Prognostic factors associated with failure of total elbow arthroplasty.

Aims: The aims of this study were to identify and evaluate the current literature examining the prognostic factors which are associated with failure of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Methods: Electronic literature searches were conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane. All studies reporting prognostic estimates for factors associated with the revision of a primary TEA were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool, and the quality of evidence was assessed using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. Due to low quality of the evidence and the heterogeneous nature of the studies, a narrative synthesis was used. Results: A total of 19 studies met the inclusion criteria, investigating 28 possible prognostic factors. Most QUIPS domains (84%) were rated as moderate to high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was low or very low for all prognostic factors. In low-quality evidence, prognostic factors with consistent associations with failure of TEA in more than one study were: the sequelae of trauma leading to TEA, either independently or combined with acute trauma, and male sex. Several other studies investigating sex reported no association. The evidence for other factors was of very low quality and mostly involved exploratory studies. Conclusion: The current evidence investigating the prognostic factors associated with failure of TEA is of low or very low quality, and studies generally have a moderate to high risk of bias. Prognostic factors are subject to uncertainty, should be interpreted with caution, and are of little clinical value. Higher-quality evidence is required to determine robust prognostic factors for failure of TEA.

"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.

Prognostic factors associated with failure of total elbow replacement: a protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Total elbow replacement (TER) has higher failure rates requiring revision surgery compared with the replacement of other joints. Understanding the factors associated with failure is essential for informed decision-making between patients and clinicians, and for reducing the failure rate. This review aims to identify, describe and appraise the literature examining prognostic factors for failure of TER. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will be conducted and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. Electronic literature searches will be conducted using Medline, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane. The search strategy will be broad, including a combination of subject headings (MESH) and free text search. This search will be supplemented with a screening of reference lists of the included studies and relevant reviews. Two independent reviewers will screen all search results in two stages (title and abstract, and full text) based on the Population, Index prognostic factor, Comparator prognostic factor, Outcome, Time and Setting criteria. The types of evidence included will be randomised trials, non-randomised trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, registry studies and case-control studies. If the literature lacks enough studies, then case series with 50 or more TERs will be considered for inclusion. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment for included studies will be performed by two independent reviewers using the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies for Prognostic Factors and Quality In Prognostic Studies tools.Meta-analyses of prognostic estimates for each factor will be undertaken for studies that are deemed to be sufficiently robust and comparable. Several challenges are likely to arise due to heterogeneity between studies, therefore, subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to account for the differences between studies. Heterogeneity will be assessed using Q and I2 statistics. If I2>40% then pooled estimates will not be reported. When quantitative synthesis is not possible, a narrative synthesis will be undertaken. The quality of the evidence for each prognostic factor will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023384756.

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.

Olecranon Fractures: A Critical Analysis Review.

¼: Olecranon fractures account for 10% of all elbow fractures and are more likely to result from a low-energy injury. A displaced fracture with a stable ulnohumeral joint (Mayo type 2) is the most common type of injury. ¼: The management of an isolated olecranon fracture is based on patient factors (age, functional demand, and if medically fit to undergo surgery) and fracture characteristics including displacement, fragmentation, and elbow stability. ¼: Nonoperative management can be successfully used in undisplaced fractures (Mayo type 1) and in displaced fractures (Mayo type 2) in frail patients with lower functional demands. ¼: Patients with displaced olecranon fractures with a stable ulnohumeral joint without significant articular surface fragmentation (Mayo type 2A) can be managed with tension band wiring, plate osteosynthesis (PO), intramedullary fixation, or suture repair. ¼: PO is advocated for multifragmentary fractures and fractures that are associated with ulnohumeral instability. It is essential to consider the variable anatomy of the proximal ulna during surgery.

Elbow arthroplasty research methods, outcome domains, and instruments used in clinical outcome studies : a scoping review.

AIMS: Arthroplasties of the elbow, including total elbow arthroplasty, radial head arthroplasty, distal humeral hemiarthroplasty, and radiocapitellar arthroplasty, are rarely undertaken. This scoping review aims to outline the current research in this area to inform the development of future research. METHODS: A scoping review was undertaken adhering to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines using Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and trial registries, limited to studies published between 1 January 1990 and 7 February 2021. Endnote software was used for screening and selection, and included randomized trials, non-randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies, analytical cross-sectional studies, and case series of ten or more patients reporting the clinical outcomes of elbow arthroplasty. The results are presented as the number of types of studies, sample size, length of follow-up, clinical outcome domains and instruments used, sources of funding, and a narrative review. RESULTS: A total of 362 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were of total elbow arthroplasty (246; 68%), followed by radial head arthroplasty (100; 28%), distal humeral hemiarthroplasty (11; 3%), and radiocapitellar arthroplasty (5; 1%). Most were retrospective (326; 90%) and observational (315; 87%). The median sample size for all types of implant across all studies was 36 (interquartile range (IQR) 21 to 75). The median length of follow-up for all studies was 56 months (IQR 36 to 81). A total of 583 unique outcome descriptors were used and were categorized into 18 domains. A total of 105 instruments were used to measure 39 outcomes. CONCLUSION: We found that most of the literature dealing with elbow arthroplasty consists of retrospective observational studies with small sample sizes and short follow-up. Many outcomes have been used with many different instruments for their measurement, indicating a need to define a core set of outcomes and instruments for future research in this area.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(10):1148-1155.

Partial tear of the distal biceps tendon: Current concepts.

Background: Patients with partial rupture of the distal biceps tendon can present with vague elbow pain and weakness. Understanding of the anatomy and aetiology of this disease is essential to management. Patients can present with a single or multiple traumatic events or with a chronic degenerative history. On clinical examination, patients will have an intact tendon making the diagnosis more challenging. Clinicians, therefore, should have a high index of suspicion and should actively look for this pathology. Objectives and Rationale: This review aims to discuss the current evidence in managing partial rupture of the distal biceps tendon with a suggested treatment algorithm. Conclusion: Several clinical tests have been described in the literature including resisted hook test, biceps provocation test, and TILT sign. However, the diagnosis is usually confirmed by a magnetic resonance scan with the arm positioned in elbow flexion, shoulder abduction, and forearm supination and commonly known as FABS MR. Partial tendon tears that involve less than 50% of the tendon can be successfully managed conservatively. Tears that include more than 50% of the tendon are more likely to fail conservative management and would benefit from surgical intervention. It is crucial, however, to involve the patient in the decision making, which is based on their objectives and needs.

Current concepts in elbow fracture dislocation.

BACKGROUND: Elbow fracture dislocations are complex injuries that can provide a challenge for experienced surgeons. Current classifications fail to provide a comprehensive system that encompasses all of the elements and patterns seen in elbow fracture dislocations. METHODS: The commonly used elbow fracture dislocation classifications are reviewed and the three-column concept of elbow fracture dislocation is described. This concept is applied to the currently recognised injury patterns and the literature on management algorithms. RESULTS: Current elbow fracture dislocation classification systems only describe one element of the injury, or only include one pattern of elbow fracture dislocation. A new comprehensive classification system based on the three-column concept of elbow fracture dislocation is presented with a suggested algorithm for managing each injury pattern. DISCUSSION: The three-column concept may improve understanding of injury patterns and treatment and leads to a comprehensive classification of elbow fracture dislocations with algorithms to guide treatment.

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.

Prognostic Value of Computed Tomography: Measured Parameters of Body Composition in Primary Operable Gastrointestinal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Previous reports suggest that body composition parameters can be used to predict outcomes for patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. However, evidence for an association with long-term survival is conflicting, with much of the data derived from patients with advanced disease. This study examined the effect of body composition on survival in primary operable GI cancer. METHODS: Patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the GI tract (esophagus, stomach, colon, rectum) between 2006 and 2014 were identified from a prospective database. Computed tomography (CT) scans were analyzed using a transverse section at L3 to calculate sex-specific body composition indices for skeletal muscle, visceral fat, and subcutaneous fat. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analysis were used to compare unadjusted survival. Multivariate survival analyses were performed using a proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The study enrolled 447 patients (191 woman and 256 men) with esophagogastric (OG) (n = 108) and colorectal (CR) (n = 339) cancer. Body composition did not predict survival for the OG cancer patients. Among the CR cancer patients, survival was shorter for those with sarcopenia (p = 0.017) or low levels of subcutaneous fat (p = 0.005). Older age (p = 0.046) and neutrophilia (p = 0.013) were associated with sarcopenia in patients with CR. Tumor stage (p = 0.033), neutrophil count (p = 0.011), and hypoalbuminemia (p = 0.023) were associated with sarcopenia in OG cancer patients. In the multivariate analysis, no single measure of body composition was an independent predictor of reduced survival. CONCLUSION: Sarcopenia and reduced subcutaneous adiposity are associated with reduced survival for patients with primary operable CR cancer. However, in this study, no parameter of body composition was an independent prognostic marker when considered with age, tumor stage, and systemic inflammation.