Management of complex elbow dislocations: a mechanistic approach

Reported outcome measures in complex fracture elbow dislocations: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Complex elbow fracture dislocations, dislocation with fracture of one or several surrounding bony stabilizers, are difficult to manage and associated with poor outcomes. While many studies have explored treatment strategies but a lack of standardization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) makes cross-study comparison difficult. In this systematic review, we aim to describe what injury patterns, measured outcomes, and associated complications are reported in the complex elbow fracture dislocation literature to provide outcome reporting recommendations that will facilitate improved future cross-study comparison.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We queried PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify articles published between 2010 and 2022 reporting on adult patients who had a complex elbow fracture dislocation. Pathologic fractures were excluded. A bias assessment using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies criteria was conducted. For each article, patient demographics, injury pattern, outcome measures, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Ninety-one studies reporting on 3664 elbows (3654 patients) with an elbow fracture and dislocation (weighted mean age 44 years, follow-up of 30 months, 41% female) were evaluated. Of these, the injury pattern was described in 3378 elbows and included 2951 (87%) terrible triad injuries and 72 (2%) transolecranon fracture-dislocations. The three most commonly reported classification systems were: Mason classification for radial head fractures, Regan and Morrey coronoid classification for coronoid fractures, and O'Driscoll classification for coronoid fractures. Range of motion was reported in 87 (96%) studies with most reporting flexion (n = 70), extension (n = 62), pronation (n = 68), or supination (n = 67). Strength was reported in 11 (12%) studies. PROMs were reported in 83 (91%) studies with an average of 2.6 outcomes per study. There were 14 outcome scores including the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (n = 69 [83%]), the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score (n = 28 [34%]), the visual analog scale for pain (n = 27 [33%]), QuickDASH score (n = 13 [15.7%]), and Oxford Elbow score (n = 5 [6.0%]). No significance was found between the number of PROMs used per article and the year of publication (P = .313), study type (P = .689), complex fracture pattern (P = .211), or number of elbows included (P = .152).

CONCLUSION

There is great heterogeneity in reported PROMs in the complex elbow fracture dislocation literature. Although there is no gold standard PROM for assessing complex elbow fracture dislocations, we recommend the use of at least the Mayo Elbow Performance Score and DASH outcomes measures as well as visual analog scale pain rating scale in future studies to facilitate cross-study comparisons.

"How the Wrightington classification of traumatic elbow instability can simplify the algorithm for treatment"

There are numerous injury patterns of elbow-fracture dislocation that can lead to confusion about the best surgical management. The Wrightington classification aims to provide a simple categorization based on the injury to the coronoid process and the three column concept of the elbow osseous stability that describes a medial column consisting of the anteromedial coronoid facet and sublime tubercle, the middlecolumn is the anterolateral coronoid facet, and the lateral column is the radial head and lateral ligament complex with a fulcrum for varus/valgus stability between the two coronoid facets. Injuries are classified as type A (anteromedial facet/medial-column), B (bifacet/ medial and middle-columns), B+ (bifacet with radial head/all three columns), C (combined radial head and anterolateral facet/middle and lateral-columns), D (distal to coronoid where coronoid is in continuity with olecranon process), and D+ (distal to coronoid with radial head fracture). With each bony injury pattern, we can anticipate which soft tissue constraints are likely to be involved and the importance of their repair to restore stability, and thereby develop algorithms for management. The Wrightington classification has been shown to be reliable and valid. A consecutive series of 60 patients with elbow-fracture dislocation managed according to the surgical algorithms of the Wrightington classification have been reported to have excellent outcomes with a median Mayo Elbow Performance Score of 100 (interquartile 85-100) and flexion/extension arc of movement of 123° (interquartile 101°-130°). In conclusion, the Wrightington classification of elbow-fracture dislocation is a comprehensive, reliable, and valid classification with treatment algorithms that are associated with good functional outcomes.

Functional outcomes of elbow injuries managed according to the Wrightington classification of elbow fracture-dislocations

Background

This study aims to review the functional outcomes of patients managed by the application of the Wrightington elbow fracture-dislocation classification system and its corresponding management algorithms.

Methods

This is a retrospective consecutive case series of patients over the age of 16 with an elbow fracture-dislocation managed according to the Wrightington classification. The primary outcome was the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) at the last follow-up. Range of movement (ROM) and complications were collected as a secondary outcome.

Results

Sixty patients qualified for inclusion (32 female, 28 male) with a mean age of 48 years (19-84). Fifty-eight (97%) patients completed a minimum of three months follow-up. Mean follow-up was six months (3-18). The median MEPS at the final follow-up was 100 (interquartile range [IQR] 85-100) and median ROM of 123° (IQR 101-130) degrees. Four patients underwent secondary surgery and had improved outcomes with the average MEPS score improving from 65 to 94 following the second surgery.

Conclusions

The results of this study show that good outcomes can be achieved for complex elbow fracture-dislocations through pattern recognition and management with an anatomically based reconstruction algorithm as described by the Wrightington classification system.

Using an Internal Joint Stabilizer Through a Single Posterior Approach for Elderly Patients With Terrible Triad Injury

Introduction

Treating a terrible triad injury of the elbow remains a challenge for orthopedic surgeons, especially in elderly patients due to the poor quality of the surrounding soft tissue and bony structures. In the present study, we propose a treatment protocol using an internal joint stabilizer through a single posterior approach and analyze the clinical results.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 15 elderly patients with terrible triad injuries of the elbow who underwent our treatment protocol from January 2015 to December 2020. The surgery involved a posterior approach, identification of the ulnar nerve, bone and ligament reconstruction, and the application of the internal joint stabilizer. A rehabilitation program was initiated immediately after the operation. Surgery-related complications, elbow range of motion (ROM), and functional outcomes were evaluated.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 21.7 months (range, 16-36 months). ROM at the final follow-up was 130° in extension to flexion and 164° in pronation to supination. The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 94 at the final follow-up. Major complications included breaking of the internal joint stabilizer in 2 patients, transient numbness over the ulnar nerve territory in one, and local infection due to irritation of the internal joint stabilizer in one.

Conclusions

Although the current study involved only a small number of patients and the protocol comprised two stages of operation, we believe that such a technique may be a valuable alternative for the treatment of these difficult cases.

Level of Clinical Evidence

4.

Treatment of Unstable Elbow Injuries with a Hinged Elbow Fixator: Subjective and Objective Results

Introduction

Injuries around the elbow pose a challenging problem for orthopaedic surgeons. The complex bony architecture of the joint should be restored and the thin soft tissue envelope needs to be handled with meticulous care. Elbow instability is a complication seen after dislocations and fractures of the elbow and remains a treatment challenge. The purpose of this study was to provide subjective and objective results following the surgical treatment of unstable elbow dislocations with an external hinged fixation technique.

Methods

Forty-six consecutive patients with complex trauma of the elbow with instability after ligament reconstruction were enrolled between January 2017 and December 2019. The parameters used to quantify the subjective and objective functional results were the Mayo Elbow Score (MES, objective) and Oxford Elbow Score (OES, subjective), and clinical stability of the elbow joint. We also performed a radiological follow-up of the fractures.

Results

The mean MES and OES scores were good at the 12-month follow-up. We had 38 patients with stable joints and 8 patients with minor instability. Using the stress test, we saw a significant difference in the affected joint under varus stress (6.7 ± 1.8 mm) compared to the healthy joint (5.8 ± 1.2 mm) laterally. Furthermore, medially the gap was significantly larger (5.8 ± 0.8 mm, treated elbow) than the contralateral gap under valgus stress (4.3 ± 0.8 mm) (p <0.001). Twenty-one complications occurred in 46 patients (46%): Seven patients had a clinical change of elbow axis: Three valgus (6%), four varus (9%); Superficial wound infection occurred in one case (2%) and ulnar nerve dysfunction in two (4%). The most common medium-term complication was post-traumatic osteoarthritis in eight cases (17%). Heterotopic ossification occurred in five patients (11%) and elbow stiffness in five cases (11%).

Conclusion

The use of the hinged elbow external fixator in the treatment of complex elbow trauma is a valid therapeutic adjunct to ligamentous reconstruction showing encouraging results with acceptable complications.

How to cite this article

Meccariello L, Caiaffa V, Mader K, et al. Treatment of Unstable Elbow Injuries with a Hinged Elbow Fixator: Subjective and Objective Results. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2022;17(2):68–73.

Does an Internal Joint Stabilizer and Standardized Protocol Prevent Recurrent Instability in Complex Persistent Elbow Instability?

BACKGROUND

The treatment of complex persistent elbow instability after trauma is challenging. Previous studies on treatments have reported varied surgical techniques, which makes it difficult to establish a therapeutic algorithm. Furthermore, the surgical procedures may not sufficiently restore elbow stability, even with an additional device, and a noted high rate of arthritis progression.While a recently developed internal joint stabilizer effectively treats elbow instability, its clinical application for complex persistent elbow instability is limited and the standardized protocol is not well described. Additionally, we want to know whether the arthritis progression will cause a negative impact on the functional outcomes of complex persistent elbow instability.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does treatment of complex persistent elbow instability with a hinged internal joint stabilizer and a standardized protocol prevent recurrent instability and other complications? (2) What are the pre- to postoperative improvements in pain, disability, elbow performance, and ROM? (3) Is the development of post-traumatic arthritis associated with worse pain, disability, elbow performance, and ROM?

METHODS

Between September 2014 and October 2019, we treated 22 patients for persistent dislocation or subluxation after initial treatment of traumatic elbow fracture-dislocations. Of those, we considered patients who were at least 20 years of age, with an interval of 6 weeks or more between the injury (initial treatment) and the index reconstructive procedure, which had been performed at our institute, as potentially eligible. During that time, we used an internal joint stabilizer with a standardized protocol for posttraumatic complex persistent elbow instability. We performed total elbow replacements in patients older than 50 years who had advanced elbow arthritis. Based on that, 82% (18 of 22) of patients were eligible; 14% (3 of 22) were excluded because total elbow replacements was undertaken, and another 5% (1 of 22) were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 1 year (median 24 months [range 12 to 63]), leaving 64% (14 of 22) for analysis in this retrospective study. We treated 14 patients (14 elbows) with posttraumatic complex persistent elbow instability with an internal joint stabilizer and a standardized protocol that comprised debridement arthroplasty with ulnar neurolysis, restoration of bony and ligamentous (reattachment) structures, application of an internal joint stabilizer, and early rehabilitation. There were eight men and six women in this study, with a median (range) age of 44 years (21 to 68). The initial elbow fracture-dislocation injury pattern was a terrible triad injury in seven patients, a posterolateral rotatory injury in four patients, and a posterior Monteggia fracture in three patients. Preoperative and follow-up radiographs were reviewed for evidence of recurrent instability and arthritis. Complications such as wound infection, seroma, neurovascular injury, and hardware complications were ascertained through chart review. Preoperative and postoperative VAS score for pain, DASH, and Mayo Elbow Performance Scores (MEPS) were collected and compared. Furthermore, extension-flexion and supination-pronation arcs were collected by chart review. We divided the patients into two groups according to whether or not they developed posttraumatic arthritis. We then presented the differences between pain, disability, elbow performance, and ROM. The hinged internal joint stabilizer was removed using another open procedure under general anesthesia 6 to 8 weeks after surgery.

RESULTS

There were no recurrent instability during and after device removal. Seven patients developed complications, including wound infection, seroma, neurovascular injury, hardware complications, and heterotopic ossification. Two patients had complications related to internal joint stabilizers and three had complications linked to radial head prostheses. Median (range) preoperative to postoperative changes included decreased pain (VAS 5 [2 to 9] to 0 [0 to 3], difference of medians -5; p < 0.001), decreased disability (DASH 41 [16 to 66] to 7 [0 to 46], difference of medians -34; p < 0.001), improved function (MEPS 60 [25 to 70] to 95 [65 to 100], difference of medians 35; p < 0.001), improved extension-flexion arc (40° [10° to 70°] to 113° [75° to 140°], difference of medians 73°; p < 0.001), and supination-pronation arc (78° [30° to 165°] to 148° [70° to 175°], difference of medians 70°; p < 0.001). Between patients with and without development of post-traumatic arthritis, there were no differences in postoperative pain (VAS 0 [0 to 3] to 0 [0 to 1], difference of medians 0; p = 0.17), disability (DASH 7 [0 to 46] to 7 [0 to 18], difference of medians 0; p = 0.40), function (MEPS 80 [65 to 100] to 95 [75 to 100], difference of medians 15; p = 0.79), extension-flexion arc (105° [75° to 140°] to 115° [80° to 125°], difference of medians 10°; p = 0.40), and supination-pronation arc (155° [125° to 175°] to 135° [70° to 160°], difference of medians -20°; p < 0.18).

CONCLUSION

In this small, retrospective study, we found that an internal joint stabilizer with a standardized treatment protocol could maintain concentric reduction while allowing early functional motion, and that it could improve clinical outcomes for patients with complex persistent elbow instability. However, patients must be counseled that the complications related to the radial head prostheses may occur, and that the benefits of early motion must compensate for an additional removal procedure and the risk of seroma formation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Terrible triad of the elbow and associated variants: a systematic review

Background

The terrible triad of the elbow (TTE) is a complex injury consisting of simultaneous elbow dislocation or subluxation, radial head fracture, and coronoid fracture. During the initial assessment of a TTE, the typical severity of presenting pain, swelling, and limited range of motion may limit the ability to perform a thorough physical examination and thus divert a clinician's attention away from additional injuries to the ipsilateral upper extremity. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to review the literature for reported cases of concomitant ipsilateral upper extremity injuries associated with a TTE and discuss various strategies to increase clinician awareness to avoid underdiagnosis and missed diagnoses.

Methods

A systematic review of five databases in four languages (English, Spanish, French, and Portuguese), from inception to May 2021, was conducted. Articles describing a TTE with a concomitant osseous, chondral, ligamentous, or musculotendinous injury occurring on the ipsilateral upper extremity were included. The patients were divided into two groups, those presenting with a classic TTE and concomitant ipsilateral upper extremity injury (group 1) and those in whom a TTE variant was described (group 2). A TTE variant was defined as a combination of osseous and/or chondral injuries to the elbow other than the classic description of TTE, in which at least two of the three classical elements of a TTE (elbow dislocation, coronoid fracture, and radial head fracture) were present in addition to other unique elbow osteoarticular injury.

Results

Nineteen articles met inclusion criteria and were further analyzed. A total of 27 patients were analyzed, 23 from group 1 and 4 from group 2. Overall, 33 concomitant injuries were documented in group 1, the most common being an olecranon fracture (27.3%), followed by Essex-Lopresti injury, triceps tendon avulsion, and carpal fracture-dislocation with 4 (12.1%) cases each. Group 2 had four patients, all of whom presented with a unique variant of the classically described TTE.

Conclusion

Despite a characteristic radiographic appearance of the classic TTE, additional injuries of the ipsilateral extremity or variants of the classic TTE may be easily missed, especially in cases resulting from high-energy mechanisms of injury. By analyzing the available data on associated injuries and variants that may occur with a TTE, we hope to increase awareness so that clinicians may recognize these less common but more complex injury patterns.

The radiological findings in complex elbow fracture-dislocation injuries

Elbow fracture-dislocation is a complex injury which can lead to significant bony and soft tissue damage. Surgical intervention is guided towards restoring joint stability, allowing early mobilization and preventing long-term joint stiffness. The most common types are posterolateral, posteromedial, Monteggia type (and variants), and anterior trans-olecranon fracture-dislocations. Posterolateral fracture-dislocation is characterized by a radial head fracture (± anterolateral coronoid fracture) and typically capsuloligamentous disruption (lateral collateral ligaments injury is the most common). A posterolateral fracture-dislocation with radial head and coronoid anterolateral facet fractures is termed a terrible triad injury. In posteromedial fracture-dislocation, there is a fracture of the anteromedial facet of the coronoid, typically with proximal avulsion of the lateral collateral ligaments (± injury to the posterior bundle of the ulnar collateral ligament). Monteggia fracture-dislocation injuries demonstrate proximal ulnar fracture (with possible involvement of the olecranon and the coronoid) and radial head dislocation. These can be divided into apex anterior or apex posterior variants. The latter are commonly associated with radial head fractures and lateral ligamentous injury, and have a worse prognosis. In trans-olecranon fracture-dislocation, there is significant disruption of the greater sigmoid notch and the olecranon, with various involvement of the coronoid and the proximal ulna. The article describes the radiological findings and outlines the management principles in complex elbow fracture-dislocation injuries.

Role of Dynamic Stabilizers of the Elbow in Radiocapitellar Joint Alignment: A Prospective In Vivo Study

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of dynamic stabilizers of the elbow on radiocapitellar joint alignment, before and after the administration of regional anesthesia.

METHODS

At a single institution, 14 patients were prospectively enrolled in a study using a within-subjects control design. Before performing a supraclavicular regional block, 10 fluoroscopic images (1 anteroposterior and 9 lateral views) of the elbow were obtained for each patient. The lateral images were obtained with the forearm in maximal supination, neutral rotation, and maximal pronation, and these forearm positions were repeated for 3 elbow positions: (1) full extension; (2) flexion to 90°, with 0° of shoulder internal rotation; and (3) flexion to 90°, with 90° of shoulder internal rotation. After obtaining the 10 initial images, a block was performed to achieve less than 3/5 motor strength of the imaged extremity, followed by obtaining the same 10 images in each patient. Radiocapitellar ratio, defined as the minimal distance between the right bisector of the radial head and the center of the capitellum divided by the diameter of the capitellum, was measured in each image.

RESULTS

The 14 patients had a mean age of 47.8 ± 15.7 years, and 10 (71.4%) patients were women. A difference between radiocapitellar ratios measured before and after the regional block administration was observed for all lateral images (-1.0% ± 7.2% to -2.2% ± 8.0%), although this difference was less than the minimum clinically important difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Paralysis of the dynamic stabilizers of the elbow produces a difference in the radiocapitellar joint alignment, but this did not reach the minimum clinically important difference.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Paralysis of the dynamic stabilizers of the elbow via a supraclavicular nerve block produces no clinically relevant effect on the radiocapitellar alignment of uninjured elbows.

The three-column concept of elbow joint stability and the Wrightington elbow fracture-dislocation classification, emphasizing the role of cross-sectional imaging

Elbow fracture-dislocation is a complex injury with a combination of osseous and soft tissue disruption. Different classification systems have been used to describe the injury pattern and help guide the management. The article describes the important cross-sectional findings in complex elbow fracture-dislocation injuries based on the relatively new Wrightington classification. This includes the various elements and patterns seen in elbow fracture-dislocations providing a simple and comprehensive system to classify these injuries and help guide the surgical management. The article also describes the three-column concept of elbow joint stability, dividing the elbow joint osseous structures into lateral, middle and medial columns. Detailed radiological assessment of the fractures pattern is vital to understand the mechanism of injury, allowing clinicians to predict the associated capsuloligamentous injury and help guide the management decisions. The Wrightington elbow fracture-dislocation classification categorizes the injuries according to the ulnar coronoid process and radial head fractures. Type A is an anteromedial coronoid fracture. Type B is a bifacet or basal coronoid fracture, with B + indicating associated radial head fracture. Type C is a combined anterolateral facet and radial head or comminuted radial head fractures. Type D is a diaphyseal ulnar fracture, with D + indicating associated radial head fracture.

Trans-olecranon fracture dislocations: How should we treat them?

BACKGROUND

Trans-olecranon fracture dislocations are the least frequent complex elbow instability. Proper surgical treatment should be performed to avoid postoperative complications.

METHODS

A retrospective design study was performed. Patients that suffered from this injury, treated at our center from 2010 to 2016 were included. Fifteen patients were analyzed. Functional results were measured using DASH, MEPS and VAS scores. Average time from injury to first surgical treatment was 4.87 days. Radial head fracture was present in seven cases and coronoid process in three patients. Most frequent complication was hardware disturbances in five patients. Mean follow up was 3.65 years.

RESULTS

Mean range of motion (ROM) was evaluated 1 year postoperatively: 129° flexion, 6° flexion contracture, and less than 5° deficit of pronation/supination. Clinical and functional results are encouraging, DASH 36.38, MEPS 100 and VAS 0.46.

CONCLUSION

Trans-olecranon fracture dislocations could obtain functional range of movement, pain relief and good functional outcomes with a standardized protocol of surgical fixation. It is important to achieve proper ulnar fixation, focusing in reestablishing dorsal angulation, and also to treat radial head and coronoid injuries properly, if present.

The contact area of the radiocapitellar joint under pronation and supination with axial load using a 3-dimensional computed tomography: an in vivo study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the contact area of the radiocapitellar joint with forearm pronation and supination under axial loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six healthy volunteers (2 males and 4 females, mean age: 44.6 years) were included in the study. A computed tomography scan of the extended elbow joints was obtained at 4 positions of forearm: full pronation with or without load and full supination with or without load. Mimics, 3-matic Medical, Geomagic, and Photoshop were used to reconstruct 3-dimensional models. The contact area of the radiocapitellar joint was measured. Shifting of the center of the contact area of the radiocapitellar joint was measured.

RESULTS

The axial load added 8.6% and 10.5% contact area to pronation and supination without load, respectively. From pronation without load, the center of contact area significantly shifted 2.4 ± 1.1 mm anteromedially to supination without load and shifted by 1.0 ± 0.5 mm to the center of the radial head compared with the pronation with load. The center of the contact area significantly shifted 2.4 ± 1.5 mm anteromedially from the pronation to the supination under loading. The contact area of the tuberosity anterior in the radial head significantly increased by 14% (without load) and 8% (with load) from pronation to supination.

CONCLUSION

Axial loading increases the contact area of the radiocapitellar joint. The center of the contact area of the radiocapitellar joint changed according to loading and shifted to the anterior tuberosity of the radial head from forearm pronation to supination.

Reoperation Rates and Costs of Radial Head Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Radial Head and Neck Fractures: A Retrospective Database Study

Background: We conducted a retrospective study to compare reoperation/conversion rates and costs between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and radial head arthroplasty (RHA) in patients with radial head/neck fractures. Methods: We examined the Humana Orthopedic data sets using the PearlDiver Application from January 2007 to June 2016 to identify patients with radial head and neck fractures with and without a concurrent elbow dislocation. Time to revision surgery, odds ratios, and survival curves for reoperations/conversions were calculated comparing ORIF and RHA. Results: A total of 7520 patients were identified who had undergone either ORIF or RHA. Overall, ORIF patients were less likely to undergo a conversion procedure (2.76% vs 7.03%) but more likely to undergo any reoperation (21.36% vs 17.63%) with a higher average cost ($19 688.46 vs $11 626.64). Patients who underwent ORIF without a concurrent elbow dislocation were also less likely to undergo a conversion procedure (2.12% vs 7.24%) but more likely to undergo any reoperation (20.22% vs 16.99%) with a higher average cost ($19 420.21 vs $11 123.61). Patients who underwent ORIF with a concurrent elbow dislocation were more likely to undergo both a conversion procedure (15.86% vs 6.39%) and any reoperation (44.98% vs 19.63%) with a higher average cost per patient ($24 999.62 vs $13 192.00). The average time to reoperation/conversion surgery was less than a year for all patient groups. Conclusions: Overall reoperation rates are high in patients undergoing operative treatment of radial head and neck fractures. RHA is less expensive and has fewer reoperations/conversions in short-term follow-up when compared with ORIF in radial head/neck fracture dislocations of the elbow.

Reliability and validity of the Wrightington classification of elbow fracture-dislocation

Aims

The Wrightington classification system of fracture-dislocations of the elbow divides these injuries into six subtypes depending on the involvement of the coronoid and the radial head. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and reproducibility of this classification system.

Methods

This was a blinded study using radiographs and CT scans of 48 consecutive patients managed according to the Wrightington classification system between 2010 and 2018. Four trauma and orthopaedic consultants, two post CCT fellows, and one speciality registrar based in the UK classified the injuries. The seven observers reviewed preoperative radiographs and CT scans twice, with a minimum four-week interval. Radiographs and CT scans were reviewed separately. Inter- and intraobserver reliability were calculated using Fleiss and Cohen kappa coefficients. The Landis and Koch criteria were used to interpret the strength of the kappa values. Validity was assessed by calculating the percentage agreement against intraoperative findings.

Results

Of the 48 patients, three (6%) had type A injury, 11 (23%) type B, 16 (33%) type B+, 16 (33%) Type C, two (4%) type D+, and none had a type D injury. All 48 patients had anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs, 44 had 2D CT scans, and 39 had 3D reconstructions. The interobserver reliability kappa value was 0.52 for radiographs, 0.71 for 2D CT scans, and 0.73 for a combination of 2D and 3D reconstruction CT scans. The median intraobserver reliability was 0.75 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.62 to 0.79) for radiographs, 0.77 (IQR 0.73 to 0.94) for 2D CT scans, and 0.89 (IQR 0.77 to 0.93) for the combination of 2D and 3D reconstruction. Validity analysis showed that accuracy significantly improved when using CT scans (p = 0.018 and p = 0.028 respectively).

Conclusion

The Wrightington classification system is a reliable and valid method of classifying fracture-dislocations of the elbow. CT scans are significantly more accurate than radiographs when identifying the pattern of injury, with good intra- and interobserver reproducibility. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1041–1047.

Radiographic Predictors of Medial Collateral Ligament Injury and Stability of the Elbow

It has been postulated that injury to the medial collateral ligament (MCL) of the elbow is rare in cases of elbow fracture-dislocation, and if the MCL is torn, it does not require surgical repair. Elbow fracture-dislocations with MCL insufficiency are associated with recurrent instability, secondary surgery, and the development of posttraumatic arthritis. With the current study, our aim was to investigate whether evidence of an MCL attachment-site fracture on a radiograph or computed tomography (CT) scan is predictive of MCL insufficiency, the need for MCL repair, and postoperative instability.

The role of the posterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament in posteromedial rotatory instability of the elbow

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate two hypotheses. First, that disruption of posterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament (PMCL) has to occur for the elbow to subluxate in cases of posteromedial rotatory instability (PMRI) and second, that ulnohumeral contact pressures increase after disruption of the PMCL.

Materials and Methods

Six human cadaveric elbows were prepared on a custom-designed apparatus which allowed muscle loading and passive elbow motion under gravitational varus. Joint contact pressures were measured sequentially in the intact elbow (INTACT), followed by an anteromedial subtype two coronoid fracture (COR), a lateral collateral ligament (LCL) tear (COR + LCL), and a PMCL tear (COR + LCL + PMCL).

Results

There was no subluxation or joint incongruity in the INTACT, COR, and COR + LCL specimens. All specimens in the COR + LCL + PMCL group subluxated under gravity-varus loads. The mean articular contact pressure of the COR + LCL group was significantly higher than those in the INTACT and the COR groups. The mean articular contact pressure of the COR + LCL + PMCL group was significantly higher than that of the INTACT group, but not higher than that of the COR + LCL group.

Conclusion

In the presence of an anteromedial fracture and disruption of the LCL, the posterior bundle of the MCL has to be disrupted for gross subluxation of the elbow to occur. However, elevated joint contact pressures are seen after an anteromedial fracture and LCL disruption even in the absence of such subluxation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1060–5.

Varus posteromedial rotatory instability: a biomechanical analysis of posterior bundle of the medial ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been growing interest in the involvement of the posterior bundle of the medial ulnar collateral ligament (pMUCL) in varus posteromedial rotatory instability (PMRI). Varus PMRI has been observed clinically, but the degree of involvement of the pMUCL remains unclear. This study assessed the degree to which the pMUCL is involved in stabilizing the elbow and the feasibility of a pMUCL reconstruction to restore stability.

METHODS

Movements simulating PMRI were performed in 8 cadaveric elbows. Joint gapping values were obtained by 3-dimensional motion capture for the proximal and distal aspects of the ulnohumeral joint. Specimens were assessed at "intact," "cut coronoid + pMUCL," "reconstruction," and "cut anterior aspect MUCL + reconstruction" conditions with mechanical testing at 30°, 60°, and 90° of elbow flexion.

RESULTS

Proximal joint gapping significantly increased from intact to cut coronoid + pMUCL at 60° and 90°, and distal joint gapping significantly increased at 90°. In the reconstruction condition, joint gapping across the proximal joint at 60° and 90° significantly recovered, as did distal joint gapping at 90°. In the cut anterior aspect MUCL + reconstruction condition, no significant increase occurred in proximal or distal joint gapping.

CONCLUSIONS

Transection of the pMUCL with a coronoid fracture leads to increased joint gapping, suggesting the presence of PMRI. PMRI can still occur with an intact lateral ligamentous complex. A pMUCL tendon graft reconstruction confers some elbow stability in this injury mechanism.

Management Of Recent Elbow Dislocations: Functional Treatment Versus Immobilization; A Prospective Study About 60 Cases

Objective:

To determine our therapeutic posture trough a comparison of functional treatment results versus immobilization in two different periods.

Introduction:

For years, the treatment of recent elbow dislocations consisted of reduction and immobilization during 21 days. Given the frequency of stiffness other methods have been tried out.

Method:

A prospective study was carried out from January 2010 to December 2014. Sixty patients averaging 28.3 years of age underwent elbow dislocation reduction. They were categorized into three separate groups. Patients in the first group had their elbow immobilized for 21 days whereas Group 2 patients were immobilized for 10 days. Group 3 patients were applied a functional treatment followed by a functional rehabilitation. Patients were evaluated according to the Mayo Clinic Elbow Performance Index and the results analyzed with statistical software (SPSS, version 18).

Results:

During the first month, the functional results of the patients were excellent and good in 19%, 94.7% and 90% respectively for Groups 1, 2 and 3. The pain was intense (10 on the visual analogue scale) in group 3 associated with swelling. At day 90, the results of the patients in Groups 2 and 3 were excellent in 100% of the cases versus 90% for Group 1. At 6 months, all the results were the same. We have not noted any instability, or recurrence or periarticular ossification in our patients.

Conclusion:

The treatment of stable elbow dislocations remains orthopedic. The risk of instability and pain motivates a short 10-day immobilization period followed by early mobilization.

Elbow Instability: Anatomy, Biomechanics, Diagnostic Maneuvers, and Testing

The elbow comprises a complex of bony and ligamentous stabilizers that provide both primary and secondary constraints to elbow instability. Through trauma and overuse, classic instability patterns arise by loss of these important stabilizers. The diagnosis of elbow instability can made using specific examination maneuvers and testing to diagnose the clinical pattern. This article reviews the elbow's unique anatomy and biomechanical characteristics and these are applied when reviewing the maneuvers and testing used to diagnose elbow instability.

Isolated ligamentous injury can cause posteromedial elbow instability: a cadaveric study

BACKGROUND

Elbow posteromedial rotatory instability (PMRI) is known to occur with fracture of the anteromedial coronoid and injury to the posterior bundle of the medial ulnar collateral ligament (pMUCL). However, whether instability results from isolated pMUCL injury remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to quantify displacement about the ulnohumeral joint to evaluate whether isolated sectioning of the pMUCL results in elbow PMRI.

METHODS

Nine cadaveric elbows underwent movements simulating PMRI by application of axial compression with varus and internal rotation moments. Gapping values at both the proximal and distal aspects of the medial ulnohumeral joint were then recorded for "intact" and "pMUCL-sectioned" elbows at positions of 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion.

RESULTS

After pMUCL transection, torsion increased by 2.6° ± 0.7° (P = .054) at 30° and 4.5° ± 1.2° (P = .039) at 60° of flexion. Proximal ulnohumeral joint gapping also increased at 30° (1.4 ± 0.4 mm; P = .039), 60° (1.5 ± 0.6 mm; P = .039), and 90° (1.5 ± 0.7 mm; P = .017), respectively. No increases in distal ulnohumeral gapping occurred at any angle of flexion.

DISCUSSION

Sectioning of the pMUCL results in significant increases in torsion and displacement about the proximal ulnohumeral joint. Our findings demonstrate that elbow PMRI can occur secondary to isolated ligamentous injury. Clinicians mindful of this previously unrecognized role of the pMUCL as a stabilizer may wish to consider methods of restoring pMUCL integrity when treating medial elbow instability.

Treatment of complex elbow fracture-dislocations

Successful management of complex elbow fracture-dislocations requires, in part, recognition of the overall injury pattern, which can aid in the identification of concomitant bony and soft tissue injuries. Trans-olecranon fracture-dislocations are best treated surgically with stable anatomic restoration of the trochlear notch. Terrible triad elbow injuries are believed to be caused by a valgus posterolateral force. Although select terrible triad injuries can be managed non-operatively, the majority of injuries are treated with stable surgical repair to allow early elbow motion. Unlike terrible triads, varus posteromedial forces are theorized to cause anteromedial coronoid fractures. These are usually associated with LCL disruptions, but do not have concomitant MCL or radial head injuries. A subset of anteromedial coronoid fractures can also be managed non-operatively. Internal fixation is recommended for injuries associated with large fracture fragments or elbow instability preventing early motion.