Revision total elbow arthroplasty for prosthetic fractures

BACKGROUND: Fractures of total elbow arthroplasty components are uncommon, and the literature provides little guidance regarding the management and outcomes of treatment of these complications. The goal of this report was to investigate the prevalence and management of fractures of ulnar and humeral components following total elbow arthroplasty and to review our experience with cement-within-cement reconstruction for revision following such fractures. METHODS: Between 1979 and 2003, twenty-four patients with a total of twenty-seven fractured total elbow arthroplasty components (seventeen ulnar and ten humeral) of different designs presented to our institution. Twenty-six implants underwent subsequent revision elbow arthroplasty at our institution. Fourteen of those revisions were done with a cement-within-cement technique, and twelve, with traditional methods. Twenty-one patients (twenty-three implants) were available for final follow-up, and data that had been acquired prospectively and entered into the institutional arthroplasty database were reviewed retrospectively. At the time of final follow-up, the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) was calculated and preoperative, postoperative, and most recent radiographs were examined for bone loss, bushing wear, and integrity of the bone-cement interface. RESULTS: The prevalences of humeral and ulnar component fracture following primary total elbow arthroplasties performed at our institution were 0.65% and 1.2%, respectively. At a mean of 5.1 years following revisions for those fractures, the MEPS was excellent for eight patients, good for five, fair for six, and poor for two. The average MEPS was 82 points following the revision total elbow arthroplasties done with the cement-within-cement technique and 78 points following the revisions done with the traditional method of cement removal and insertion of a revision component. Complications included seven intraoperative cortical perforations; five nerve injuries, two of which were permanent; three triceps avulsions; and one deep infection. CONCLUSIONS: Implant fractures following total elbow arthroplasty are uncommon. They occur for several reasons, such as notch sensitivity, component design, and high stresses due to bone deficiency. Revision techniques, such as cement-within-cement reimplantation, are reliable for relieving pain and restoring function; however, the rate and spectrum of complications are a cause for concern. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV.     

Revision total elbow arthroplasty with the linked Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty: a retrospective study of twenty procedures

Purpose

In this retrospective study we evaluated the short- to medium-term results after 20 Coonrad-Morrey revision total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs).

Methods

We included a consecutive series of revision TEAs performed at our institution from 2004 to 2010. At a mean follow-up of 4.4 years, patients were evaluated using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and standard radiographs.

Results

The mean age at revision TEA was 65.8 years. The median time of implant survival for primary prosthesis was 9.5 years. The mean post-operative MEPS was 79. The mean OES was 58, 66 and 53 for function, pain and social-psychological dimensions, respectively. At follow-up the range of motion had improved significantly. There were two cases of radiolucent lines and two cases of minor bushing wear; however, none of the implants were clinically loose. In one case deep infection led to a further revision. Two patients had post-operative ulnar nerve paraesthesia.

Conclusions

Results after revision TEA using the Coonrad-Morrey prosthesis are acceptable with a low short- to midterm failure rate. Revision improves range of motion and provides pain relief. One case of deep infection with recurrent revision is of concern. The treatment can be used as an option for failed TEA.     

Revision total elbow replacement

The range of general and specific adverse event in total elbow arthroplasty is similar in principle and practice to all other revision prosthetic arthroplasty but with three particular challenges: loss of humeral and ulnar bone stock; insufficiency of the extensor ‘mechanism’; and the management of the ulnar nerve. Total elbow replacement is presently performed for the management of complex non-reconstructable distal humeral fractures in osteoporotic bone, for post-traumatic arthropathy, and for medically managed inflammatory arthritides in which metaphyseal bone architecture is often preserved while the articular surface is degenerate. In all these conditions the patient often presents for revision total elbow arthroplasty with relevant co-morbidities and relevant musculoskeletal dysfunction (for example: ipsilateral shoulder, wrist, thumb or hand dysfunction).Infection is a universal concern for revision arthroplasty but where the soft tissue ‘envelope’ is compromised and already limited, as in the proximal forearm, it is difficult to eradicate, particularly in immunocompromised patients.Bone loss compromises subsequent implantation of a revision prosthesis, while failure to restore the working lengths of the humerus and ulna reduces the strength of the flexor and extensor compartment muscles for elbow motion.Failure to restore the continuity of the triceps aponeurosis - antebrachial fascia and triceps medial head-olecranon components of the extensor ‘mechanism’ also compromises extensor power. Prior triceps-dividing surgical approaches will determine the elasticity, and therefore pliability, of the extensor ‘mechanism’: this will have a role in determining how much gain in length of the humeral side can be safely achieved.The ulnar nerve, and its management during elbow arthroplasty, is a source of frequent concern, particularly for revision of an elbow arthroplasty undertaken for distal non-reconstructable humeral articular fractures or post-traumatic arthropathy, in which the position of the ulnar nerve is never anatomic. For these reasons revision total elbow replacement (RTER) is challenging: it requires experience with surgical exposures of the elbow including the major nerve trunks, familiarity with the restoration of bone stock, a range of prostheses and techniques for prosthetic implantation, the ability to achieve adequate soft tissue cover and primary closure, and a logical approach to individualised rehabilitation.     

Revision of failed total elbow arthroplasty with use of a linked implant

We studied retrospectively the results of revision arthroplasty of the elbow using a linked Coonrad-Morrey implant in 23 patients (24 elbows) after a mean follow-up period of 55 months. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, 19 elbows were satisfactory, nine were excellent and ten good. The median total score had improved from 35 points (20 to 75) before the primary arthroplasty to 85 points (40 to 100) at the latest follow-up. There was a marked relief of pain, but the range of movement showed no overall improvement. Two patients had a second revision because of infection and two for aseptic loosening. The estimated five-year survival rate of the prosthesis was 83.1% (95% confidence interval 61.1 to 93.3). Revision elbow arthroplasty using the Coonrad-Morrey implant provided satisfactory results but with complications occurring in 13 cases.     

Constrained total elbow arthroplasty

In 1972, the senior author designed a condylar-sparing constrained hinge elbow prosthesis with a high-density polyethylene bushing. The condylar-sparing design allows both intercondylar and intramedullary fixation of the humeral component with methylmethacrylate cement. Reattachment of the muscles and collateral ligaments to the preserved condyles provides further stability. The clinical experience spans more than 16 years in 42 elbows with a relatively low loosening rate of 7%. The implant was removed and not replaced in three elbows: one for late infection, one for posttraumatic comminuted fracture of the distal humerus, and one for loosening of a humeral component. A series of 27 patients (31 elbows) with 24-204 months of follow-up study (average, 77 months) had excellent pain relief and an average range of motion of 129 degrees flexion, -44 degrees extension, 69 degrees pronation, and 61 degrees supination.     

Souter-Strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty

We have reviewed 66 consecutive Souter-Strathclyde arthroplasties of the elbow implanted in 59 patients between 1982 and 1993. Thirteen patients (15 elbows) (19.6%) died. Sixteen elbows (24.2%) were revised, six for aseptic loosening (9%), four (6%) because of fracture or loosening after a fracture, three (4.5%) for infection and three (4.5%) for dislocation. Four patients refused to attend for review. In 33 elbows with a follow-up of 93 months (60 to 167) complete relief of pain was achieved in 22 (67%) when seen at one year. After ten years or more 36% of the elbows were painfree and 64% had occasional slight pain especially under loading or stress. The mean gain in the arc of movement was 16 degrees, but a mean flexion contracture of 33 degrees remained. The main early complications were intraoperative fractures of the epicondyles (9%), postoperative dislocation (4.5%) and ulnar neuropathy. The incidence of ulnar neuropathy before operation was 19%. After operation 20 patients (33%) had an ulnar neuropathy, in seven of which it had been present before operation, and of these weakness of the hypothenar muscle occurred in two. The probability of survival of the Souter-Strathclyde elbow prosthesis based on the Kaplan-Meier calculation is 69% at ten years.     

Primary total elbow arthroplasty

In view of recently published follow-up studies, the indications for total elbow arthroplasty are expanding. Common factors that are essential for achieving optimal outcomes for all indications include the architectural characteristics of the pathologic condition, appropriate patient selection, suitable choice of prosthesis, and proper surgical technique. This article addresses these factors and presents our current surgical technique for total elbow arthroplasty.     

Primary total elbow arthroplasty

There have been significant improvements in surgical techniques and implant designs of elbow arthroplasty over the last five decades. These advances have resulted in improved outcomes and expansion of indications for total elow arthroplasty (TEA). As the proportion of TEAs being performed for inflammatory arthritis has been decreasing in recent years, TEAs are being performed more commonly for the management of acute distal humerus fractures in the elderly, post-traumatic sequelae, and primary osteoarthritis. Appropriate patient selection and meticulous attention to surgical technique including the surgical approach, implant positioning and fixation will result in acceptable outcomes. Future advances in the design, instrumentation, and surgical technique will allow for further improvement in outcomes as the indications for TEA continue to expand.     

Primary total elbow arthroplasty

Background:

Primary total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) is a challenging procedure for orthopedic surgeons. It is not performed as frequently as compared to hip or knee arthroplasty. The elbow is a nonweight-bearing joint; however, static loading can create forces up to three times the body weight and dynamic loading up to six times. For elderly patients with deformity and ankylosis of the elbow due to posttraumatic arthritis or rheumatoid arthritis or comminuted fracture distal humerus, arthroplasty is one of the option. The aim of this study is to analyze the role of primary total elbow arthroplasty in cases of crippling deformity of elbow.

Materials and Methods:

We analyzed 11 cases of TEA, between December 2002 and September 2012. There were 8 females and 3 males. The average age was 40 years (range 30-69 years). The indications for TEA were rheumatoid arthritis, comminuted fracture distal humerus with intraarticular extension, and posttraumatic bony ankylosis of elbow joint. The Baksi sloppy (semi constrained) hinge elbow prosthesis was used. Clinico-radiological followup was done at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and then yearly basis.

Results:

In the present study, average supination was 70° (range 60-80°) and average pronation was 70° (range 60-80°). Average flexion was 135° (range 130-135°). However, in 5 cases, there was loss of 15 to 35° (average 25°) of extension (45°) out of 11 cases. The mean Mayo elbow performance score was 95.4 points (range 70-100). Arm length discrepancy was only in four patients which was 36% out of 11 cases. Clinico-radiologically all the elbows were stable except in one case and no immediate postoperative complication was noted. Radiolucency or loosening of ulnar stem was seen in 2 cases (18%) out of 11 cases, in 1 case it was noted after 5 years and in another after 10 years. In second case, revision arthroplasty was done, in which only ulnar hinge section, hinge screw and lock screw with hexagonal head were replaced.

Conclusion:

Elbow arthroplasty remains a valuable option for deformed and ankylosed elbows especially in the demanding patients with crippling deformity of the elbow.     

Linked total elbow arthroplasty

This article provides an overview of the current state of linked total elbow arthroplasty. Discussed are the general indications for using a linked implant and currently available implants. Disease-specific indications, contraindications, surgical technique, and rehabilitation are discussed. The overall results and disease-specific results, as well as complications after a linked elbow arthroplasty, are reviewed.     

Revision total knee arthroplasty

Revision total knee arthroplasty can be very successful if careful preoperative planning has been carried out and the surgeon is equipped to handle potential problems encountered with restoration of static alignment, stability, and deficient bone stock. Special femoral and tibial component extractors are indispensable tools. A high-speed burr is helpful. Posterior cruciate ligament-preserving prostheses often can be used, but prostheses with extra degrees of constraint must be available. Long-stemmed components for both the femoral and tibial sides should be available. Access to a bone bank to obtain allogeneic bone for grafting is essential. The surgeon must be familiar with techniques other than bone grafting for restoration of deficient stock, such as the use of bone screws and cement, custom-augmented components, and metal wedge spacers.     

Revision total knee arthroplasty

Revision total knee arthroplasty presents numerous technical challenges and decisions for the operating surgeon. Preoperative planning includes critically reviewing radiographs and ordering necessary equipment, including prosthetic components, extraction devices, and bone graft materials. In some cases, surgical exposure requires the use of extensile exposure techniques. Component removal is facilitated by the use of appropriate tools (eg, specialized osteotomes) as well as by the patience to ensure preservation of host bone. Bone loss is managed with bone grafts or prosthetic augmentation. Attention to balancing the flexion and extension gaps is essential to avoid problems with instability as well as excessively constrained prosthetic components. Intramedullary stem extensions improve long-term clinical results. Intraoperative extensor mechanism complications can be avoided with meticulous surgical technique; late complications may require surgical intervention.     

Revision total hip arthroplasty

Two hundred and ten hips in 206 patients who had an initial total hip arthroplasty performed at the Mayo Clinic between 1969 and 1978 required revision of the arthroplasty at the Mayo Clinic for reasons other than infection. One hundred and sixty-two of the patients (166 hips) were followed both clinically and roentgenographically for two years or more. One hundred and forty-five (90 per cent) reported that they had improvement after the surgical revision. Complications that occurred with revision included deep sepsis, superficial would infection, dislocation, intraoperative femoral fracture, and postoperative femoral fracture. Roentgenographic analysis showed probable loosening in thirty-three acetabular components (20.1 per cent) and seventy-two femoral components (44 per cent). Symptomatic loosening (moderate to severe pain and probable roentgenographic loosening) was seen in thirty-five patients. Eight patients required a second revision for this reason, and seven others required a second revision for other reasons. Modified Harris hip scores, calculated for 108 hips, showed a good or excellent result in sixty-seven hips (62 per cent), a fair result in twelve (11 per cent), and a poor result in twenty-nine (27 per cent). Using a new Mayo Clinic hip score that incorporates roentgenographic data (which will be described) in the evaluation of 165 revised hips, there was a good or excellent result in eighty-five (52 per cent), a fair result in thirty-two (19 per cent), and a poor result in forty-eight hips (29 per cent). Although 90 per cent of the patients thought that their condition had improved, the high incidence of roentgenographic signs of probable loosening of a component is of serious concern.     

Revision total elbow arthroplasty with impaction allografting and uncemented partially hydroxyapatite-coated custom-made prostheses

Total elbow arthroplasty has become a relatively common procedure in the last decade, and the number of primary total elbow replacements performed is likely to continue to increase as the population ages. The incidence of technically demanding prosthesis revisions involving complex problems such as major bone loss is therefore expected to increase. We report 3 cases of total elbow revision arthroplasty, all of which represented patients with severe bone loss. They were all treated using the impaction allografting technique and uncemented custom-made semiconstrained prostheses partially coated with hydroxyapatite manufactured at the bioengineering department of our institution.     

Infection after total elbow arthroplasty

Deep sepsis occurred after fourteen (9 per cent) of 156 elbow-replacement procedures in 140 patients. This high frequency of infection was attributed to several factors. First, the patients were drawn from a population that was at high risk of infection, because rheumatoid arthritis and post-traumatic arthritis were the indications for arthroplasty. Second, many of the patients had had prior surgery, which significantly (p less than 0.02) increased the risk of sepsis in those with rheumatoid arthritis. Third, some patients had surgery after the arthroplasty, which also seemed to predispose to deep infection (p less than 0.05). In one patient the elbow was salvaged by early débridement, and in two others reimplantation of a total joint replacement was successful after removal of the first prosthesis and control of the infection. Resection arthroplasty was required to arrest the infection in ten patients, eight of whom had a satisfactory result. The high incidence of this significant complication attests to the hazardous nature of the elbow-replacement procedure and should warn orthopaedic surgeons to be cautious when recommending this form of treatment.     

Instability after total elbow arthroplasty

Instability has limited the indications and appeal of unlinked (unconstrained, surfacing replacing) total elbow arthroplasties. True dislocation occurs in fewer than 5% of patients and may be less common when careful operative technique ensures appropriate tensioning of the medial collateral ligament, secure repair of the lateral collateral ligament, and preservation of the anterior capsule and triceps. Conversion of an unstable unlinked total elbow arthroplasty to a linked total elbow arthroplasty can be a complex and difficult procedure, but usually salvages a functional elbow.