Extensor tendon transfer for fracture-related extensor pollicis longus rupture: Long-term outcome case series.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous rupture of the extensor pollicis longus (EPL) tendon following both nonoperative and operative treatment of distal radius fractures has been well described. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess long-term outcomes of extensor indicis proprius to EPL tendon transfers for patients following distal radius fracture and EPL tendon repair. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series focusing on long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted for patients who sustained a distal radius fracture and subsequently underwent extensor tendon transfer from 2005-2015 at a private practice center. Outcome measures including index finger (IF) metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and thumb interphalangeal (IP) active range of motion (ROM), digital extension against resistance, subjective complaints, and QuickDASH scores were recorded at final follow-up. RESULTS: Seven patients were included in the study. There were six females and one male subject, mean age of 54 ± 13 years at injury of EPL, and 5/7 involved the left upper extremity. For isolated function, 7/7 (100%) patients had isolated, active IF MCP extension, 6/7 (86%) could extend IF MCP and thumb IP against resistance. Mean IF MCP extension was 1° ± 2°, mean IF MCP flexion was 89° ± 2°, mean thumb IP extension was -5° ± 4°, and mean thumb IP flexion was 67° ± 15°. Mean QuickDASH score was 16 ± 14. CONCLUSIONS: This series shows good long-term functional and patient reported outcomes in patients following extensor indicis proprius to EPL tendon transfers at a single center.

Transfers of pediatric patients with isolated injuries to a rural Level 1 Orthopedic Trauma Center in the United States: are they all necessary?

BACKGROUND: Pediatric fractures are difficult to manage and often result in expensive urgent transfers to a pediatric trauma center. Our study seeks to identify patients transferred with isolated acute orthopedic injuries to a Level 1 center in which no procedure occurred and the patient was discharged home. We sought to examine all patients who are transferred to a Level 1 pediatric trauma center for care of isolated orthopedic injuries, and to determine how often no procedure is performed after transfer. Identification of this group ahead of time could potentially lead to less avoidable transfers. METHODS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all patients with isolated orthopaedic injuries who were transferred to a Level 1 pediatric trauma center in a rural state within the United States over a 5-year period beginning January, 2011 and ending December, 2015. Demographic factors were collected for each patient as well as diagnosis and treatment at the trauma center. Patients were divided into two groups, those who underwent an operation or fracture reduction after admission and those that had no procedure performed. Patient demographics, fracture types and presentation characteristics were examined to attempt to determine factors related to the potentially avoidable transfers. RESULTS: 1303 patients were identified who were transferred with isolated orthopedic fractures. Of these, 1113 (85.6%) patients underwent a procedure for their injuries, including 821 treated with surgical intervention and 292 treated with closed reduction of their fracture. 190 of 1303 (14.6%) of the patients transferred with isolated injuries had neither surgery nor a reduction performed. Identifying characteristics of the non-operative group were that they contained a substantially higher percentage of females, transfers by ambulance, fractures involving only the tibia, fracture types classified as other, and fractures from motor-vehicle accidents. DISCUSSION: Approximately 14.6% of patients transferred to a pediatric Level 1 trauma center for isolated orthopedic injury underwent no surgery or fracture reductions and were discharged directly home. In particular, isolated tibia fractures were more frequently treated without reduction or surgery. In the future, telemedicine consultation for these specific injury types may limit unnecessary and costly transfers to a Level 1 pediatric trauma hospital.

Biomechanics of axial load transmission across the native human elbow.

BACKGROUND: Elbow and forearm motion are thought to affect elbow load transmission, yet little empirical evidence exists to quantify the biomechanics. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen human cadaver upper extremities were utilized. A 100 N axial force was applied across the elbow joint at elbow flexion angles of (0°, 30°, 60°, and 90°) and forearm rotation angles (0°, 45° supination, and 45° pronation). Pressure mapping sensors were placed in both the radiocapitellar and ulnotrochlear joints. Force distributions and contact areas were measured, and paired t-tests were used for comparison (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The average maximum loading percentage of the radiocapitellar and ulnotrochlear joint pressures were 57.8 ± 4.6% and 42.2 ± 4.6%, respectively. Elbow flexion angle and forearm rotation did not significantly affect the joint loading. There was no significant difference between the contact areas of each joint, although ulnotrochlear and radiocapitellar joints demonstrated an inverse relationship. CONCLUSION: Our study is the only one to date to comprehensively evaluate loading mechanics throughout both functional elbow flexion and forearm rotation across both articulations. The load sharing ratio across the radiocapitellar and ulnotrochlear joints was 58%:42%, agreeing with previously reported ratios with limited parameters. A relationship may be present between increasing radiocapitellar and decreasing ulnotrochlear contact areas as elbow flexion increases.