Contribution of monoblock and bipolar radial head prostheses to valgus stability of the elbow.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the stabilizing effect of radial head replacement in cadaver elbows with a deficient medial collateral ligament. METHODS: Passive elbow flexion with the forearm in neutral rotation and in 80 degrees of pronation and supination was performed under valgus and varus loads (1) in intact elbows, (2) after a surgical approach (lateral epicondylar osteotomy of the distal part of the humerus), (3) after release of the anterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament, (4) after release of the anterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament and resection of the radial head, and (5) after subsequent replacement of the radial head with each of three different types of radial head prostheses (a Wright monoblock titanium implant, a KPS bipolar Vitallium [cobalt-chromium]-polyethylene implant, and a Judet bipolar Vitallium-polyethylene-Vitallium implant) in the same cadaver elbow. Total valgus elbow laxity was quantified with use of an electromagnetic tracking device. RESULTS: The mean valgus laxity changed significantly (p < 0.001) as a factor of constraint alteration. The greatest laxity was observed after release of the medial collateral ligament together with resection of the radial head (11.1 degrees +/- 5.6 degrees). Less laxity was seen following release of the medial collateral ligament alone (6.8 degrees +/- 3.4 degrees), and the least laxity was seen in the intact state (3.4 degrees +/- 1.6 degrees). Forearm rotation had a significant effect (p = 0.003) on valgus laxity throughout the range of flexion. The laxity was always greater in pronation than it was in neutral rotation or in supination. The mean valgus laxity values for the elbows with a deficient medial collateral ligament and an implant were significantly greater than those for the medial collateral ligament-deficient elbows before radial head resection (p < 0.05). The implants all performed similarly except in neutral forearm rotation, in which the elbow laxity associated with the Judet implant was significantly greater than that associated with the other two implants. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study showed that a bipolar radial head prosthesis can be as effective as a solid monoblock prosthesis in restoring valgus stability in a medial collateral ligament-deficient elbow. However, none of the prostheses functioned as well as the native radial head, suggesting that open reduction and internal fixation to restore radial head anatomy is preferable to replacement when possible.     

Metallic radial head arthroplasty improves valgus stability of the elbow

The stabilizing influence of radial head arthroplasty was studied in eight medial collateral ligament deficient anatomic specimen elbows. An elbow testing apparatus, which used computer controlled pneumatic actuators to apply tendon loading, was used to simulate active elbow flexion. The motion pathways of the elbow were measured using an electromagnetic tracking device, with the forearm in supination and pronation. As a measure of stability, the maximum varus to valgus laxity over the range of elbow flexion was determined from the difference between varus and valgus gravity loaded motion pathways. After transection of the medial collateral ligament, the radial head was excised and replaced with either a silicone or one of three metallic radial head prostheses. Medial collateral ligament transection caused a significant increase in the maximum varus to valgus laxity to 18.0 degrees +/- 3.2 degrees. After radial head excision, this laxity increased to 35.6 degrees +/- 10.3 degrees. The silicone implant conferred no increase in elbow stability, with a maximum varus to valgus laxity of 32.5 degrees +/- 15.5 degrees. All three metallic implants improved the valgus stability of the medial collateral ligament deficient elbow, providing stability similar to the intact radial head. The use of silicone arthroplasty to replace the radial head in the medial collateral ligament deficient elbow must be questioned. Metallic radial head arthroplasty provides improved valgus stability, approaching that of an intact radial head.     

Importance of a radial head component in Sorbie unlinked total elbow arthroplasty

The effects of a radial head component on total elbow arthroplasty kinematics and stability were evaluated using an anatomic design unlinked total elbow prosthesis. An electromagnetic tracking device recorded motion and varus and valgus displacements under various conditions in 10 cadaveric elbows. The motion patterns of the intact elbows and the Sorbie-Questor total elbow prostheses with a radial head component were similar, as both tended to have a valgus position in extension, varus at midflexion, and more valgus toward full flexion. Under conditions of simulated muscle loading, the maximum valgus and varus laxity of the elbow prosthesis was, on average, 8.6 degrees +/- 4.0 degrees greater than normal. Without the radial head component, however, significant kinematic disturbances and instabilities were seen. The varus and valgus displacements were 13.3 degrees +/- 5.5 degrees greater than the intact elbows. One total elbow arthroplasty without a radial head dislocated during testing. Increasing the muscle loading across the elbow significantly enhanced dynamic stability of the total elbow arthroplasties, especially in the extension half of elbow motion where instability is greatest. However, this dynamic enhancement of stability was seen only in those elbows in which the radial head component had been implanted. The radial head component is an important stabilizer, particularly in extension for this prosthesis, and possibly for other unlinked total elbow prostheses. Although instability of unlinked prostheses depends on the prosthetic design, the use of a radial head replacement may be an important factor in preventing such instability. Perhaps even more importantly, a radial head component balances the load distribution across the articulation, which could decrease stress on the ulnohumeral articulation and therefore possibly reduce polyethylene wear, osteolysis, and loosening.     

Stabilizers of capitellocondylar total elbow arthroplasty

The contribution of the medial and lateral collateral ligaments (MCL, LCL) and muscle forces to the kinematics and stability of the capitellocondylar total elbow arthroplasty was investigated in six fresh cadaveric elbows. The three-dimensional orientation of the ulna relative to the humerus was monitored with the use of an electromagnetic tracking device in neutral, valgus, and varus stress positions with (1) the ligaments intact, (2) LCL insufficiency obtained by osteotomizing the lateral epicondyle, (3) partial MCL insufficiency obtained by sectioning either the anterior or posterior bundle of the MCL, and (4) complete MCL insufficiency. Simulated muscle forces were applied as follows: (1) no load, (2) 1 kg each to the biceps and the brachialis and 2 kg to the triceps, and (3) 2 kg to the biceps and the brachialis and 4 kg to the triceps. The laxity was defined as the difference in valgus/varus orientation of the ulna in the valgus and varus stress positions. The laxity at 40°, 75°, and 110° elbow flexion was analyzed. The greatest laxity occurred with LCL insufficiency (40.7° ± 11.6°, average at three flexion angles) followed by that with MCL insufficiency (15.7° ± 9.9°), both of which were significantly larger than laxity with the intact ligaments (5.6° ± 2.5°). The laxity with the anterior bundle sectioned (12.0° ± 8.1°) was significantly greater than with the posterior bundle sectioned (3.3° ± 3.6°); thus the contribution of anterior bundle to stability was four times that of posterior bundle. Stabilizing effect of muscle loading was small in elbows with intact ligaments, whereas it was large with LCL or MCL insufficiency. Based on these data, we can see that the integrity of both the MCL and LCL is essential to maintain stability of this total elbow, the anterior bundle is a more important stabilizer than the posterior bundle, and the collateral ligaments seem to be the primary stabilizer and the musculature seems to be the secondary stabilizer. Careful implantation technique to preserve the collateral ligaments is required to obtain postoperative stability of this arthroplasty. Otherwise, routine exposure of the MCL and repair or reinforcement of the MCL, if deficient, may need to be considered during surgery.     

Coronoid process and radial head as posterolateral rotatory stabilizers of the elbow

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of the radial head and the coronoid process as posterolateral rotatory stabilizers of the elbow and to determine the stabilizing effect of radial head replacement and coronoid reconstruction. METHODS: The posterolateral rotatory displacement of the ulna was measured after application of a valgus and supinating torque (1). in seven intact elbows, (2). after radial head excision, (3). after sequential resection of the coronoid process, (4). after subsequent insertion of each of two different types of metal radial head prostheses (a rigid implant and a bipolar implant with a floating cup), and (5). after subsequent reconstruction of the coronoid with each of two different techniques in the same cadaveric elbow. RESULTS: The posterolateral rotatory laxity averaged 5.4 degrees in the intact elbows. The surgical approach used in this study insignificantly increased the mean laxity to 9 degrees. Excision of the radial head in an elbow with intact collateral ligaments caused a mean posterolateral rotatory laxity of 18.6 degrees (p < 0.0001). Additional removal of 30% of the height of the coronoid fully destabilized the elbows, always resulting in ulnohumeral dislocation despite intact ligaments. Implantation of a rigid radial head prosthesis stabilized the elbows. However, a mean laxity of 16.9 degrees persisted after insertion of a floating prosthesis (p < 0.0001). The elbows with a defect of 50% or 70% of the coronoid, loss of the radial head, and intact ligaments could not be stabilized by radial head replacement alone, but additional coronoid reconstruction restored stability. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the coronoid and the radial head contribute significantly to posterolateral rotatory stability.     

The effect of radial head fracture size on elbow kinematics and stability.

This study determined the effect of radial head fracture size and ligament injury on elbow kinematics. Eight cadaveric upper extremities were studied in an in vitro elbow simulator. Testing was performed with ligaments intact, with the medial collateral (MCL) or lateral collateral (LCL) ligament detached, and with both the MCL and LCL detached. Thirty degree wedges were sequentially removed from the anterolateral radial head up to 120 degrees . Valgus angulation and external rotation of the ulna relative to the humerus were determined for passive motion, active motion, and pivot shift testing with the arm in a vertical (dependent) orientation. Maximum varus-valgus laxity was calculated from measurements of varus and valgus angulation with the arm in horizontal gravity-loaded positions. No effect of increasing radial head fracture size was observed on valgus angulation during passive and active motion in the dependent position. In supination, external rotation increased with increasing fracture size during passive motion with LCL deficiency and both MCL and LCL deficiency. With intact ligaments, maximum varus-valgus laxity increased with increasing radial head fracture size. With ligament disruption, elbows were grossly unstable, and no effect of increasing radial head fracture size occurred. During pivot shift testing, performed with the ligaments intact, subtle instability was noted after resection of one-third of the radial head. In this in vitro biomechanical study, small subtle effects of radial head fracture size on elbow kinematics and stability were seen in both the ligament intact and ligament deficient elbows. These data suggest that fixation of displaced radial head fractures less than or equal to one-third of the articular diameter may have some biomechanical advantages; however, clinical correlation is required.     

The effect of radial head excision and arthroplasty on elbow kinematics and stability

BACKGROUND: Radial head fractures are common injuries. Comminuted radial head fractures often are treated with radial head excision with or without radial head arthroplasty. The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of radial head excision and arthroplasty on the kinematics and stability of elbows with intact and disrupted ligaments. We hypothesized that elbow kinematics and stability would be (1) altered after radial head excision in elbows with intact and disrupted ligaments, (2) restored after radial head arthroplasty in elbows with intact ligaments, and (3) partially restored after radial head arthroplasty in elbows with disrupted ligaments. METHODS: Eight cadaveric upper extremities were studied in an in vitro elbow simulator that employed computer-controlled actuators to govern tendon-loading. Testing was performed in stable, medial collateral ligament-deficient, and lateral collateral ligament-deficient elbows with the radial head intact, with the radial head excised, and after radial head arthroplasty. Valgus angulation and rotational kinematics were determined during passive and simulated active motion with the arm dependent. Maximum varus-valgus laxity was measured with the arm in a gravity-loaded position. RESULTS: In specimens with intact ligaments, elbow kinematics were altered and varus-valgus laxity was increased after radial head excision and both were corrected after radial head arthroplasty. In specimens with disrupted ligaments, elbow kinematics were altered after radial head excision and were similar to those observed in specimens with a native radial head after radial head arthroplasty. Varus-valgus laxity was increased after ligament disruption and was further increased after radial head excision. Varus-valgus laxity was corrected after radial head arthroplasty and ligament repair; however, it was not corrected after radial head arthroplasty without ligament repair. CONCLUSIONS: Radial head excision causes altered elbow kinematics and increased laxity. The kinematics and laxity of stable elbows after radial head arthroplasty are similar to those of elbows with a native radial head. However, radial head arthroplasty alone may be insufficient for the treatment of complex fractures that are associated with damage to the collateral ligaments as arthroplasty alone does not restore stability to elbows with ligament injuries.     

Kinematics and functional characteristics of the Pritchard ERS unlinked total elbow arthroplasty

This study examined the kinematic characteristics of the Pritchard ERS elbow-resurfacing system, with special attention paid to the effects of the radial head component. The kinematics between the ulna and humerus were assessed in 6 human cadaveric specimens by an electromagnetic tracking system throughout a full flexion/extension range of motion. The elbows were studied under 2 loading conditions, in 3 orientations (neutral, varus, and valgus), and under 4 surgical conditions. The varus/valgus and internal/external rotation laxities were used to assess the condition differences. Specifically, the maximum laxities throughout the extension motion were compared, as were the laxities at 40 degrees, 75 degrees, and 110 degrees of flexion. Both the varus/valgus and internal/external rotation laxities of the ulnohumeral joint increased after total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) implantation, with and without a radial head. This increase was most evident in the extension portion of the arc of motion. At 40 degrees of flexion, the varus/valgus laxity of the intact elbow was 4 degrees +/- 2 degrees versus 11 degrees +/- 8 degrees for a TEA with a radial head and 22 degrees +/- 11 degrees for a TEA without a radial head while the elbow was being subjected to compressive loads via the biceps, brachialis, and triceps. The kinematic data demonstrate a consistent increase in laxity with the Pritchard ERS TEA. They also indicate that a radial head component is necessary for optimal tracking and stability of the ERS arthroplasty.     

Kinematics of semi-constrained total elbow arthroplasty.

We used 11 cadaver elbows and a three-dimensional electromagnetic tracking device to record elbow movements before and after implantation of a 'loose-hinged' elbow prosthesis (modified Coonrad). During simulated active motion there was a maximum of 2.7 degrees (+/- 1.5 degrees) varus/valgus laxity in the cadaver joints. This increased slightly after total elbow arthroplasty to 3.8 degrees (+/- 1.4 degrees). These values are lower than those recorded for the cadaver joints and for the prostheses at the limits of their varus/valgus displacements, indicating that both behave as 'semi-constrained' joints under physiological conditions. They suggest that the muscles absorb some of the forces and moments that in a constrained prosthesis would be transferred to the prosthesis-bone interface.     

重建肘关节外翻稳定性的生物力学研究

目的　评价肘关节桡骨头 (radial head,RH)切除、尺侧副韧带 (medial collateral ligament,MCL )损伤以及 RH假体置换、MCL重建后的外翻稳定性。　方法　新鲜成人尸体上肢标本 12侧 ,制成肘关节“骨 -韧带”标本 ,在2 N· m的外翻力矩作用下 ,分别在肘关节 0°、30°、6 0°、90°和 12 0°伸屈时 ,测量肘关节外翻松弛度 :1完整肘关节(n=12 ) ;2 MCL切断 (n=6 ) ;3RH切除 (n=6 ) ;4 MCL切断 +RH切除 (n=12 ) ;5 RH假体置换 (n=6 ) ;6 MCL重建(n=6 ) ;7RH假体置换 +MCL重建 (n=12 )。用 SPSS 10 .0统计软件包作方差分析 ,比较各组的外翻稳定性。　结果　完整肘关节的平均外翻松弛度最小 ;RH切除后 ,外翻松弛度增大 ;单纯 MCL切断 ,外翻松弛度大于单纯 RH切除 (P<0 .0 1) ;MCL切断 +RH切除 ,外翻稳定性最差 ;行 RH假体置换 ,对稳定性有改善 ;MCL重建与完整 MCL差异无统计学意义 (P>0 .0 5 ) ;RH假体置换同时重建 MCL ,效果最好。　结论　 MCL是抵抗肘关节外翻应力最主要的因素 ,RH是次要因素。在重建肘关节的外翻稳定性方面 ,MCL的重建比 RH的假体置换更重要。在无条件行 RH假体置换时 ,修复MCL是较好的手术方式。     

Total elbow replacement with the GSB III prosthesis

Fourteen consecutive elbows have been treated for rheumatoid arthritis (9 elbows) and for post-traumatic osteoarthrosis (5 elbows) by total elbow replacement with the GSB III implant. The elbows were reviewed retrospectively after a mean follow-up of 6 years (2 to 9 years). Ten of 14 elbows had a functioning GSB III implant at follow-up; 7 of them were rated satisfactory and 3 unsatisfactory with the Mayo elbow performance score. In 5 of these 10 cases, the patients had significant pain relief with no or only mild pain at follow-up, whereas 5 had moderate to severe pain. With a functioning implant the range of motion averaged 140 degrees of flexion, 19 degrees of lack of extension, 65 degrees of pronation, and 84 degrees of supination. Six (43%) elbows had major complications requiring 1 to 8 additional operations. Aseptic loosening requiring revision occurred in 4 (29%) elbows. Two of them were treated by a resection arthroplasty, and 2 were revised with another hinged semiconstrained device. Three further elbows had radiolucent lines involving more than 50% of the cement-bone interface of either the humeral or the ulnar component. However, in 8 elbows the cementing technique was considered marginal or inadequate. Poor cementing (marginal or inadequate) was associated with loosening (P = .008). The GSB III total elbow prosthesis can restore function and reduce pain. The rate of aseptic loosening in this series was higher than previously reported. Based on this observation, we conclude that the GSB III implant seems to be sensitive to the insertion technique and does not tolerate suboptimal cementing.     

Kinematics and stability of the Norway elbow: A cadaveric study

We investigated the effect of simulated muscle loading and the contribution of the radial head to stability of the Norway elbow in 6 cadavers using an electromagnetic tracking device. The kinematics of the elbow after implantation of the prosthesis were similar to the intact elbow in their valgus-varus orientation, however, the forearms were slightly externally rotated, probably due to a small amount of external rotation of the humeral components at the time of implantation. The valgus-varus laxity limit of the implants were greater than in the intact specimens averaging 8.0 and 5.6 degrees, respectively. Simulated muscle loading stabilized both the intact and the Norway elbows. Excision of the radial head after implant arthroplasty increased their valgus-varus laxity, suggesting that preservation of the radial head may be indicated if it is not too severely involved by the underlying disease process.

The laxity permitted by the prosthesis articulation is greater than that measured after implantation of the Norway arthroplasty. This suggests that the prosthesis may behave as an unconstrained arthroplasty. This should minimize the stress experienced by the bone-cement interface and may reduce the incidence of loosening. The laxity of the elbows after joint arthroplasty were only slightly greater than normal, possibly explaining the low incidence of prosthesis dislocation which has been observed with clinical use.     

Five- to thirteen-year follow-up of the GSB III total elbow arthroplasty

Between 1988 and 1995, the senior author performed total elbow arthroplasty in 28 elbows (23 patients) with the GSB III prosthesis. At the most recent follow-up, 7 patients had died (9 elbows) and 1 had the implant removed because of a deep infection. The remaining 18 elbows (15 patients) were available for clinical and radiographic review at a mean period of 7.6 years (range, 5.5-11.9 years). All 15 patients were satisfied with the results of their elbow replacement, with a mean Mayo elbow performance score of 91 (range, 75-100). The mean flexion/extension and supination/pronation arcs improved by 33 degrees and 67 degrees, respectively. Radiographic follow-up demonstrated progressive loosening in only 1 patient and no progressive loosening in those with an adequate cement technique. Mild or moderate lysis of the distal humeral or proximal ulnar components was noted in 10 elbows, and severe lysis of the distal humerus was seen in 1. Of the patients, 6 (21%) had mild complications: triceps avulsions in 3, superficial wound infections in 2, and an undisplaced fracture of the distal humeral medial condyle in 1. In 4 patients (14%) complications developed requiring reoperation, including exchange of the polyethylene bushing because of wear, debridement of synovitis, resection arthroplasty for deep infection, and exploration of an ulnar nerve palsy. In 2 additional patients (7%), persistent ulnar nerve paresthesias developed postoperatively. Of the 28 elbow replacements performed with the GSB III prosthesis, only 1 required revision because of loosening at a mean follow-up of 7.6 years. The results of this series of GSB III elbow replacements in patients with rheumatoid arthritis demonstrate reasonable survivorship of this prosthesis.     

Radial Head Reconstruction in Elbow Fracture-Dislocation: Monopolar or Bipolar Prosthesis?

Background

Monopolar and bipolar radial head prosthetic arthroplasties have been used successfully to treat elbow fracture-dislocation with unsalvageable radial head fractures. The relative stability of these two designs in different clinical situations is a topic of ongoing investigation.

Questions/purposes

We tested the effects of monopolar and bipolar fixed-neck prosthetic radial head implants on improvement in elbow coronal and axial plane laxity in a terrible triad biomechanical model that accounted for lateral collateral ligament integrity and the presence of a transverse coronoid fracture.

Methods

Kinematic data were collected on six fresh-frozen cadaveric upper extremities tested with passive motion throughout the flexion arc. Varus and valgus gravity stress were applied with the wrist in neutral position. A lateral collateral ligament reconstruction was simulated. We assessed instability after radial head resection and reconstruction with either a monopolar or bipolar implant in the presence of a transversely fractured (Regan and Morrey Type 2) or fixed coronoid process.

Results

With collateral ligament integrity, no difference was detected, with the numbers available, in valgus laxity between implants under valgus stress (p = 1.0). Laxity improvement with each prosthesis was higher when the coronoid was fractured (mean ± SD: monopolar: 7.4° ± 1.6°, p < 0.001; bipolar: 6.4° ± 1.6°, p = 0.003) than when it was fixed (monopolar: 4.0° ± 1.6°, p = 0.02; bipolar: 4.2° ± 1.6°, p = 0.01). With the numbers available, there was no difference in external rotation laxity between implants under valgus stress (p = 1.0). The greatest stabilizing effect of the prostheses occurred when the coronoid was fractured (monopolar: 3.3° ± 1.2°, p = 0.15; bipolar: 3.3° ± 1.2°, p = 0.17). Radial head arthroplasty offered no substantial stability under varus stress for varus or internal rotation laxity.

Conclusions

In our terrible triad cadaveric model, coronoid fixation was effective in improving varus laxity with a monopolar or bipolar prosthesis in place. Also, both types of prostheses were effective in improving valgus and external rotation laxity to the elbow, regardless of coronoid status. With collateral ligaments reconstructed, no large kinematic differences were noted between implants regardless of the varus-valgus position or whether the coronoid was fractured or fixed.

Clinical Relevance

The data from our cadaveric model support the use of either implant type in terrible triad injuries if the collateral ligaments are intact or reconstructed.     

Elbow joint instability: A kinematic model

The effect of simultaneous ulnar and radial collateral ligament division on the kinematics of the elbow joint is studied in a cadaveric model. Severance of the anterior part of the ulnar collateral ligament and the annular ligament led to significant elbow joint instability in valgus and varus stress and in forced external and internal rotation. The mean maximum laxity in valgus stress and forced external rotation were 5.7° and 13.2°. The forearms of the elbow joint specimens were transfixed in maximum pronation. During valgus and varus stress the corresponding spontaneous ulnar rotation of the specimens was recorded. The reproducibility of the instability pattern suggests that this model is suitable for evaluating stabilizing procedures aimed at correction of elbow joint instability before these procedures are introduced into patient care.     

Single-strand reconstruction of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament restores varus and posterolateral rotatory stability of the elbow

Because of a lack of biomechanical studies of lateral elbow ligament reconstruction in the literature, the initial stability afforded by 3 different techniques of lateral ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction was evaluated in 8 cadaveric elbows. The arm was mounted in a testing apparatus, and passive flexion was performed with the arm in varus and valgus orientations. A pivot shift test was performed with the arm in the vertical orientation. An electromagnetic tracking device was used to quantify motion pathways. After intact testing, each specimen underwent sectioning of the radial collateral and lateral ulnar collateral ligaments from the lateral epicondyle. Reconstruction of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament was performed in a randomized sequence, consisting of proximal single-strand, distal single-strand, and double-strand tendon grafts. Division of the radial collateral and lateral ulnar collateral ligaments from the lateral epicondyle caused a significant decrease in rotational stability when the pivot shift test was being performed (P <.0001). Varus-valgus stability also decreased after transection of the radial collateral and lateral ulnar collateral ligaments (P <.0001). Reconstruction of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament restored elbow stability to that of the intact state. There was no significant difference in stability between the single- and double-strand repair techniques (P >.05). This study demonstrates that both single- and double-strand reconstructions restore varus and posterolateral elbow stability and may be considered appropriate reconstructive procedures in patients with symptomatic insufficiency of the lateral ligaments of the elbow.     

Selective ligament release in total knee arthroplasty of the knee in valgus.

An approach to the valgus knee based on anatomic function of ligaments in flexion and extension consistently yields a knee that is balanced in flexion and extension when the implants have been positioned correctly. Two hundred thirty-one knees had a valgus deformity (range, 12 degrees-45 degrees) and were corrected with valgus alignment to 5 degrees by resecting the intact joint surfaces to match implant thickness. Femoral joint surfaces were aligned in 5 degrees valgus to the long axis of the femur and parallel to the epicondylar axis of the femur in flexion and extension. The tibial surfaces were aligned perpendicular to the long axis of the tibia. For knees that were tight in flexion and extension, the lateral collateral ligament and popliteus tendon were released. Those knees that remained tight only in extension had release of the iliotibial band. Posterior capsular release was done only when necessary for persistent lateral ligament tightness. Neither ligament advancement procedures nor varus or valgus stabilized implant systems were needed to achieve stability with this procedure. The knees with ligament releases all fell within a range of 4 degrees to 7 degrees mean varus and valgus laxity, and were not significantly different from one another. No cases of clinical instability occurred, and joint stability did not deteriorate with time.     

Elbow joint kinematics after excision of the radial head.

The contribution of the radial head to elbow joint kinematics was studied in 7 osteoligamentous elbow preparations. During unloaded flexion and extension, radial head excision induced a maximum varus displacement of 1.6 degrees with 20 degrees of joint flexion and a maximum external rotation of 3.2 degrees at 110 degrees of flexion. With application of a 0.75-Nm load, radial head excision induced a maximum laxity of 3.3 degrees at 20 degrees of flexion in forced varus and a maximum laxity of 8.9 degrees at 10 degrees of flexion in forced external rotation. No laxity was observed in forced valgus or internal rotation. The results were independent of the rotation of the forearm. This study indicates that the radial head acts as stabilizer to the elbow joint in forced varus and in forced external rotation. The results suggest that fractures of the radial head cannot be treated by simple excision without altering the basic kinematics of the elbow joint.     

Valgus stability of the elbow. A definition of primary and secondary constraints

The stabilizing structures of the elbow that resist valgus stress were studied with a tracking device in a model simulating active motion and muscle activity. By varying the order of serial release of the medial collateral ligament complex and removal of the radial head, each structure's contribution to valgus stability against the effect of gravity was determined. In the otherwise intact elbow, absence of the radial head does not significantly alter the three-dimensional characteristics of motion in the elbow joint. Isolated medial collateral release, on the other hand, causes increases in abduction rotation of about 6 degrees-8 degrees in magnitude. Releasing both structures results in gross abduction laxity and elbow subluxation. This study defines the medial collateral ligament (MCL) as the primary constraint of the elbow joint to valgus stress and the radial head as a secondary constraint. This definition facilitates the proper management of patients with radial head fractures and MCL disruption. The comminuted radial head fracture uncomplicated by MCL insufficiency should be treated by excision without the need for an implant and without concern of altering the normal kinematics of the elbow.     

The biomechanical properties of the finger metacarpophalangeal joints to varus and valgus stress

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the normal biomechanical properties of the passive capsuloligamentous structures about the finger metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints subjected to dynamic varus/valgus loading and to equate these findings to the clinical situation. METHODS: The finger MCP joints from 9 fresh-frozen cadaver hands were tested in a custom-designed testing apparatus that applied a varus/valgus force in each direction. Testing was performed at 0 degrees, 30 degrees, 60 degrees, and 90 degrees of MCP joint flexion. Load-displacement curves were generated for each specimen. A nonlinear hysteresis curve was apparent on loading and unloading. A region of collateral ligament laxity was identified whereby minimal torque (< 0.5 Nm) caused progressive joint angulation. Subsequently incremental load was required to produce further joint angulation. The slope of this region was used to calculate early and late collateral ligament stiffness. RESULTS: The index and long fingers showed a significant decrease in the region of collateral ligament laxity between 0 degrees and 90 degrees. The long finger collateral ligament laxity also diminished significantly between 30 degrees and 90 degrees. The collateral ligament laxity did not significantly change in the ring and small digits throughout MCP joint flexion. The early or late phase of collateral ligament stiffness was not affected by the amount of MCP joint flexion across any of the digits, except in late radial collateral ligament stiffness of the long finger between 0 degrees and 60 degrees. CONCLUSIONS: The additional stability and clinical observation of tightening of the MCP in flexion appears related to the decreased laxity of the collateral ligaments and not to alterations in the biomechanical properties of the collateral ligaments.