discussed.The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review the literature and analyze the evidence of early functional rehabilitation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed via Ovid Medline, whereby 1645 publications were identified and evaluated in a stepwise approach. Of these publications 29 met the inclusion criteria of the authors and described simple elbow dislocations in 5765 patients.Data from the studies and subgroups included were initially categorized descriptively in conservative and surgical primary therapies, in immobilizing (immobilization lasting 2 weeks or longer) and free-functional follow-up treatments, and those data were then extracted from each subgroup in absolutes. We then pooled these numbers into descriptive statistics to ensure their comparability. We determined the success rates from the numbers of excellent and good results of the specific used outcome scores.

RESULTS

The effect estimate of the conservative therapy's success rate was 84% and for surgical treatment 80% (P < .0001). The difference between the immobilizing treatment (78% success rate) and early-function therapy (83% success rate) was significant (P = .002).In a subgroup analysis the success rate of conservative and immobilizing therapy was 79%, of conservative and early-functional therapy 91%, of surgical and immobilizing groups' was 77% and of the surgical and early-functional therapies was 93%. The difference among the 4 treatment options was significant (P < .0001), as were differences between the 2 conservative groups (P < .0001) and between the 2 surgical groups (P = .044).

DISCUSSION

Conservative therapy is the dominant therapy. Regardless of the primary therapy chosen in simple elbow dislocations: early functional follow-up care seems to be superior to immobilizing therapy with a duration more than 2 weeks.

[Emergency treatment of dislocation of large joints]

Joint dislocations are always accompanied by rupture of the joint capsule. Depending on the forces exerted on the joint as well as individual bone quality, fractures (dislocation fractures) and injuries to ligaments occur. As blood vessels and nerves can also be damaged, reduction is an urgent measure. Only impaired peripheral perfusion, loss of motor function or sensation justify reduction without radiological documentation. As reduction can be a painful procedure, analgosedation is nearly always necessary. Evidence for superiority of individual maneuvers is weak. Reduction is followed by immobilization and documented by another control X‑ray. Follow-up treatment depends on concomitant injuries, age and individual demands on joint function. Even with correct follow-up treatment, deficits often persist. This article deals with the diagnostics and treatment of dislocations of the shoulder, elbow, hip, patella and knee.

Epidemiology and treatment of acute elbow dislocations: current concept based on primary surgical ligament repair of unstable simple elbow dislocations

Purpose

Acute elbow dislocations are complex injuries that predispose to chronic instability and pain. The ideal treatment strategy is part of controversial discussion and evidence-based recommendations for the treatment could not be concluded from the literature. The purpose of the present study was to assess current epidemiological data, injury pattern, and the changing trend for treatment.

Methods

This study presents a retrospective review of 72 patients ≥ 18 years of age who were treated in our level I trauma centre with acute elbow dislocations from 2014 to 2018. The data were acquired by analysis of the institution’s database, and radiological examinations.

Results

The average age of the patients was 48.5 years (range 18–86). The ratio of male to female patients was 1.9:1. A fall onto the outstretched arm (42%) was the most common injury mechanism. By classification, 42% of the elbow dislocations were simple, and 58% complex. A total of 85% of patients underwent surgery including 73% of the simple elbow dislocations due to remaining instability or non-congruency of the reduced elbow. The indication for surgical treatment correlated merely with the grade of instability and displacement, but not with age.

Conclusion

Acute elbow dislocations need identification of the precise injury pattern and instability after reduction of the elbow joint. To achieve a congruent and stable joint, we recommend primary surgical repair as first-line treatment for patients with unstable simple and complex elbow dislocation independent of age.

Distribution of Osteochondral Lesions in Patients With Simple Elbow Dislocations Based on MRI Analysis

Background:

The clinical relationship between osteochondral lesions and long-term outcomes and patterns in the elbow joint has not yet been established. A sole evaluation from plain standard radiography may underestimate the severity of bony lesions in patients with simple dislocations. It has been suggested that the mechanism of a posterior elbow dislocation could be inferred from the pattern of bony contusions and osteochondral lesions visible on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with simple elbow dislocations.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence and distribution of osteochondral lesions based on MRI findings in patients with simple elbow dislocations. We hypothesized that (1) osteochondral lesions are consistently found in patients with simple elbow dislocations and (2) the distribution and severity of osteochondral lesions may explain the mechanism of the simple elbow dislocation.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

A retrospective review of 43 patients with simple elbow dislocations was performed in tertiary-level hospitals from January 2010 to August 2019. Two orthopaedic surgeons separately assessed the initial plain radiographs and MRI scans. Osteochondral lesions were evaluated and categorized based on whether they were located (1) on the lateral side (posterolateral capitellum and radial head; type 1) or (2) on the medial side (posterior trochlea and anteromedial facet of the coronoid; type 2). The severity of the osteochondral lesions was assessed according to the Anderson classification.

Results:

Of the 43 patients, 21 (48.8%) presented with osteochondral lesions on MRI. The type 1 pattern of osteochondral lesions was the most frequently observed on MRI in patients with simple elbow dislocations (69.8% of cases), and these were confirmed by simple radiography. Posterolateral capitellum osteochondral lesions were found in 13 patients. Among them, 10 (76.9%) were advanced-stage lesions (stages III and IV according to the Anderson classification).

Conclusion:

Osteochondral lesions were found on MRI after simple elbow dislocations at a rate of 48.8%. Osteochondral lesions in the posterolateral capitellum were associated with an advanced stage. Clinically, these findings may help surgeons in the diagnosis of osteochondral lesions and in determining how to manage patients with the progression of arthritic changes.

Reattachment of the flexor and extensor tendons at the epicondyle in elbow instability: a biomechanical comparison of techniques

Background

Elbow dislocation represents a common injury, especially in the younger population. If treated surgically, the reattached tendons require a high amount of primary stability to allow for an early rehabilitation to avoid postoperative stiffness. The purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical properties of a single and a double row technique for reattachment of the common extensor and common flexor muscles origin. We hypothesized that the double row technique would provide greater stability in terms of pullout forces than the single row technique.

Methods

Twelve cadaveric specimens were randomized into two groups of fixation methods for the common extensor tendon or the common flexor tendon at the elbow (1): a single row technique using two knotted 3.0 mm suture anchors, and (2) a double row technique using an additional knotless 3.5 mm anchor. The repairs were cyclically loaded over 500 cycles at 1 Hz from 10 N to a maximum of 100 N (extensors) or 150 N (flexors), and then pulled to failure. Stiffness and maximum load at failure and mode of failure were recorded and calculated.

Results

No significant differences in stiffness were observed between the two techniques for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (P = 0.701 and P = 0.306, respectively). The mean maximum load at failure indicated that the double row construct was significantly stronger than the single row construct. This was found to be true for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (213.6; SD 78.7 N versus 384.1; SD 105.6 N, P = 0.010 and 203.7; SD 65.8 N versus 318.0; SD 64.6 N, P = 0.013, respectively).

Conclusions

The double row technique provides significant greater stability to the reattached common flexor or extensor origin to the medial or lateral epicondyle. Thus, it should be considered in the development of improved repair techniques for stabilizers of the elbow.

Study design

Controlled laboratory study.