Results of Linked Convertible Total Elbow Arthroplasty for the Management of Distal Humeral Fractures in the Elderly.

PURPOSE: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) is increasingly used for the management of comminuted distal humeral fractures in elderly patients. There are limited data on the outcome of modern elbow arthroplasty designs in larger patient cohorts. The aim of the current study was to review the outcomes and complications using a cemented convertible TEA system in a linked configuration in patients with distal humeral fractures. METHODS: Patients with distal humeral fractures treated with TEA and a minimum of 2 years' follow-up were reviewed. Demographic information, patient-reported outcome, functional and radiographic outcome assessments, and complications were reported. RESULTS: Forty patients met inclusion criteria; 35 were female. Median follow-up was 4 years (range, 2-13 years). Average age of patients at the index procedure was 79 ± 9 years. All implants were linked. Range of motion was: extension 16° ± 13°, flexion 127° ± 14°, supination 79° ± 11°, and pronation 73° ± 20°. Patient-reported outcome scores were: Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation 37 ± 35, Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand 31 ± 31, and Mayo Elbow Performance Index 90 ± 18. Seven patients had heterotopic ossification. Lucent lines were noted predominantly in humeral implant zone V. No lucent lines were noted around the ulnar component in any radiographic zone. Complications occurred in 9 patients (22%) and 2 revisions were performed: one for infection and one for a late periprosthetic fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Total elbow arthroplasty for fracture in elderly patients provides pain relief, functional range of motion, and good patient-reported outcome scores. No implant-related complications of this convertible implant system were encountered, but longer-term follow-up is needed. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Management of rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow with a convertible total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) is commonly performed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes and complications of unlinked and linked TEA using a convertible system in patients with RA. METHODS: All patients with RA who underwent TEA at a single center with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up were reviewed. Demographic information, patient-reported outcome scores, functional outcome assessments, and radiographic parameters were evaluated at most recent follow-up. RESULTS: We evaluated 82 patients (27 with unlinked TEA and 55 with linked TEA) with RA. The mean age at surgery was 61 ± 10 years, with a mean follow-up period of 6 ± 4 years. Demographic characteristics were similar between groups, with the exception of longer follow-up in the unlinked group (8 years vs. 5 years, P = .001). No differences in range of motion were noted. Elbow strength was similar other than pronation strength (74% ± 8% for unlinked vs. 100% ± 8% for linked, P = .03). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Index was 83 ± 16; Patient Rated Elbow Evaluation score, 15 ± 18; and QuickDASH (short version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire) score, 34 ± 20. No differences in the rates of reoperation (17% vs. 24%, P = .4), complications (32% vs. 31%, P = .4), or revisions (13% vs. 17%, P = .3) were found between unlinked and linked devices. Four patients with instability, all with unlinked designs, underwent revision to a linked design. Four patients, all with linked designs, underwent revision for aseptic loosening of smooth short-stem ulnar components. CONCLUSION: TEA using a convertible implant design provides good patient-reported outcomes at mid-term follow-up in patients with RA. Our study was unable to detect a difference in the use of either unlinked or linked implant designs; further large comparison trials are needed.

Glenoid component positioning and guidance techniques in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Positioning of the glenoid component is one of the most challenging steps in shoulder arthroplasty, and prosthesis longevity as well as functional outcomes is considered highly dependent on accurate positioning. This review considers the evidence supporting surgical navigation and patient-specific instruments for glenoid implant positioning in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed for studies assessing glenoid implant positioning accuracy as measured by cross-sectional imaging on live subjects or cadaver models. Meta-analysis of controlled studies was performed to estimate the primary effects of navigation and patient-specific instruments on glenoid implant positioning error. Meta-analysis of absolute positioning outcomes was also performed for each group incorporating data from controlled and uncontrolled studies. RESULTS: Nine studies, four controlled and five uncontrolled, with 258 total subjects were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis of controlled studies supported that both navigation and patient-specific instruments had a moderate statistically significant effect on improving glenoid implant positioning outcomes. Meta-analysis of absolute positioning outcomes demonstrates glenoid implant positioning with standard instrumentation results in a high rate of malposition. DISCUSSION: Navigation and patient-specific instruments improve glenoid positioning outcomes. Whether the improvement in positioning outcomes achieved translate to better clinical outcomes is unknown.

Management of chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures: primary repair vs. semitendinosus autograft reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Delayed presentation of distal biceps tendon ruptures can make primary repair difficult, in which case reconstruction using a tendon graft is an option. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes and complications between delayed distal biceps tendon ruptures managed with repair vs. semitendinosus autograft reconstruction. METHODS: Nineteen delayed distal biceps tendon rupture cases treated with a tendon reconstruction were compared with 16 delayed primary repair cases (>21 days). The reconstructions were performed using a semitendinosus autograft looped through a transosseous tunnel in the bicipital tuberosity and secured with a Pulvertaft weave to the remnant distal biceps tendon. The patient groups were reviewed and completed functional outcomes testing including range of motion, isometric elbow flexion and supination strength, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Mayo Elbow Performance Index. RESULTS: Mean patient age (49 ± 9 vs. 46 ± 8 years, P = .65) and follow-up (47 ± 25 vs. 45 ± 27 months, P = .45) were similar between delayed primary repair and reconstruction groups. Range of motion (P = .62), supination strength (P = .26), elbow flexion strength (P = .93), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (P = .08), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (P = .22) were not significantly different between groups. The Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (P = .02) and Mayo Elbow Performance Index (P = .04), however, were better in the delayed repair group compared with the reconstruction group. Complications were similar between groups (P = .87). CONCLUSION: Delayed reconstruction of irreparable distal biceps tendon ruptures with semitendinosus autograft produces similar strength, range of motion, and complication rates but slightly worse functional outcome scores compared with delayed primary repair. This suggests that when possible direct repair is preferred, however, if not possible, reconstruction with an autologous tendon graft results in predictably good outcomes.

The Radiographic Union Score for Hip (RUSH) Identifies Radiographic Nonunion of Femoral Neck Fractures.

BACKGROUND: The Radiographic Union Score for Hip (RUSH) is a previously validated outcome instrument designed to improve intra- and interobserver reliability when describing the radiographic healing of femoral neck fractures. The ability to identify fractures that have not healed is important for defining nonunion in clinical trials and predicting patients who will likely require additional surgery to promote fracture healing. We sought to investigate the utility of the RUSH score to define femoral neck fracture nonunion. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What RUSH score threshold yields at least 98% specificity to diagnose nonunion at 6 months postinjury? (2) Using the threshold identified, are patients below this threshold at greater risk of reoperation for nonunion and for other indications? METHODS: A representative sample of 250 out of a cohort of 725 patients with adequate 6-month hip radiographs was analyzed from a multinational elderly hip fracture trial (FAITH). All patients had a femoral neck fracture and were treated with either multiple cancellous screws or a sliding hip screw. Two reviewers independently determined the RUSH score based on the 6-month postinjury radiographs and interrater reliability was assessed with the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). There was substantial reliability between the reviewers assigning the RUSH scores (ICC, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.85). The RUSH score is a checklist-based system that quantifies four measures of healing: cortical bridging, cortical fracture disappearance, trabecular consolidation, and trabecular fracture disappearance.. Fracture healing was determined by two independent methods: (1) concurrently by the treating surgeon using both clinical and radiographic assessments as per routine clinical care; and (2) retrospectively by a Central Adjudication Committee using complete obliteration of the fracture line on radiographs alone. Receiver operating characteristic tables were used to define a RUSH threshold score that was > 98% specific for fracture nonunion. RESULTS: A threshold score of < 18 was associated with a 100% specificity (95% CI, 97%-100%) and a positive predictive value of 100% (95% CI, 73%-100%) for radiographic nonunion. In contrast, using the fracture healing assessments of the treating surgeons failed to identify a useful discriminatory nonunion threshold and the highest positive predictive value was 43%. With respect to complications, patients with RUSH scores below 18 had greater risk of undergoing reoperation for nonunion (reoperation when < 18: six of 13 [46%]; reoperation when ≥ 18: 11 of 237 [54%]; relative risk [RR], 9.9 [95% CI, 4.4-22.7]; p < 0.001) and for all indications (reoperation when < 18: eight of 13 [62%]; reoperation when ≥ 18: 54 of 237 [38%]; RR, 2.7 [95% CI, 1.7-4.4]; p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-month RUSH score is a reliable method for assessing radiographic healing. Our results highlight the discordance between radiographic determinations and clinician assessments of fracture healing and stress the need for clinical data to be incorporated in research studies evaluating fracture healing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.