The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures is useful to identify patients who may require treatment with hemi- or total elbow arthroplasty.

Background: Classification systems are only useful if there is agreement among observers. The purpose of this study is to introduce a simple and clinically applicable classification system - The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures (CCDHF) and to compare the interobserver and intraobserver agreement for this classification with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA), and the Sheffield classification systems. The primary objective of the new classification system is to distinguish fractures that may not be suitable for open reduction and internal fixation, necessitating treatment options such as elbow hemiarthroplasty or total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Methods: Five consultant elbow surgeons assessed a consecutive series of 105 sets X-rays of distal humeral fractures on 2 occasions with at least 10 weeks interval. All X-rays were classified according to AO/OTA, Sheffield, and the CCDHF systems. The CCDHF system has been developed collaboratively by a panel of five experienced elbow surgeons. Based on consensus, the surgeons identified specific fracture characteristics where elbow hemiarthroplasty or TEA might be needed. Results: The mean interobserver agreement was fair for AO/OTA and moderate for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The mean intraobserver agreement was moderate for AO/OTA and substantial for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The observers were uncertain about the classification in 29% of the cases with the AO/OTA classification, 15% with the Sheffield classification, and 12% with CCDHF. Conclusion: The CCDHF demonstrated validity and clinical applicability and can assist surgeons in identifying fractures that may require hemiarthroplasty or TEA treatment.

Low risk of postoperative ulnar nerve affection in surgically treated distal humeral fractures when the nerve is released in situ.

BACKGROUND: Adult distal humeral fractures (DHF) comprise 2%-5% of all fractures and 30% of all elbow fractures. Treatment of DHF may be technically demanding due to fracture complexity and proximity of neurovascular structures. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) are often the treatment of choice, but arthroplasty is considered in case of severe comminution or in elderly patients with poor bone quality. Ulnar nerve affection following surgical treatment of distal humerus fractures is a well-recognized complication. AIM: To report the risk of ulnar nerve affection after surgery for acute DHFs. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 239 consecutive adult patients with acute DHFs who underwent surgery with ORIF, elbow hemiarthroplasty (EHA) or total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) between January 2011 and December 2019. In all cases, the ulnar nerve was released in situ without anterior transposition. We used our institutional database to review patients' medical records for demographics, fracture morphology, type of surgery and ulnar nerve affection immediately; records were reviewed after surgery and at 2 wk and 12 wk of routine clinical outpatient follow-up. Twenty-nine percent patients were excluded due to pre- or postoperative conditions. Final follow-up examination was a telephone interview in which ulnar nerve affection was reported according to the McGowen Classification Score. A total of 210 patients were eligible for interview, but 13 patients declined participation and 17 patients failed to respond. Thus, 180 patients were included. RESULTS: Mean age at surgery was 64 years (range 18-88 years); 121 (67.3%) patients were women; 59 (32.7%) were men. According to the AO/OTA classification system, we recorded 47 patients with type A3, 55 patients with type B and 78 patients with type C fractures. According to the McGowen Classification Score, mild ulnar nerve affection was reported in nine patients; severe affection, in two. A total of 69 patients were treated with ORIF of whom three had mild temporary ulnar nerve affection and one had severe ulnar nerve affection. In all, 111 patients were treated with arthroplasty (67 EHA, 44 TEA) of whom seven had mild ulnar nerve affection and one had severe persistent ulnar nerve affection. No further treatment was provided. CONCLUSION: The risk of ulnar nerve affection after surgical treatment for acute DHF is low when the ulnar nerve is released in situ without nerve transposition, independently of the treatment provided.

Anterior interosseous nerve syndrome after shoulder arthroscopy.

A 47-year-old woman developed anterior interosseus nerve (AIN) syndrome after subacromial decompression and acromioclavicular joint resection. The operation was performed in the beach chair position and under general anaesthesia without the application of an interscalene block. Two weeks later, the patient presented with paresis of the distal interphalangeal joint of the second finger. Previous studies have proposed traction-type neuropraxia and extravasation of irrigation fluid as leading causes. Exploration and release of the AIN can be indicated if there is no improvement 3-6 months after the operation.

Elbow hemiarthroplasty vs. open reduction internal fixation for acute Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) type 13C fractures-A systematic review.

Background: Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is the standard treatment for multifragmentary intra-articular distal humeral fractures. Fractures not amenable by ORIF are treated with total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). In recent years, elbow hemiarthroplasty (EHA) has been used as an alternative to TEA, as weight bearing restrictions and risk of component loosening are lower. We systematically reviewed the literature reporting functional outcomes and complication rates after either EHA or ORIF for Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) type 13C fractures. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus. The inclusion criteria were at least 5 patients, aged ≥50 years, AO/OTA type 13C fracture treated with ORIF or EHA, and evaluation with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Literature screening and data extraction were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The results were synthesized qualitatively using weighted means. No comparative statistical analyses were done. Results: We included 27 articles, which included 96 patients treated with EHA and 535 patients treated with ORIF. We identified 1 randomized controlled trial and 26 case series. The weighted mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 86.9 (n = 89) in the EHA group and 84.7 (n = 535) in the ORIF group. There were 26 (33%) complications (n = 78) in the EHA group and 103 (38%) complications (n = 270) in the ORIF group. Complication rates were generally high in both groups. Conclusion: We found comparable results of EHA and ORIF, which indicate that EHA is a viable treatment option for AO/OTA type 13C fractures not amenable by ORIF. Because of high risk of bias, interpretation of the results should be done with caution.

Good functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation for AO/OTA type 13-C2 and -C3 acute distal humeral fractures in patients aged over 45 years.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to report the functional outcomes and complications after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO)/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) type 13-C2 and -C3 acute distal humeral fractures with minimum 2-year follow-up. Our hypothesis was that ORIF would provide functional outcomes that are comparable to those of total elbow arthroplasty and elbow hemiarthroplasty reported in the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During a 6-year period, 23 patients aged > 45 years were treated with double plating for AO/OTA type 13-C2 or -C3 fractures. The mean age was 62 years (range, 46-80 years). The Oxford Elbow Score was used as the primary outcome; the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, pain severity score (on a visual analog scale), range of motion, reoperations, and complications were used as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The median Oxford Elbow Score was 42 (range, 25-48), where a score of 48 represents a normal elbow; 20 patients achieved good to excellent outcomes, and 3 achieved fair outcomes. The median Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 85 (range, 60-100), where a score of 100 represents a normal elbow; 18 patients achieved good to excellent outcomes, and 5 achieved fair outcomes. The median visual analog scale score was 2 (range, 0-5). The median flexion-extension and supination-pronation arcs were 120° (range, 70°-155°) and 160° (range, 75°-170°), respectively. Eight complications were recorded in 7 patients; 4 of them required reoperation because of fracture pseudarthrosis or elbow stiffness. Ten patients were working at the time of trauma, and nine of them returned to the same occupation. Our results are comparable to the results of previously published studies regarding the outcome of ORIF, elbow hemiarthroplasty, or total elbow arthroplasty for AO/OTA type 13-C fractures. CONCLUSION: ORIF is a reliable treatment option for AO/OTA type 13-C2 and -C3 acute distal humeral fractures in middle-aged and elderly patients, despite the considerable rate of complications. Good to excellent results can be obtained in most patients.

Effects of 12 Weeks of Progressive Early Active Exercise Therapy After Surgical Rotator Cuff Repair: 12 Weeks and 1-Year Results From the CUT-N-MOVE Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic full-thickness rotator cuff tears are typically managed surgically, followed by rehabilitation, but the load progression to reach an optimal clinical outcome during postoperative rehabilitation is unknown. PURPOSE: To evaluate whether there was a superior effect of 12 weeks of progressive active exercise therapy on shoulder function, pain, and quality of life compared with usual care. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: Patients with surgically repaired traumatic full-thickness rotator cuff tears were recruited from 2 orthopaedic departments and randomized to progressive active exercise therapy (PR) or limited passive exercise therapy (UC [usual care]). The primary outcome was the change in the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) score between groups from before surgery to 12 weeks after surgery. Secondary outcomes included changes in the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire score, pain, range of motion, and strength. Adverse events were registered during the intervention period. RESULTS: A total of 82 patients were randomized to the PR (n = 41) or UC (n = 41) group. All 82 patients (100%) participated in the 12-week assessment and 79 in the 1-year follow-up. At 12 weeks, there was no significant difference between the groups in the change in the WORC score from baseline adjusted for age, sex, and center (physical symptoms: P = .834; sports and recreation: P = .723; work: P = .541; lifestyle: P = .508; emotions: P = .568). Additionally, there was no between-group difference for the secondary outcomes including the WORC score at 1 year and the DASH score, pain, range of motion, and strength at 12 weeks and 1 year. Both groups showed significant improvements over time in all outcomes. In total, there were 13 retears (16%) at 1-year follow-up: 6 in the PR group and 7 in the UC group. CONCLUSION: PR did not result in superior patient-reported and objective outcomes compared with UC at either short- or long-term follow-up (12 weeks and 1 year). REGISTRATION: NCT02969135 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Elbow hemiarthroplasty versus open reduction and internal fixation for AO/OTA type 13 C2 and C3 fractures of distal humerus in patients aged 50 years or above: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Intraarticular distal humeral fractures of AO/OTA type 13 C2 and C3 pose a surgical challenge despite the evolution of surgical implants and techniques. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is often preferred as the first choice of treatment, but the results vary and are sometimes disappointing. Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has been widely used for fractures that are not amenable to ORIF in elderly patients, but the mechanical complications remain a challenge, especially in active patients. Elbow hemiarthroplasty (EHA) provides a modern alternative that might avoid the mechanical complications and weight bearing restrictions related to the linked articulation in semi-constrained TEA. No studies have compared the results of EHA to that of ORIF, but case series have reported promising results. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a study protocol describing an investigator-initiated, non-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing the outcome of EHA with ORIF for AO/OTA type 13 C2 and C3 fractures of the distal humerus in patients who are 50 years or older. Forty-four patients with AO/OTA type 13 C2 and C3 fractures of distal humerus will be randomized to either EHA or ORIF. The Oxford Elbow Score (OES) will be used as primary outcome. Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), pain severity score (VAS), range of motion, and patient satisfaction will be used as secondary outcomes. Reoperations, complications, and the length of sick leave will be recorded. The patients will be examined after the operation and at 3 months and 1, 2, 5, and 10 years. DISCUSSION: The main objective of this study is to investigate the best treatment option for AO/OTA type 13 C2 and C3 fractures of distal humerus in patients aged 50 years or above. We hypothesize that EHA results in fewer complications and superior functional outcome compared with ORIF and that the mechanical complications related to the linked articulation of TEA can be avoided. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, PRS, NCT04163172. Registered November 13, 2019. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=evori&cntry=&state=&city=&dist= (Table 2). The protocol has been approved by The Scientific Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark (Jr. no.: H- 19,035,590). The processing of personal data has been approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (Jr. no. P-2019-246). Inclusion started on February 1, 2020.

Good outcome after elbow hemiarthroplasty in active patients with an acute intra-articular distal humeral fracture.

BACKGROUND: This study reported the clinical outcomes and complications after elbow hemiarthroplasty (EHA) for acute distal humeral fractures Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO)/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) type C2 and C3. METHOD: During a 6-year period, 24 active patients with acute intra-articular and multifragmentary distal humeral fractures were treated with an EHA by 1 of 4 experienced elbow surgeons. Mean age was 65 years (range, 47-80 years). Median follow-up time was 20 months (range, 12-70 months). RESULTS: The median Oxford Elbow Score was 40 points (range, 17-48 points), where 48 points represents a normal elbow. Outcomes were "good to excellent results" in 21 patients, "fair" in 2 patients, and "poor" in 1 patient. The median Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 85 points (range, 50-100 points), where 100 points represents a normal elbow. Outcomes were "good to excellent" in 19 patients, "fair" in 4 patients, and "poor" in 1 patient. The median pain severity score was 2 (range, 0-7) in a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 represents a pain-free elbow. The median flexion/extension and supination/pronation arcs were 110° (range, 60°-140°) and 160° (range, 115°-180°), respectively. Complications were recorded in 7 patients, and 3 of them underwent reoperation because of stiffness, which was treated with open release. CONCLUSIONS: EHA provides a good and reliable option in the treatment of an acute intra-articular distal humeral fracture unsuitable for open reduction and internal fixation, especially in active patients.

Outcome of Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty After Resurfacing Hemiarthroplasty in Patients with Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Patients are often treated with a resurfacing hemiarthroplasty in the expectation that the bone-preserving design facilitates revision should the need for a revision arthroplasty arise. The aim of this study was to report the outcome of patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis who underwent revision shoulder arthroplasty after resurfacing hemiarthroplasty. METHODS: We reviewed all patients with osteoarthritis reported to the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry from 2006 to 2013. There were 1,210 primary resurfacing hemiarthroplasties, of which 107 cases (9%) required a revision surgical procedure, defined as the removal or exchange of the humeral component or the addition of a glenoid component. The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index was used to evaluate outcome at 1 year. RESULTS: The median WOOS of revision arthroplasty after failed resurfacing hemiarthroplasty was 62 points (interquartile range, 40 to 88 points). Of the 80 cases that had follow-up, 33 (41%) had an unacceptable outcome, defined as a WOOS of ≤50 points. Of the 107 cases that required a revision surgical procedure, 11 arthroplasties (10%) required a further revision surgical procedure. The resurfacing hemiarthroplasty was revised to a stemmed hemiarthroplasty (n = 39), anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (n = 31), or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (n = 30). In 7 cases, the revision arthroplasty design was unknown. The median WOOS of patients who underwent revision stemmed hemiarthroplasty (48 points) was significantly inferior (p = 0.002) to that of patients who underwent primary stemmed hemiarthroplasty (75 points); the median WOOS of patients who underwent revision anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (74 points) was also significantly inferior (p = 0.007) to that of patients who underwent primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (93 points). However, the median WOOS of patients who underwent revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty (68 points) was not significantly different (p = 0.66) from that of patients who underwent primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty (77 points) used in the treatment of osteoarthritis. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of revision shoulder arthroplasty after failed resurfacing hemiarthroplasty was variable and, in many cases, disappointing. It is important that resurfacing hemiarthroplasty is used for the correct indications and with adequate technique and skill. When resurfacing hemiarthroplasty is used in the treatment of osteoarthritis, revision cannot be counted upon as a fallback. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.