Influence of Training Background on Elbow Arthroplasty Case Numbers: An Analysis of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Oral Examination Case List Database.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of training background on the frequency and indications of elbow arthroplasty performed by early-career surgeons. METHODS: A review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Oral Examination Case List database from 2010 to 2021 was completed. The number of cases performed by surgeons from each individual training background were calculated and compared with the total number of surgeons who completed each fellowship during the study period. RESULTS: Hand surgeons performed the most elbow arthroplasty cases (132, 44%), but a higher percentage of shoulder/elbow surgeons performed elbow arthroplasty in comparison (15% vs. 7%). The mean number of TEA cases performed by shoulder/elbow surgeons was significantly higher than in other subspecialties (P < 0.01). However, when comparing only surgeons who performed elbow arthroplasty during the board collection period, there was no significant difference between training backgrounds (P = 0.20). DISCUSSION: While hand surgeons performed the most elbow arthroplasty cases, a higher percentage of shoulder/elbow surgeons performed elbow arthroplasty during the study period. The high prevalence of distal humerus fracture as an indication for arthroplasty reflected a shift in indications and was not related to training background.

Stress shielding following radial head arthroplasty: the impact of preoperative bone quality.

BACKGROUND: We sought to assess if the medullary diameter to cortical width ratio (MD:CW), canal flair index (CFI), and canal fill (CF) of the proximal radius were associated with the presence of stress shielding (SS) after a MoPyC radial head arthroplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, international, multicenter (4 centers) study. A total of 100 radial head arthroplasties in 64 women and 36 men with a mean age of 58.40 years ± 14.90 (range, 25.00-91.00) were included. Radiographic measurements, including MD:CW, CFI, CF, and postoperative SS were captured at a mean follow-up of 3.9 years ± 2.8 (range, 0.5-11). RESULTS: SS was identified in 60 patients. Mean preoperative MD:CW, CFI, and CF were 0.55 ± 0.09, 1.05 ± 0.18, and 0.79 ± 0.11, respectively. The presence of SS was significantly associated with MD:CW (adjusted odds ratio = 13.66; P = .001), and expansion of the stem (adjusted odds ratio = 3.78; P = .001). The amount of the SS was significantly correlated with expansion of the stem (aß 4.58; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that MD:CW was an independent risk factor of SS after MoPyc radial head arthroplasty. Autoexpansion of the MoPyc stem significantly increased the risk of SS and its extent. Further studies involving multiple implants designs are needed to confirm the preliminary observations presented in the current study.

Outcomes of total elbow arthroplasty in the treatment of distal humeral fractures in the elderly: a retrospective cohort comparison between primary arthroplasty and arthroplasty secondary to failed internal fixation.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of total elbow arthroplasty as the index procedure in the treatment of traumatic distal humerus fractures with those of secondary total elbow arthroplasty after failed internal fixation. The secondary objective was to compare the complication rates and the radiographic results in the 2 groups. Our hypothesis was that the clinical results of total elbow arthroplasty performed after failed internal fixation were comparable to those of primary total elbow arthroplasty in the treatment of distal humerus fractures in the elderly population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort comparison study, including 60 patients with a median age of 80 years (71-85 years), who either underwent a primary total elbow arthroplasty (group 1; 45 patients) or secondary total elbow arthroplasty after failed internal fixation (group 2; 15 patients) in the treatment of a post-traumatic supra and intercondylar fracture of the distal humerus, between January 2004 and January 2021. The clinical examination, including the Mayo Elbow Performance Score and triceps proficiency test, complication rates, and the need for reoperation were noted. The average clinical and radiographic follow-up was 40.8 months (24-120 months). RESULTS: The clinical results of the 2 groups were comparable when looking at the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (90.00 [85.00, 100.00], P = .486). With regard to complications, there were 2 surgical site infections in group 1 and 3 in group 2 (P = .099), 1 case of mechanical loosening of the humeral component in group 1 and 1 in group 2 (P = .448), and 1 patient with triceps insufficiency in group 1. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary total elbow arthroplasty after failed internal fixation has shown good functional results and a complication rate comparable to that of index total elbow arthroplasty in the treatment of articular fractures of the distal humerus in the elderly.

Long-terms outcomes of radial head arthroplasty using a bipolar prosthesis.

BACKGROUND: In acute treatment of radial head fractures, a radial head prosthesis can be considered if open reduction and internal fixation are not technically feasible. METHODS: We reviewed the data of 27 consecutive bipolar Judet radial head prostheses implanted in patients with unreconstructable radial head fractures and no other concomitant fractures (coronoid or olecranon factures). The lesions of the lateral collateral ligament were rated according to the McKee classification. Twenty-three patients with more than ten-year follow-up participated in this retrospective study All patients underwent assessments for pain, range of motion and stability using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, the QuickDash questionnaire and a Visual Analogue Scale for pain. Radiography assessment was performed to determine the correct setting of the implant, presence of periprosthetic loosening, prosthetic disassembly, heterotopic ossification, capitellum and ulnohumeral degenerative changes. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 149 months (± 12.2). Mean range of motion in flexion-extension was 111° (± 10.55), mean extension was 18° (± 14.32) and mean flexion was 130° (± 11.4). Mean arc of motion in supination-pronation was 150° (± 12.26). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 88, the mean QuickDash score was 7.3; 86% of the patients were satisfied. Seven patients (26%) required secondary surgery. The most frequent complication was heterotopic ossification, which had negative consequences on the functional result. CONCLUSIONS: Bipolar radial head prostheses are an option for acute treatment of isolated unreconstructable radial head fractures. During follow-up, three patients required implant revision and removal; the capitellum surface presented severe degenerative changes and the prosthesis was not replaced. Another complication was the risk of implant dislocation, in relation to implant design, incorrect positioning of the radial head stem or else to inadequate reconstruction of the lateral collateral ligament. Further work is needed to establish the long-term follow-up results of Judet implants in complex elbow fractures.

Complications of antibiotic cement spacers used for elbow infections.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic cement spacers have been widely used in the treatment of joint infections. There are no commercially available antibiotic spacers for the elbow. Instead, they are typically fashioned by the surgeon at the time of surgery using cement alone or a combination of cement with sutures, Steinmann pins, external fixator components, or elbow arthroplasty components. There is no consensus regarding the ideal elbow antibiotic spacer and no previous studies have examined the complications associated with these handmade implants in relation to their unique structural design. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 55 patients who had 78 static antibiotic cement spacers implanted between January 1998 and February 2021 as part of a 2-stage treatment plan for infection of an elbow arthroplasty, other elbow surgery, or primary elbow infection. Several antibiotic spacer structures were used during the study period. For analysis purposes, the spacers were classified into linked and unlinked spacers based on whether there was a linking mechanism between the humerus and the ulna. Complications related to these spacers that occurred either during the implantation, between implantation and removal, or during removal were recorded and analyzed from chart review and follow-up x rays. Reoperations due to spacer-related complications were also recorded. RESULTS: Among the 55 patients (78 spacers), there were 23 complications, including 17 minor and 6 major complications. The most common complication of unlinked spacers (intramedullary [IM] dowels, beads and cap spacer) was spacer displacement. Other complications included IM dowel fracture and difficulty locating beads during spacer removal. The major complications of linked cement spacers included two periprosthetic humerus fractures after internal external fixator cement spacers and re-operation due to breakage and displacement of one bushing cement spacer. The major complications of unlinked cement spacers included two reoperations due to IM dowel displacement and one reoperation due to displacement of beads. Among patients who had removal of all components and those with native joints, there was no statistically significant difference between internal external fixator cement spacers and unlinked cement spacers in minor complication rates (30% vs. 16%, P = .16), major complication rates (7% vs. 8%, P = .85) and reoperation rates (0% vs. 8%, P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: Static handmade antibiotic elbow spacers have unique complications related to their structural designs. The most common complication of linked and nonlinked cement spacers were failure of the linking mechanism and displacement, respectively. Surgeons should keep in mind the possible complications of different structures of cement spacers when choosing 1 antibiotic spacer structure over another.

Using 3D Printing Technology to Design Split-Piece Sleeve Prosthesis in the Revision Surgery of Tumor-Type Total Elbow Prosthetic Fractures: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Revision of tumor-type prosthetic fractures is very challenging in clinical work. Traditional repair methods may not be able to meet the needs of complex cases or cause greater bone damage. Therefore, more effective and reliable solutions need to be found. CASE PRESENTATION: This study presents a novel revision technique for managing fractures of tumor-type total elbow prostheses. A 57-year-old female patient was diagnosed with a left distal humeral bone tumor accompanied by pathological fracture and underwent customized tumor-type total elbow prosthesis arthroplasty. After 5 years, she experienced pain and encountered difficulty in flexing the left elbow while lifting heavy objects. The X-ray examination revealed a fracture of the distal humeral prosthesis. As a response, the elbow joint was initially explored, and the damaged component of the prosthesis was extracted. Subsequently, we utilized 3D printing technology to design a split-piece sleeve prosthesis and effectively restored the fractured left distal humerus implant. During the 2-year follow-up, The X-ray demonstrated satisfactory positioning of the prosthesis, which remained securely affixed without any indications of loosening. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) reached 80 points, the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) attained a score of 28 points, and the range of motion of the elbow was measured between 25° and 110°, revealing favorable functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: The utilization of a 3D printed split-piece sleeve prosthesis presents a viable clinical treatment strategy for addressing fractures in tumor-type elbow prostheses.

Midterm follow-up of the Nexel total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Aseptic loosening is one of the most common complications of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Modern implants, such as the Nexel, have been designed in an attempt to decrease loosening. The present study aims to report implant survivorship, radiographic assessment of loosening and lucency, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients treated with the Nexel TEA at midterm follow-up. METHODS: Consecutive series of adult patients underwent TEA using the Nexel by a single surgeon via standardized technique. Patients with minimum 3-year follow-up with radiographic and PROM data were included. Survivorship was defined by the absence of revision. Loosening was assessed via the Wrightington method by 3 independent fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons. Lucency was analyzed across individual radiographic zones on orthogonal radiographs. PROMs included the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE), and EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). RESULTS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients (22 female, 16 male) with a mean age of 67 years underwent TEA via a triceps-sparing isolated medial window approach. Mean follow-up was 5.5 years (range 3-9). Primary diagnoses were as follows: 19 osteoarthritis (OA), 9 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 9 post-traumatic arthritis (PA), and 1 conversion of elbow arthrodesis. Overall survivorship was 97.4%, with 1 patient undergoing revision for infection. Loosening was found in 5.3% of elbows, averaged across 3 observers. Lucency was most pronounced at the level of the humeral condyles. PROMs demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful improvements in 76%, 92%, and 73% of patients for QuickDASH, PREE, and EQ-5D, respectively. No significant correlations were found between patient age, gender, loosening, lucency, and PROMs. CONCLUSION: At midterm follow-up, the Nexel TEA demonstrated excellent overall survivorship and low rate of implant loosening. The single failure requiring revision for infection was conversion of a prior elbow arthrodesis. PROMs overall exhibited marked and consistent improvement from preoperative to final postoperative follow-up. Although promising, these results should be interpreted with some caution as long-term data regarding this prosthesis are still lacking.

Ligament Sparing Elbow Hemiarthroplasty: A Novel Technique for the Management of Distal Humeral Fractures.

Intra-articular distal humerus fractures present various challenges with a wide array of treatment options. Open reduction internal fixation remains the treatment of choice. In older patient populations with poor bone quality and short-end segment fractures with articular comminution, open reduction internal fixation, however, may bring on unsurmountable technical challenges. Total elbow arthroplasty and elbow hemiarthroplasty (EHA) may offer superior functional outcomes in these cases. During EHA for fractures, the medial and lateral columns are reconstructed with the collateral ligaments to restore elbow stability. We hypothesize that in coronal sheer fracture patterns where the columns are intact, maintaining the native collateral ligaments and columns will provide both an anatomic and stable elbow joint. We introduce the ligament sparing EHA technique for unreconstructible coronal shear fractures. We describe this novel technique and compare our postoperative outcomes in 2 patients who underwent this surgery to those described in the literature. The postoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores for the 2 patients were 13.8 and 10.3, respectively. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score for the 2 patients were 80 and 85, respectively. The operative arm presented a grip strength of 82% and 89% when compared with the contralateral arm, for the patients respectively. The range of motion varied between 78% and 100% of the contralateral arm for both patients. Although our results are promising and the ligament sparing EHA technique may be a more anatomic option in certain fracture patterns, further research with larger cohorts and multiple surgeons is needed to reinforce our results.

High failure rate of 2-stage revision for the infected total elbow arthroplasty: a single institution's experience.

BACKGROUND: Despite 2-stage revision being a common treatment for elbow prosthetic joint infection (PJI), failure rates are high. The purpose of this study was to report on a single institution's experience with 2-stage revisions for elbow PJI and determine risk factors for failed eradication of infection. The secondary purpose was to determine risk factors for needing allograft bone at the second stage of revision in the setting of compromised bone stock. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all 2-stage revision total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) performed for infection at a single institution between 2006 and 2020. Data collected included demographics and treatment course prior to, during, and after 2-stage revision. Radiographs obtained after explantation and operative reports were reviewed to evaluate for partial component retention and incomplete cement removal. The primary outcome was failed eradication of infection, defined as the need for repeat surgery to treat infection after the second-stage revision. The secondary outcome was the use of allograft for compromised bone stock during the second-stage revision. Risk factors for both outcomes were determined. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were included. Seven patients (37%) had either the humeral or ulnar component retained during the first stage, and 10 (53%) had incomplete removal of cement in either the humerus or ulna. Nine patients (47%) had allograft strut used during reimplantation and reconstruction. Nine patients (47%) failed to eradicate the infection after 2-stage revision. Demographic data were similar between the repeat-infection and nonrepeat-infection groups. Six patients (60%) with retained cement failed compared with 3 patients (33%) with full cement removal (P = .370). Two patients (29%) with a retained component failed compared to 7 patients (58%) with full component removal (P = .350). Allograft was used less frequently when a well-fixed component or cement was retained, with no patients with a retained component needing allograft compared to 9 with complete component removal (P = .003). Three patients (30%) with retained cement needed allograft, compared with 6 patients (67%) who had complete cement removal (P = .179). CONCLUSION: Nearly half of the patients failed to eradicate infection after 2-stage revision. The data did not demonstrate a clear association between retained cement or implants and risk of recurrent infection. Allograft was used less frequently when a component and cement were retained, possibly serving as a proxy for decreased bone loss during the first stage of revision. Therefore, the unclear benefit of removing well-fixed components and cement need to be carefully considered as it likely leads to compromised bone stock that complicates the second stage of revision.

Do ChatGPT and Google differ in answers to commonly asked patient questions regarding total shoulder and total elbow arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) offer a new potential resource for patient education. The answers by Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), a LLM AI text bot, to frequently asked questions (FAQs) were compared to answers provided by a contemporary Google search to determine the reliability of information provided by these sources for patient education in upper extremity arthroplasty. METHODS: "Total shoulder arthroplasty" (TSA) and "total elbow arthroplasty" (TEA) were entered into Google Search and ChatGPT 3.0 to determine the ten most FAQs. On Google, the FAQs were obtained through the "people also ask" section, while ChatGPT was asked to provide the ten most FAQs. Each question, answer, and reference(s) cited were recorded. A modified version of the Rothwell system was used to categorize questions into 10 subtopics: special activities, timeline of recovery, restrictions, technical details, cost, indications/management, risks and complications, pain, longevity, and evaluation of surgery. Each reference was categorized into the following groups: commercial, academic, medical practice, single surgeon personal, or social media. Questions for TSA and TEA were combined for analysis and compared between Google and ChatGPT with a 2 sample Z-test for proportions. RESULTS: Overall, most questions were related to procedural indications or management (17.5%). There were no significant differences between Google and ChatGPT between question categories. The majority of references were from academic websites (65%). ChatGPT produced a greater number of academic references compared to Google (80% vs. 50%; P = .047), while Google more commonly provided medical practice references (25% vs. 0%; P = .017). CONCLUSION: In conjunction with patient-physician discussions, AI LLMs may provide a reliable resource for patients. By providing information based on academic references, these tools have the potential to improve health literacy and improved shared decision making for patients searching for information about TSA and TEA. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: With the rising prevalence of AI programs, it is essential to understand how these applications affect patient education in medicine.

Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty compared to total elbow replacement for distal humeral fractures: a registry analysis of 906 procedures.

BACKGROUND: Total elbow replacement (TER) is an accepted treatment for complex intra-articular distal humerus fractures in elderly patients. Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty (HA) is also a potential surgical option for unreconstructable fractures and avoids the concerns regarding mechanical wear and functional restrictions associated with TER. In the current literature, there are limited data available to compare the revision rates of HA and TER for the treatment of fracture. We used data from a large national arthroplasty registry to compare the outcome of HA and TER undertaken for fracture/dislocation and to assess the impact of demographics and implant choice on revision rates. METHODS: Data obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry from May 2, 2005, to December 31, 2021, included all procedures for primary elbow replacement with primary diagnosis of fracture or dislocation. The analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HRs) from Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: There were 293 primary HA and 631 primary TER procedures included. The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) rate at 9 years was 9.7% for HA (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0, 15.7), and 11.9% (95% CI 8.5, 16.6) for TER. When adjusted for age and gender, there was a significantly higher risk of revision after 3 months for TER compared to HA (HR 2.47, 95% CI 1.22, 5.03, P = .012). There was no difference in the rate of revision for patients aged <55 years or ≥75 years when HA and TER procedures were compared. In primary TER procedures, loosening was the most common cause of revision (3.6% of primary TER procedures), and the most common type of revision in primary TER involved revision of the humeral component only (2.6% of TER procedures). TER has a higher rate of first revision for loosening compared to HA (HR 4.21, 95% CI 1.29, 13.73; P = .017). In HA procedures, instability (1.7%) was the most common cause for revision. The addition of an ulna component was the most common type of revision (2.4% of all HA procedures). CONCLUSION: For the treatment of distal humerus fractures, HA had a lower revision rate than TER after 3 months when adjusted for age and gender. Age <55 or ≥75 years was not a risk factor for revision when HA was compared to TER. Loosening leading to revision is more prevalent in TER and increases with time. In HA, the most common type of revision involved addition of an ulna component with preservation of the humeral component.

Failure of the linkage mechanism in a semi-constrained total elbow arthroplasty is a rare and unpredictable event: a review of seven cases.

PURPOSE: Linked component of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) consisted of bushing and locking pins. Failure of linked components is a rare complication of TEA. This study aims to investigate the mechanism and consequence of failure of the linkage mechanism in TEA surgeries. METHODS: Between 2010 and 2021, five patients received revision operation due to linked component failure. Besides, two patients underwent primary operation at another institute were also analyzed due to failure of the linkage mechanism. RESULTS: All seven patients underwent primary TEA and mean age for primary TEA was 48 (range, 27-62). Two patients had TEA for post-traumatic arthritis, three patients for rheumatoid arthritis, and two patients for comminuted distal humerus fracture. The average time between primary TEA and revision TEA for linked component failure was 13.6 years. Three bushing wear and four locking pin dissociation were diagnosed according to pre-operative radiography. Elbow pain and swelling are the most common clinical symptoms. Severe osteolysis, periprosthetic fracture, and stem loosening were noted in three bushing wear cases. In four dissociation of locking pin cases, breakage of male locking pin phalanges was demonstrated in two patients. For revision procedures, both the locking pins and bushings were replaced. No patients in the study required additional surgery after the revision operation for linked component failure. CONCLUSION: Osteolysis, component loosening, periprosthetic fracture may be expected after linked component failure. Patients should be regularly followed up from short-term to long-term with radiography. Early diagnosis and intervention with linked component exchange can prevent extensive revision surgery.

Long-term outcomes of Kudo type-5 unlinked surface-replacing total elbow arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis: a 15-year average follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has been used for various conditions including rheumatoid arthritis (RA). While the Kudo TEA has been associated with favorable short-term outcomes, there is limited information on the longer term outcomes of this device. The aim of this study was to investigate the average 15-year outcome of Kudo type-5 TEA in patients with RA. METHODS: For this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed 29 elbows in 28 patients (Larsen grade III, n = 8; IV, n = 19; V, n = 2) with RA who underwent Kudo type-5 TEA between 1999 and 2010. The patients were followed up for a mean of 15 (range: 10-21) years. We investigated the survival with setting revision/removal as the endpoints. The risk factors for revision/loosening were assessed. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in elbow flexion after Kudo TEA. Preoperative and postoperative Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved significantly from 60.3 to 94.7. Complications included intraoperative medial humeral epicondyle fracture (n = 2), postoperative dislocations (n = 4), deep infections (n = 1), and persistent ulnar nerve neuropathy (n = 1). Aseptic loosening was observed in 7 elbows (24.1%; humerus, n = 3; ulna, n = 3; both sides, n = 1). The causes of the 5 revisions were postoperative dislocation (n = 1), deep infection (n = 1), aseptic loosening of the humerus (n = 2), and aseptic loosening of the ulna (n = 1). All 5 elbows underwent revision of the ulnar component (n = 2) or the linked TEA (n = 3). The survival rate was 81% at 15 years after surgery with setting revision/removal as the endpoints. A deviation of ulnar component insertion angle of over 5° in any plane was associated with more revision compared to those with accurately placed implants. CONCLUSION: The Kudo type-5 elbow showed good results for up to 15 years of follow-up. However, excessive deviation of insertion angle of the ulnar component (over 5°) was associated with more revision. Due to the small sample size, robust statistical analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications or revision could not be performed, and further research is warranted to resolve this limitation.

Distal humerus fracture in older patients: ORIF vs. total elbow arthroplasty.

Distal humerus fractures are a contemporary problem because the life expectancy, autonomy and functional demands of older patients continue to grow. This is combined with surgical advances in bone reconstruction, especially in fragile patients. A distal humerus fracture in an older adult is a serious injury with an uncertain prognosis. In fact, damage to the elbow joint in this complex anatomical area overwhelmed by low-quality bone occurs in patients who often have unfavorable characteristics (fragile skin, low physiological reserves, organ failure) combined with pharmaceutical treatments that can be iatrogenic. The treatment indication must not be based solely on the conventional radiographs used for classification purposes; the fracture and bone quality must be analyzed in three dimensions. Also, the surgeon must understand the patient's needs, worries and risks fully to decide between conservative treatment and anatomical locking plate fixation or elbow arthroplasty (hemi or total). In the end, the chosen treatment must allow at least 100̊ and preferably 120̊ of flexion-extension at the elbow. In this age range, the choice between arthroplasty and plate fixation is definitive; the surgical approach must make it possible to carry out either option, with arthroplasty implants available in case the trochlear fracture cannot be plated. The aim of this lecture is to provide a fresh perspective on the anatomy of the distal humerus, its fracture and the best surgical approaches, discuss how to decide on the indication, outline the safest and most reliable ways to reconstruct and stabilize the elbow, and lastly, summarize the expected outcomes and potential complications of each treatment option. Level of evidence: V; expert opinion.

Valgus instability and related factors beyond 2 years following unlinked total elbow arthroplasty.

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA), categorized into linked and unlinked types, is a commonly reported treatment for rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow. Although unlinked TEA preserves bone, it may result in instability. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of unlinked TEA in rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow beyond 2 years and to identify factors correlating with postoperative valgus instability of unlinked TEA. METHODS: This study included patients who underwent TEA for rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow at our department between August 2009 and January 2017, with a follow-up period exceeding 2 years. Elbow joint range of motion (ROM) and clinical scores were evaluated preoperatively and at the final follow-up. Factors contributing to valgus instability, such as the Larsen grade, sex, age, side, preoperative ROM, postoperative ROM, implant placement, preoperative carrying angle, and the use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), were also assessed. RESULTS: This study encompassed 26 elbows from 23 patients, with a mean patient age at surgery of 64.8 years and a mean follow-up duration of 92.4 months. Significant improvements were observed in the ROM (extension: from -31° preoperatively to -21° postoperatively [P = .02], flexion: from 116° to137° [P < .001]), Japanese Orthopaedic Association-Japan Elbow Society Elbow Function Score (from 45.9 to 86.3 points [P < .001]), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (from 43.6 to 91.7 points [P < .001]). At the last follow-up, 2 elbows exhibited radiolucent lines around the humeral stem, whereas 7 had valgus instability. Factors correlated with valgus instability included total arc at the final follow-up, preoperative carrying angle, and the use of bDMARDs. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Unlinked TEA demonstrated favorable midterm outcomes for rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow, albeit with occasional valgus instability. Surgeons should consider preoperative carrying angle and bDMARD use, and exercise caution regarding intraoperative extensions.

Elbow joint loads during simulated activities of daily living: implications for formulating recommendations after total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Overloading of the elbow joint prosthesis following total elbow arthroplasty can lead to implant failure. Joint moments during daily activities are not well contextualized for a prosthesis's failure limits, and the effect of the current postoperative instruction on elbow joint loading is unclear. This study investigates the difference in elbow joint moments between simulated daily tasks and between flexion-extension, pronation-supination, and varus-valgus movement directions. Additionally, the effect of the current postoperative instruction on elbow joint load is examined. METHODS: Nine healthy participants (age 45.8 ± 17 years, 3 males) performed 8 tasks; driving a car, opening a door, rising from a chair, lifting, sliding, combing hair, drinking, emptying cup, without and with the instruction "not lifting more than 1 kg." Upper limb kinematics and hand contact forces were measured. Elbow joint angles and net moments were analyzed using inverse dynamic analysis, where the net moments are estimated from movement data and external forces. RESULTS: Peak elbow joint moments differed significantly between tasks (P < .01) and movement directions (P < .01). The most and least demanding tasks were, rising from a chair (13.4 Nm extension, 5.0 Nm supination, and 15.2 Nm valgus) and sliding (4.3 Nm flexion, 1.7 Nm supination, and 2.6 Nm varus). Net moments were significantly reduced after instruction only in the chair task (P < .01). CONCLUSION: This study analyzed elbow joint moments in different directions during daily tasks. The outcomes question whether postoperative instruction can lead to decreasing elbow loads. Future research might focus on reducing elbow loads in the flexion-extension and varus-valgus directions.

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.

Revision Arthroplasty in the Challenging Elbow.

Compared with hip and knee arthroplasty, total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) has a higher complication rate and lower survivorship. Modern TEA implants most commonly require revision due to implant loosening, infection, and periprosthetic fracture. Concerns with revision TEA include handling of the soft tissues and possible necessity of flap coverage, triceps management, preservation of bone stock, and management of concurrent infection or fracture. In this review, we will discuss preoperative evaluation of the failed elbow arthroplasty, surgical approaches, techniques for revision, outcomes, and complications following revision total elbow arthroplasty.