Terrible triad injuries of the elbow: does the coronoid always need to be fixed?

Type II coronoid fracture in a terrible triad elbow: An experimental study of the elbow kinematics using dynamic radiostereometric analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the elbow kinematics with and without a Regan-Morrey type II coronoid fracture in an experimental setting of terrible triad injury with intact collateral ligaments and radial head arthroplasty.

METHODS

Eight human donor arms were examined following radial head arthroplasty with and without a 1/3 coronoid fracture by CT and dynamic radiostereometry during elbow flexion with the forearm in unloaded neutral position, and in supinated- and pronated position without and with 10 N either varus or valgus load, respectively. The elbow kinematics were described using anatomical coordinate systems.

FINDINGS

The coronoid fracture changed the elbow kinematics. In the valgus loaded pronated forearm position, the radius shifted mean 1.7 mm (95 %CI 0.2; 3.2) posterior, and the ulna shifted mean 0.6 mm (95 %CI 0.0; 1.2) in the radial direction. In the unloaded supinated position, the radius shifted 0.8 mm (95 %CI 0.0; 1.5) posterior and 1.0 mm (95 %CI 0.4; 1.6) in the ulnar direction, while the ulna shifted 0.7 mm (95 %CI 0.1; 1.4) posterior. In the varus loaded supinated position, the radius shifted 1.4 mm (95 %CI 0.2; 2.6) in the ulnar direction.

INTERPRETATION

The Regan-Morrey type II coronoid fracture imposed slight kinematic changes to the elbow joint, which may not be clinically relevant. This indicates that a type II coronoid fracture may not need fixation in the setting of optimal radial head arthroplasty with intact collateral ligaments. However, elbow stability should be evaluated intraoperatively in every terrible triad case.

Fracture patterns, outcomes, and complications of terrible triad injury in elderly patients

HYPOTHESIS

This study hypothesized that patients older than 65 years with terrible triad elbow injuries (TTEI) exhibit complex fracture patterns, a high prevalence of associated injuries, and increased rates of complications and reinterventions.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 29 patients, mean follow-up of 48.7 ± 4.6 months (range 65-78). Fractures were classified according to the Mason and Regan-Morrey classifications. All patients were evaluated by the Mayo Elbow Performance Scale, Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, Quality of life Visual Analog Scale, EQ5D scores, and range of motion measurement.

RESULTS

The mean age was 72.3 years and 79% were women. Mason Type III (72%) and Reagan-Morrey type II (69%) were the most frequent fracture type. All patients were managed with a lateral approach consisting of repair or replacement of the radial head and repair of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament; of these patients, 19 underwent re-attachment of the coronoid process or anterior capsule. Mean functional scores were Mayo Elbow Performance Scale 90.3 ± 7.5, Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand 18.4 ± 4.6, EQ5D .89 ± 0.33, Quality of life Visual Analog Scale 86.2 ± 21, and Visual Analog Scale 2.2 ± 1.5. Mean postoperative flexo-extension arc of elbow motion was 105° (range, 65°-145°). Two patients (7%) required revision surgery. We did not observe any joint instability in the elbow after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients over 65 years old with a terrible triad elbow injury are at substantial risk of complex fracture patterns, particularly Mason type III radial head fractures and Regan-Morrey type II coronoid fractures. Complications such as joint stiffness and heterotopic ossification are infrequent, while associated capitellum fractures are not rare and should be considered in the assessment as they can impact elbow stability. Despite these challenges, surgical management generally achieves favorable functional outcomes with low complication and reoperation rates.

Comparative study of open elbow arthrolysis with and without hinge external fixation for the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to compare the functional outcomes of hinged external fixators and non-external fixation in open elbow arthrolysis (OEA) for post-traumatic elbow stiffness (PTES) and to evaluate their applicability and limitations in patients with posttraumatic elbow stiffness.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with PTES treated with OEA at our hospital between March 2015 and June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The assessed variables were the operation time, intraoperative blood loss volume, duration of hospitalization, and treatment costs. The elbow range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (Q-DASH) score, Oxford Elbow score (OES), Broberg and Morrey score (BMS), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and complications such as pin tract infection and heterotopic ossification were compared between patients with and without hinge external fixation. We also compared the baseline characteristics and functional outcomes of patients with and without hinge external fixation.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients (48 patients with hinged external fixators and 108 patients without external fixators) diagnosed with PTES were included in this study. The mean follow-up was 15.8 ± 3.6 months. Compared with patients without external fixators, those with external fixators showed significantly greater improvements in elbow flexion and extension ROM (59.6° ± 26.1° vs. 46.2° ± 26.2°, p = 0.004) but had a significantly longer duration of hospitalization (p < 0.001), significantly longer operation time (p < 0.001), significantly higher treatment costs (p < 0.001), and significantly greater intraoperative blood loss volume (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of improvement in elbow rotation ROM, MEPS score, VAS score for pain, OES score, Q-DASH score, BMS score, or incidence of complications.

CONCLUSION

The use of a hinged external fixator in open arthrolysis for posttraumatic elbow stiffness may result in short-term improvements in flexion-extension range of motion but is accompanied by increased blood loss, longer operative time, extended hospitalization, and higher costs. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

Not applicable.

Outcomes of coronoid-first repair through an anterior approach in patients with terrible triad injury of the elbow: a prospective study with a minimum 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of terrible triad injury of the elbow (TTIE), the indication and the appropriate approach and sequence for coronoid process (CP) fixation remain debatable. No gold standard protocol has been established for CP fixation. In this study, we evaluated the midterm outcomes of coronoid-first repair through an anterior approach in patients with unstable TTIE.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective observational study included patients with TTIE who exhibited posterior or posterolateral subluxation/dislocation during examination under anesthesia (EUA) at our institute between January 2019 and December 2021. All patients underwent coronoid-first repair through an anterior approach, regardless of fragment size. After CP fixation, radial head fixation/replacement and lateral ulnar collateral ligament repair were performed through the lateral Kocher approach. Radiographic and functional (Mayo Elbow Performance Score [MEPS] and Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score [DASH]) assessments were performed 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Complications such as recurrent subluxation/dislocation, synostosis, heterotopic ossification, traumatic arthritis, and stiffness were examined at the follow-up visits.

RESULTS

The analysis included 27 patients. The mean follow-up duration was 29.9 (range 24-44) months. At the 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up, the mean flexion-extension arcs were 88.7° ± 14.7°, 107.9° ± 11.9°, 128.3° ± 15.5°, and 130.9° ± 15.3°; the mean supination-pronation arcs were 143.7° ± 9.9°, 160.4° ± 7.6°, 165.0° ± 6.0°, and 167.9° ± 4.9°; the mean DASH scores were 18.7 ± 5.7, 4.5 ± 6.1, 2.7 ± 6.5, and 2.0 ± 6.8; and the mean MEPS were 79.1 ± 10.3, 90.2 ± 8.3, 94.8 ± 6.6, and 95.9 ± 5.7, respectively. At the 24-month follow-up, 26 patients had excellent and 1 patient had good results according to MEPS. Only one patient had a complication: they exhibited stiffness and did not have a 30-130° flexion-extension arc at 24 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The EUA findings, rather than fragment size alone, may be a good indicator of whether the CP needs to be repaired. Midterm follow-up results implied that coronoid-first repair through an anterior approach yields satisfactory functional outcomes with minimal complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic level II.

Management of Elbow Terrible Triad Injuries: A Comprehensive Review and Update

The "terrible triad" of the elbow, encompassing elbow dislocation, radial head fracture, and coronoid process fracture, remains a formidable challenge in orthopaedic practice. Typically, stabilizing structures in the elbow fail from lateral to medial through a posterolateral rotatory force after a fall onto an outstretched upper extremity. Surgery is often needed to repair the lateral ligamentous complex, replace or fix the radial head, possibly repair the anterior capsule or fix the coronoid, and consider medial repair or application of an internal versus external fixator. However, in some challenging cases persistent instability, complications, and loss of function may occur. Rehabilitation focuses on achieving early range of motion to prevent stiffness which can be common after these injuries. By integrating emerging approaches with established practices, this article aims to guide orthopaedic surgeons toward a fundamental understanding of terrible triad injuries and assist with informed management principles of these complex injuries.

Factors associated with the choice of treatment for coronoid fractures

Aims

This study aimed to gather insights from elbow experts using the Delphi method to evaluate the influence of patient characteristics and fracture morphology on the choice between operative and nonoperative treatment for coronoid fractures.

Methods

A three-round electronic (e-)modified Delphi survey study was performed between March and December 2023. A total of 55 elbow surgeons from Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America participated, with 48 completing all questionnaires (87%). The panellists evaluated the factors identified as important in literature for treatment decision-making, using a Likert scale ranging from "strongly influences me to recommend nonoperative treatment" (1) to "strongly influences me to recommend operative treatment" (5). Factors achieving Likert scores ≤ 2.0 or ≥ 4.0 were deemed influential for treatment recommendation. Stable consensus is defined as an agreement of ≥ 80% in the second and third rounds.

Results

Of 68 factors considered important in the literature for treatment choice for coronoid fractures, 18 achieved a stable consensus to be influential. Influential factors with stable consensus that advocate for operative treatment were being a professional athlete, playing overhead sports, a history of subjective dislocation or subluxation during trauma, open fracture, crepitation with range of movement, > 2 mm opening during varus stress on radiological imaging, and having an anteromedial facet or basal coronoid fracture (O'Driscoll type 2 or 3). An anterolateral coronoid tip fracture ≤ 2 mm was the only influential factor with a stable consensus that advocates for nonoperative treatment. Most disagreement existed regarding the treatment for the terrible triad injury with an anterolateral coronoid tip fracture fragment ≤ 2 mm (O'Driscoll type 1 subtype 1).

Conclusion

This study gives insights into areas of consensus among surveyed elbow surgeons in choosing between operative and nonoperative management of coronoid fractures. These findings should be used in conjunction with previous patient cohort studies when discussing treatment options with patients.

Reported outcome measures in complex fracture elbow dislocations: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Complex elbow fracture dislocations, dislocation with fracture of one or several surrounding bony stabilizers, are difficult to manage and associated with poor outcomes. While many studies have explored treatment strategies but a lack of standardization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) makes cross-study comparison difficult. In this systematic review, we aim to describe what injury patterns, measured outcomes, and associated complications are reported in the complex elbow fracture dislocation literature to provide outcome reporting recommendations that will facilitate improved future cross-study comparison.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We queried PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify articles published between 2010 and 2022 reporting on adult patients who had a complex elbow fracture dislocation. Pathologic fractures were excluded. A bias assessment using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies criteria was conducted. For each article, patient demographics, injury pattern, outcome measures, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Ninety-one studies reporting on 3664 elbows (3654 patients) with an elbow fracture and dislocation (weighted mean age 44 years, follow-up of 30 months, 41% female) were evaluated. Of these, the injury pattern was described in 3378 elbows and included 2951 (87%) terrible triad injuries and 72 (2%) transolecranon fracture-dislocations. The three most commonly reported classification systems were: Mason classification for radial head fractures, Regan and Morrey coronoid classification for coronoid fractures, and O'Driscoll classification for coronoid fractures. Range of motion was reported in 87 (96%) studies with most reporting flexion (n = 70), extension (n = 62), pronation (n = 68), or supination (n = 67). Strength was reported in 11 (12%) studies. PROMs were reported in 83 (91%) studies with an average of 2.6 outcomes per study. There were 14 outcome scores including the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (n = 69 [83%]), the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score (n = 28 [34%]), the visual analog scale for pain (n = 27 [33%]), QuickDASH score (n = 13 [15.7%]), and Oxford Elbow score (n = 5 [6.0%]). No significance was found between the number of PROMs used per article and the year of publication (P = .313), study type (P = .689), complex fracture pattern (P = .211), or number of elbows included (P = .152).

CONCLUSION

There is great heterogeneity in reported PROMs in the complex elbow fracture dislocation literature. Although there is no gold standard PROM for assessing complex elbow fracture dislocations, we recommend the use of at least the Mayo Elbow Performance Score and DASH outcomes measures as well as visual analog scale pain rating scale in future studies to facilitate cross-study comparisons.

Does the coronoid fracture in terrible triad injury always need to be fixed?

BACKGROUND

The ideal treatment of terrble triad injuries and whether fixation of coronoid process fractures is needed or not are still debated. Therefore, we aimed to investigate if terrible triad injuries necessitate coronoid fracture fixation and evaluate if non-fixation treatments have similar efficacies and outcomes as fixation-treatments in cases of terrible triad injuries.

METHODS

From August 2011 to July 2020, 23 patients with acute terrible triad injuries without involvement of the anteromedial facet of the coronoid process were included to evaluate the postoperative clinical and radiological outcomes (minimum follow-up of 20 months). According to the preoperative height loss evaluation of the coronoid process and an intraoperative elbow stability test, seven patients underwent coronoid fracture fixation, and the other eight patients were treated conservatively. The elbow range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and modified Broberg-Morrey score were evaluated at the last follow-up. In addition, plain radiographs were reviewed to evaluate joint congruency, fracture union, heterotopic ossification, and the development of arthritic changes.

RESULTS

At the last follow-up, the mean arcs of flexion-extension and supination-pronation values were 118.2° and 146.8° in the fixation group and 122.5° and 151.3° in the non-fixation group, respectively. The mean MEPSs were 96.4 in the fixation group (excellent, nine cases; good, tow cases) and 96.7 in the non-fixation group (excellent, ten cases; good, two cases). The mean modified Broberg-Morrey scores were 94.0 in the fixation group (excellent, sevev cases; good, four cases) and 94.0 in the non-fixation group (excellent, ten cases; good, tow cases). No statistically significant differences in clinical scores and ROM were identified between the two groups. However, the non-fixation group showed a significantly lower height loss of the coronoid process than the fixation group (36.3% versus 54.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the fixation and non-fixation groups in terrible triad injuries.

Morphometrics of the coronoid process and the radial notch of the ulna: implications for fracture assessment

PURPOSE

A comprehensive analysis of the morphology of fractures of the coronoid process (CP) can aid diagnosis and guide treatment. The involvement of the radial notch of the ulna (RN)-e.g., in anterolateral facet fractures and transverse fractures of the CP-may influence the biomechanical conditions of the proximal radioulnar joint. However, the morphometric relation between the CP and the RN and the extent to what the proximal radioulnar joint can be affected in these types of fractures is unknown.

METHODS

A total of 113 embalmed, cadaveric ulnae were dissected. All soft tissue was removed. Strictly lateral, high-resolution photographs were taken and digitally analyzed. The height of the CP and its relation to the RN was measured. Sex differences and correlations between measured parameters were calculated.

RESULTS

Mean height of the CP was 16 mm (range: 12-23 mm; SD: 2). Mean height of the RN was 16 mm (11-25 mm; 2.2). The 50% mark of the CP corresponded to 18% (0-56%; 11.2) of the height of the RN. No significant differences were found between male and female specimens.

CONCLUSION

The RN of the ulna extends only to a small part to the CP. Transverse or anterolateral fractures of less than 50% of the coronoid process may involve only a small portion of the proximal radioulnar joint.

Influence of Coronoid fixation on the functional outcome and rate of complications in surgically treated acute complex elbow instability

INTRODUCTION

Fractures of the coronoid commonly present in elbow fracture-dislocations. Despite the evidence that the coronoid plays an important role in elbow stability, there is still controversy on which fractures should be surgically fixed. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes and rate of complications of patients with elbow fracture-dislocations in which the coronoid was fixed or left untreated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-nine patients with an elbow fracture-dislocation involving a coronoid fracture were prospectively followed for an average of 90 months (range 24-190). According to Morrey´s classification there were 22 type II and 8 type III. Nine patients had an anteromedial fracture of the coronoid. In 24 patients the coronoid was repaired (suture fixation in 9, screws fixation in 10 and plate fixation in 5) and in 15 patients the coronoid was not fixed. In 18 patients the radial head was replaced and in 8 patients it was fixed. All patients underwent repair of the lateral ligament complex. Clinical evaluation was performed with the MEPS. Radiographically, the rate of coronoid nonunion was specifically analyzed. Postoperative neurological complications were recorded.

RESULTS

At the most recent follow up, the average arc of flexion-extension was 120° (range 70°-140°) with a mean MEPS of 90 (range 25-100). No statistically significant differences were found in the MEPS and flexion-extension arc between the patients in whom synthesis was performed (117° ROM, and 89 MEPS) and those in whom it was not (122° ROM, 94 MEPS) (p = 0.42; p = 0.34). Coronoid fracture healing could be assessed in 36 patients: in 19 patients the coronoid was radiographically healed, and in 17 a nonunion was present, with no difference in the final clinical outcome between both groups. Nine patients, 6 of whom had undergone coronoid fixation, had a neurological complication related to the ulnar nerve.

CONCLUSIONS

Coronoid fractures affecting around 50% of its height can be treated without internal fixation as long as the rest of the osteo-ligamentous structures are adequately repaired. Osteosynthesis of the coronoid through a medial approach may carry a non-negligible risk of associated neurological injury.

Coronoid fractures and traumatic elbow instability

The coronoid process is key to concentric elbow alignment. Malalignment can contribute to post-traumatic osteoarthritis. The aim of treatment is to keep the joint aligned while the collateral ligaments and fractures heal. The injury pattern is apparent in the shape and size of the coronoid fracture fragments: (1) coronoid tip fractures associated with terrible triad (TT) injuries; (2) anteromedial facet fractures with posteromedial varus rotational type injuries; and (3) large coronoid base fractures with anterior (trans-) or posterior olecranon fracture dislocations. Each injury pattern is associated with specific ligamentous injuries and fracture characteristics useful in planning treatment. The tip fractures associated with TT injuries are repaired with suture fixation or screw fixation in addition to repair or replacement of the radial head fracture and reattachment of the lateral collateral ligament origin. Anteromedial facet fractures are usually repaired with a medial buttress plate. If the elbow is concentrically located on computed tomography and the patient can avoid varus stress for a month, TT and anteromedial facet injuries can be treated nonoperatively. Base fractures are associated with olecranon fractures and can usually be fixed with screws through the posterior plate or with an additional medial plate. If the surgery makes elbow subluxation or dislocation unlikely, and the fracture fixation is secure, elbow motion and stretching can commence within a week when the patient is comfortable.

Improved Understanding of Traumatic Complex Elbow Instability

Recent advancements in surgical treatment have improved clinical results in complex traumatic elbow injury. There is increasing recognition that conservative treatment and inadequate surgical fixation carry high risk of substantial morbidity in many of these cases. Recent literature displays improved outcomes in complex elbow instability, in part, because of a more complete comprehension of the injury patterns and fixation methods. Prompt surgical management with stable internal fixation, which permits immediate postoperative mobilization, has been a consistent variable across the reports leading to more satisfactory outcomes. This applies to both acute and chronic cases.

A combined experimental and finite element analysis of the human elbow under loads of daily living

Elbow trauma is often accompanied by a loss of independence in daily self-care activities, negatively affecting patients' quality of life. Finite element models can help gaining profound knowledge about native human joint mechanics, which is crucial to adequately restore joint functionality after severe injuries. Therefore, a finite element model of the elbow is required that includes both the radio-capitellar and ulno-trochlear joint and is subjected to loads realistic for activities of daily living. Since no such model has been published, we aim to fill this gap. For comparison, 8 intact cadaveric elbows were subjected to loads of up to 1000 N, after they were placed in an extended position. At each load step, the displacement of the proximal humerus relative to the distal base plate was measured with optical tracking markers and the joint pressure was measured with a pressure mapping sensor. Analogously, eight finite element models were created based on subject-specific CT scans of the corresponding elbow specimens. The CT scans were registered to the positions of tantalum beads in the experiment. The optically measured displacements were applied as boundary conditions. We demonstrated that the workflow can predict the experimental contact pressure distribution with a moderate correlation, the experimental peak pressures in the correct joints and the experimental stiffness with moderate to excellent correlation. The predictions of peak pressure magnitude, contact area and load share on the radius require improvement by precise representation of the cartilage geometry and soft tissues in the model, and proper initial contact in the experiment.

Comparison of different treatment approaches for coronoid process fracture in terrible triad injury: a multicenter, randomized controlled study

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to compare the functional results of different treatment approaches for the fracture of the coronoid process in terrible triad injury (TTI).

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial included participants from seven level-1 trauma centres in China. All patients were randomly assigned to three groups, wherein different approaches were applied to treat coronoid fracture: group A) internal fixation of the coronoid process without external fixation or splint (ORIF group), B) external fixation using a hinged fixator without internal fixation (Exfix group), and C) long-arm plaster for two to three weeks postoperatively without internal fixation of coronoid process (Plaster group). Early active motion exercises within the limits of pain were started immediately after surgery under the supervision of a physical therapist. Outcomes were evaluated at regular intervals over the subsequent 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients (22 patients in Group A, 21 in Group B, and 22 in Group C) were included in this trial from January 2016 to January 2019. The average arc of elbow motion was 114.1° ± 8.92°. The average flexion and flexion contracture were 126.4° ± 11.2° and 12.3° ± 7.7°, respectively. The arcs of forearm rotation of the elbow for each group were 145.41° ± 9.36°, 143.38° ± 9.79°, and 143.86° ± 10.95°, respectively. The MEPS for each group were 86.82 ± 9.7, 86.67 ± 9.92, and 85.23 ± 8.66, respectively. The DASH score for each group were 18.26 ± 19.31, 18.85 ± 15.02, and 20.19 ± 13.59, respectively.

CONCLUSION

All three approaches in our trial showed similar functional results in the long-term survey. Patients treated with external fixation without internal fixation of the coronoid process showed less pain during early mobilization and acquired maximum flexion within a short duration after surgery.

A novel and superior Lasso-plate technique in treatment for coronoid process fracture in the terrible triad of elbow

The treatment of ulna coronal process fractures in the terrible triad of elbow, especially type I and II Regan-Morrey coronoid fractures, still have been controversial. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the novel Lasso-plate technique to have a more reliable fixation and a well clinical outcomes for type I and II Regan-Morrey coronoid fractures in a terrible triad of the elbow (TTE). Patients with simple TTE, closed fracture, aged > 18 years, duration of injury < 2 weeks, type I and II Regan-Morrey coronoid process fracture fixed by the Lasso-plate technique or ORIF were enrolled in the study. Total 144 patients with type I and II Regan-Morrey coronoid fracture in TTE were included in the Lasso-plate group or ORIF (open reduction and internal fixation) group in the Xi'an Honghui Hospital from January 2017 to December 2020. Eighty-six patients in Lasso-plate group underwent surgery using a novel Lasso-plate technique. And other 58 patients in ORIF group underwent surgery using ORIF. The data of two groups, including the X-ray films, Computed tomography (CT), the range of elbow motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and the surgical complications, were extracted from the hospital's patient records. All patients in both groups were followed up at least 12 months. The mean operation time (88.2 ± 12.3 min) in Lasso-plate group is shorter than that of ORIF group (109.1 ± 13.0 min). There was one patient with injury of deep branch of radial nerve and one patient with superficial surgical incision infection in Lasso-plate group. There were two patients with surgical incision infection in ORIF group. There were three heterotopic ossifications in Lasso-plate group and eight heterotopic ossifications in ORIF group. There were 5 elbow joints stiffness in Lasso-plate group and 12 in ORIF group. At 12 months follow up, the mean range of flexion-extension motion in Lasso-plate group was 122.9° ± 13.4° versus 113.2° ± 18.1° in ORIF group (p < 0.01), the mean 89.7 ± 5.6 MEPS in Lasso-plate group versus mean 83.7 ± 6.1 MEPSin ORIF group. The fixation of coronoid process fracture in TTE by the Lasso-plate technique, especially type I and II Regan-Morrey coronoid fracture, could be easier to master and operate, could provide the sufficient stability of elbow joint to enable early functional exercise, along with a better clinical outcome, a lower surgical complication. For the treatment of TTE, we recommend the fixation of type I and II Regan-Morrey coronoid fracture with the Lasso-plate technique, which would result in a better clinical outcome.

Current concepts in the management of "Terrible Triad" injuries of the elbow

Terrible triad injuries of the elbow are complex injuries which can result in long term complications and significant disability. They must be identified correctly, and managed appropriately in order to maximise functional outcomes. A clear understanding of the bony and ligamentous anatomy is essential to plan appropriate surgical reconstruction to provide elbow stability. Urgent reduction of the elbow, followed by 3-dimensional imaging and surgical repair or replacement of the injured structures is the mainstay of treatment in the majority of cases. This review presents a summary of the relevant anatomy and the evidence for the management of these complex injuries.

Coronoid tip fractures in terrible triad injuries can be safely treated without fixation

INTRODUCTION

The optimal treatment of terrible triad injuries of the elbow (TTI) remains topic of ongoing discussion. The aim of this study was to determine whether different treatment strategies for coronoid tip fractures in terrible triad injuries influences the clinical and radiological results in a mid-term follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 62 patients with surgical treatment of a TTI including a coronoid tip fracture (37 women, 25 men; mean age, 51 years) were available for follow-up assessment after an average of 4.2 years (range 24-110 months). Thirteen patients had O'Driscoll 1.1 and 49 O'Driscoll 1.2 coronoid fractures, of which 26 were treated with and 36 without fixation. Range of motion, the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score as well as grip strength were evaluated. Radiographs were analyzed for all participants.

RESULTS

No significant benefit in outcome variables could be detected between patients, whose coronoid had been fixed, compared to patients without fixation of the coronoid. In the coronoid fixation group, patients had mean outcome scores of 81.5 ± SD 19.1 (range 35-100) for MEPS, 31.0 ± SD 12.5 (range 11-48) for OES and 27.7 ± SD 23 (range 0-61) for DASH score, while in the no-fixation group, mean MEPS was 90.8 ± SD 16.5 (range 40-100), mean OES was 39.0 ± SD 10.4 (range 16-48) and mean DASH score was 14.5 ± SD 19.9 (range 0-48). Mean range of motion was 116° ± SD 21° (range 85-140°) versus 124° ± SD 24° (range 80-150°) in extension-flexion and 158° ± SD 23° (range 70-180°) versus 165° ± SD 12° (range 85-180°) in pronation-supination. Overall complication rate was 43.5% and revision rate was 24.2%, with no significant differences between both groups. Suboptimal results were more frequently seen in patients who had degenerative or heterotopic changes on their latest radiograph.

CONCLUSIONS

Sufficient elbow stability and good outcomes can be achieved in most patients with TTI and coronoid tip fractures. Although some bias in treatment allocation and group heterogeneity cannot be completely omitted, our analysis detected no significant benefit in outcome when the coronoid tip fracture has been fixed compared to patients with non-fixed coronoid tip. Therefore, we would suggest a no-fixation approach for coronoid tip fractures as primary treatment in TTI of the elbow.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Surgical treatment of terrible triad of the elbow: Retrospective continuous 50-patient series at 2 years' follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Terrible triad (TT) of the elbow is an association at high risk of instability. Treatment aims to restore joint stability. Lateral collateral ligament (LCL) repair is systematic, whereas medial collateral ligament (MCL) repair is only exceptionally necessary. The main aim of the present study was to assess clinical results in TT surgery. The secondary objective was to compare clinical progression with versus without MCL repair.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study included 50 TTs operated on via an isolated lateral or combined medial-lateral approach. Clinical assessment comprised MEPS, QuickDASH, VAS, flexion-extension and pronation-supination, and return to work and sport. Subgroup analysis was made according to associated MCL repair.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (19 female, 31 male) were operated on between January 2006 and January 2017. Mean follow-up was 24 months. At last follow-up, mean MEPS was 89.1, VAS 0.7, QuickDASH 16, flexion-extension 114°, and pronation-supination 137°. Only MEPS was significantly improved by MCL repair (p=0.02), with no significant difference in complications.

DISCUSSION

TT surgery with immediate mobilization gave good long-term functional results, not significantly improved by MCL repair. The lateral approach should be adopted in first line, with the medial approach in second line in case of persistent instability after lateral osteo-ligamentous repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective study.

Lateral Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair With Suture-Tape Augmentation for Traumatic Elbow Instability

PURPOSE

Ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation has been used in the operative treatment of joint instability and may have advantages with respect to early motion and stability. The purpose of this investigation was to describe the clinical results of traumatic elbow instability treated with lateral ulnar collateral ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation.

METHODS

All cases of acute and chronic elbow instability treated surgically between 2018 and 2020 were included if they underwent ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament as part of the procedure. Cases with <6 months of follow-up were excluded. A manual chart review was performed to record patient demographics as well as injury and surgery characteristics. Radiographic outcomes, range of motion, and patient-reported outcome measures, including the visual analog pain scale and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, were recorded. Range of motion measurements were recorded at the end of the clinical follow-up, as were surgical complications.

RESULTS

Eighteen cases were included with a mean follow-up of 20 months. Five (28%) cases involved a high-energy mechanism, and 11 (62%) cases involved terrible triad fracture dislocations. The mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire and visual analog pain scale scores were 17 and 2, respectively. The mean flexion-extension arc was 124°, and 2 (11%) cases had <100° flexion-extension arc. There were 2 (11%) postoperative complications, and both cases had postoperative instability requiring reoperation. We observed no cases of capitellar erosion from the suture-tape material.

CONCLUSIONS

For complex elbow instability, ligament repair with suture-tape augmentation of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament results in acceptable functional outcomes and a reoperation rate comparable with other joint stabilization procedures.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

The role of the joint capsule in the stability of the elbow joint

Existing studies lack a clear understanding of the interaction of the joint capsule with surrounding tissues and the local mechanical environment. Particularly, a finite element model of human elbow joint incorporating active behavior of muscle was constructed. The simulation was performed during the elbow joint flexion movement under different injury conditions of capsule (anterior capsule, posterior capsule, medial anterior capsule, lateral anterior capsule, medial posterior capsule, and lateral posterior capsule). The stress distribution and transfer of the joint capsule, ulnar cartilage, and ligaments were obtained under different injuries and flexion angles, to explore the influence of capsule injures on the stability of the elbow joint. In medial injury posterior capsule, the peak stress of the ulnar cartilage occurred at 60° flexion and shifted from posteromedial to anteromedial. And the stress was about 1.8 times that of no injury capsule. In several cases of posterior capsule injury, the stress of capsule decreased significantly and the peak stress was 40% of that in no injury joint capsule. In the case of anterior capsular injury, the cartilage stress did not change significantly, and the stress of anterior bundle and annular ligament changed slightly in the late flexion movement. These findings provide some help for doctors to treat elbow injury and understand the interaction of tissues around the joint after trauma.

Using an Internal Joint Stabilizer Through a Single Posterior Approach for Elderly Patients With Terrible Triad Injury

Introduction

Treating a terrible triad injury of the elbow remains a challenge for orthopedic surgeons, especially in elderly patients due to the poor quality of the surrounding soft tissue and bony structures. In the present study, we propose a treatment protocol using an internal joint stabilizer through a single posterior approach and analyze the clinical results.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 15 elderly patients with terrible triad injuries of the elbow who underwent our treatment protocol from January 2015 to December 2020. The surgery involved a posterior approach, identification of the ulnar nerve, bone and ligament reconstruction, and the application of the internal joint stabilizer. A rehabilitation program was initiated immediately after the operation. Surgery-related complications, elbow range of motion (ROM), and functional outcomes were evaluated.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 21.7 months (range, 16-36 months). ROM at the final follow-up was 130° in extension to flexion and 164° in pronation to supination. The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 94 at the final follow-up. Major complications included breaking of the internal joint stabilizer in 2 patients, transient numbness over the ulnar nerve territory in one, and local infection due to irritation of the internal joint stabilizer in one.

Conclusions

Although the current study involved only a small number of patients and the protocol comprised two stages of operation, we believe that such a technique may be a valuable alternative for the treatment of these difficult cases.

Level of Clinical Evidence

4.

Terrible triad injury of the elbow: a historical perspective

PURPOSE

The aims of this study are to summarize (1) the history of terrible triad injury (TTi) treatment and (2) the clinical and biomechanical data that engendered its evolution.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using five electronic databases. Results were discussed as a chronologic review of the relevant literature between 1920 and 2022.

RESULTS

In 1962, Osborne was the first to describe a link between elbow dislocation, radial head fracture, and lateral collateral ligament complex injury via a novel mechanism: posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI). Given that untreated elbow instability leads to post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA), there has been increasing interest in elbow biomechanics since the 1980s. Data from studies in that period revolutionized the approach to elbow instability. The authors demonstrated that TTi could occur via a PLRI mechanism with a disruption of the lateral collateral ulnar ligament and a functionally competent anterior medial collateral ligament (aMCL). Since the 1990s, due to the difficulty in identifying its pathoanatomic features, some began to speculate about a sequence of injuries and mechanisms leading to TTi. However, the clinical literature has largely been unable to reproduce in vitro findings describing the pathomechanics of TTi. Some aspects of treatment remain controversial including systematic coronoid and aMCL repair.

CONCLUSION

Despite a growing body of biomechanics data, there is no widely accepted surgical protocol for the treatment of TTi. Functional outcomes among patients have greatly improved. Better diagnosis and treatment of infra-clinical instability after a TTi may be an important stepping stone to prevent the onset of moderate/severe PTOA.

Anteroposterior Cannulated Screw Fixation of Coronoid Fractures in Terrible Triad Injuries: A Simple Syringe-guided Technique

OBJECTIVE

The fixation of the coronoid fractures in terrible triad injuries is quite challenging. In this study, we introduce a minimally invasive technique using a syringe as a guide for insertion of the cannulated screw in an anterior to posterior fashion to fix the coronoid fracture in patients with terrible triad injuries.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, clinical data of patients suffering from terrible triad injuries between 2012 and 2019 were analyzed. Fifteen patients with an average age of 38.2 years old (21-56 years) were enrolled in this study, of which 12 were males and three were females. The Regan-Morrey type II and type III coronoid fractures in these patients were treated with cannulated screws, inserted anteriorly using a 1 mL syringe as a guide. Outcome measures included pain, range of motion, stability and daily function using Mayo Elbow Performance scores (MEPs). The anteroposterior and lateral radiographs were used for evaluating a healing fracture.

RESULTS

After a mean follow up of 44.2 months (range 13-80), the mean elbow flexion was 128.2°, extension was 12.3°, forearm pronation was 74.6° and supination was 73.6°. A concentric reduction was maintained without severe pain, stiffness, and radiographic evidence of instability in all patients during the follow-up period. The mean MEPs was 89.7 points.

CONCLUSION

The anteroposterior cannulated screw fixation via simple syringe guide is a minimally invasive and safe option for surgical treatment of coronoid fractures in terrible triad injuries.

A Novel Suture-Preset Spring Plate System (SSPS) for Comminuted Coronoid Process Fracture in the Elbow

OBJECTIVE

This study is aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of a novel SSPS for fixation of the comminuted coronoid fracture.

METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out in the patients with comminuted fractures of the coronoid treated by SPSS fixation between January 2014 and December 2018. A total of 17 patients (17 sides) was included in our study, including 11 male and six female, with a mean age range from 18 to 60. All cases started to functional rehabilitation immediately after the operation. Clinical outcomes were evaluated both radiographically and functionally at the follow-up visit, including the elbow instability, range of motion and Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS).

RESULTS

According to the O'Driscoll classification system, there was two side of type 1.2, two of type 2.1, four of type 2.2, three of type 2.3, two of 3.1 and four of type 3.2. The surgery was carried out by Kocher and anteromedial approach in 12 patients, posterior and anteromedial approach in four, anterior approach in one. The average operation time and intraoperative blood loss was 129.41±43.87 min and 115.29±104.65 ml. The median follow-up time was 9 months (range, 6 to 15 months). The mean flexion, extension, pronation and supination motion was 138.76±8.67 degrees, 20.00±13.58, 82.94±5.32and 74.12±14.39 respectively at final follow up. The mean MEPS score was 89.76±8.46, including 11 excellent, 3 good and 3 fair result. The mean VAS score was 1.94±0.97. The mean union time of coronoid fractures was 2.77±0.31 months according to the established standard of healing. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes among groups according to the O'Driscoll classification (P > .05) and ligament repair strategy (P > .05). No patient underwent instability or dislocation of the elbow during follow up. There were two cases with mild ulnar nerve symptoms which recovered totally at follow up. Meanwhile, there were three cases with heterotopic ossification of the elbow.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrated that the SSPS can provide a reliable fixation for the comminuted coronoid fracture with satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Classification of coronoid process fractures: A pending question

Ulna coronoid fracture is a complicated elbow injury. Comprehensive classification of coronoid fracture can assist diagnosis, guide treatment, and improve prognosis. Existing coronoid fracture classifications are insufficient to interpret all fracture patterns. The coronoid fracture classification is associated with elbow-specific trauma patterns. Coronoid fractures are often associated with other elbow injuries, commonly with radial head fractures, which makes the clinical strategies inconsistent and prognosis poor. The current fracture classifications do not contain information about combined injuries. Preservation of ulnohumeral joint contact after trauma is critical to elbow mechanical and kinematic stability. Important fracture types for treatment include terrible-triad injuries and anteromedial facet fractures. Open reduction and internal fixation of these two fractures should be conducted when marked displacement of the fragment, elbow instability under stress, and complicated associated injuries. The current surgical tactics based on classifications are still controversial.

Learning Curve Associated With Operative Treatment of Terrible Triad Elbow Fracture Dislocations

Purpose: To assess the outcomes of operatively treated terrible triad (TT) elbow injuries for a single surgeon at the start of clinical practice. We aimed to define postoperative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion (ROM), and complications during the period immediately following fellowship training, in order to describe the learning process for surgical treatment of TT. 

Methods: All operatively treated TTs from 2017 to 2020 were included. All cases were performed by a single, fellowship-trained upper-extremity surgeon and represented a consecutive series at the start of clinical practice. Baseline demographics, injury characteristics, and surgical details were recorded for each case. PROMs [QuickDisability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and (visual analog scale) pain scale], ROM, and complications were recorded at the time of final follow-up. A perioperative glucocorticoid protocol was used in all cases without diabetes.

Results: There was a total of 21 included TT cases with a mean follow-up of 20 months. The operative time averaged 89 min for the first 10 cases and 83 min for the subsequent 11 cases. The mean QuickDASH and VAS pain score at final follow-up were 19 and 2.3, respectively. The mean flexion-extension arc was 122° and two cases (9%) had < 100° arc of motion. The mean pronation-supination arc was 145°. Three cases (14%) had a postoperative complication, all of which underwent reoperation. Of the 21 included cases, these reoperations represented cases #1, #14, and #17 respectively. 

Conclusions: Upper-extremity surgeons at the start of clinical practice may be able to achieve outcomes similar to more experienced surgeons for operatively treated TT elbow fracture dislocations. There does not appear to be a substantial “learning curve” after fellowship training with respect to PROMs, complication rates, or operative time associated with surgical treatment of TT elbow injuries. 

Does an Internal Joint Stabilizer and Standardized Protocol Prevent Recurrent Instability in Complex Persistent Elbow Instability?

BACKGROUND

The treatment of complex persistent elbow instability after trauma is challenging. Previous studies on treatments have reported varied surgical techniques, which makes it difficult to establish a therapeutic algorithm. Furthermore, the surgical procedures may not sufficiently restore elbow stability, even with an additional device, and a noted high rate of arthritis progression.While a recently developed internal joint stabilizer effectively treats elbow instability, its clinical application for complex persistent elbow instability is limited and the standardized protocol is not well described. Additionally, we want to know whether the arthritis progression will cause a negative impact on the functional outcomes of complex persistent elbow instability.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does treatment of complex persistent elbow instability with a hinged internal joint stabilizer and a standardized protocol prevent recurrent instability and other complications? (2) What are the pre- to postoperative improvements in pain, disability, elbow performance, and ROM? (3) Is the development of post-traumatic arthritis associated with worse pain, disability, elbow performance, and ROM?

METHODS

Between September 2014 and October 2019, we treated 22 patients for persistent dislocation or subluxation after initial treatment of traumatic elbow fracture-dislocations. Of those, we considered patients who were at least 20 years of age, with an interval of 6 weeks or more between the injury (initial treatment) and the index reconstructive procedure, which had been performed at our institute, as potentially eligible. During that time, we used an internal joint stabilizer with a standardized protocol for posttraumatic complex persistent elbow instability. We performed total elbow replacements in patients older than 50 years who had advanced elbow arthritis. Based on that, 82% (18 of 22) of patients were eligible; 14% (3 of 22) were excluded because total elbow replacements was undertaken, and another 5% (1 of 22) were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 1 year (median 24 months [range 12 to 63]), leaving 64% (14 of 22) for analysis in this retrospective study. We treated 14 patients (14 elbows) with posttraumatic complex persistent elbow instability with an internal joint stabilizer and a standardized protocol that comprised debridement arthroplasty with ulnar neurolysis, restoration of bony and ligamentous (reattachment) structures, application of an internal joint stabilizer, and early rehabilitation. There were eight men and six women in this study, with a median (range) age of 44 years (21 to 68). The initial elbow fracture-dislocation injury pattern was a terrible triad injury in seven patients, a posterolateral rotatory injury in four patients, and a posterior Monteggia fracture in three patients. Preoperative and follow-up radiographs were reviewed for evidence of recurrent instability and arthritis. Complications such as wound infection, seroma, neurovascular injury, and hardware complications were ascertained through chart review. Preoperative and postoperative VAS score for pain, DASH, and Mayo Elbow Performance Scores (MEPS) were collected and compared. Furthermore, extension-flexion and supination-pronation arcs were collected by chart review. We divided the patients into two groups according to whether or not they developed posttraumatic arthritis. We then presented the differences between pain, disability, elbow performance, and ROM. The hinged internal joint stabilizer was removed using another open procedure under general anesthesia 6 to 8 weeks after surgery.

RESULTS

There were no recurrent instability during and after device removal. Seven patients developed complications, including wound infection, seroma, neurovascular injury, hardware complications, and heterotopic ossification. Two patients had complications related to internal joint stabilizers and three had complications linked to radial head prostheses. Median (range) preoperative to postoperative changes included decreased pain (VAS 5 [2 to 9] to 0 [0 to 3], difference of medians -5; p < 0.001), decreased disability (DASH 41 [16 to 66] to 7 [0 to 46], difference of medians -34; p < 0.001), improved function (MEPS 60 [25 to 70] to 95 [65 to 100], difference of medians 35; p < 0.001), improved extension-flexion arc (40° [10° to 70°] to 113° [75° to 140°], difference of medians 73°; p < 0.001), and supination-pronation arc (78° [30° to 165°] to 148° [70° to 175°], difference of medians 70°; p < 0.001). Between patients with and without development of post-traumatic arthritis, there were no differences in postoperative pain (VAS 0 [0 to 3] to 0 [0 to 1], difference of medians 0; p = 0.17), disability (DASH 7 [0 to 46] to 7 [0 to 18], difference of medians 0; p = 0.40), function (MEPS 80 [65 to 100] to 95 [75 to 100], difference of medians 15; p = 0.79), extension-flexion arc (105° [75° to 140°] to 115° [80° to 125°], difference of medians 10°; p = 0.40), and supination-pronation arc (155° [125° to 175°] to 135° [70° to 160°], difference of medians -20°; p < 0.18).

CONCLUSION

In this small, retrospective study, we found that an internal joint stabilizer with a standardized treatment protocol could maintain concentric reduction while allowing early functional motion, and that it could improve clinical outcomes for patients with complex persistent elbow instability. However, patients must be counseled that the complications related to the radial head prostheses may occur, and that the benefits of early motion must compensate for an additional removal procedure and the risk of seroma formation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

The radiological findings in complex elbow fracture-dislocation injuries

Elbow fracture-dislocation is a complex injury which can lead to significant bony and soft tissue damage. Surgical intervention is guided towards restoring joint stability, allowing early mobilization and preventing long-term joint stiffness. The most common types are posterolateral, posteromedial, Monteggia type (and variants), and anterior trans-olecranon fracture-dislocations. Posterolateral fracture-dislocation is characterized by a radial head fracture (± anterolateral coronoid fracture) and typically capsuloligamentous disruption (lateral collateral ligaments injury is the most common). A posterolateral fracture-dislocation with radial head and coronoid anterolateral facet fractures is termed a terrible triad injury. In posteromedial fracture-dislocation, there is a fracture of the anteromedial facet of the coronoid, typically with proximal avulsion of the lateral collateral ligaments (± injury to the posterior bundle of the ulnar collateral ligament). Monteggia fracture-dislocation injuries demonstrate proximal ulnar fracture (with possible involvement of the olecranon and the coronoid) and radial head dislocation. These can be divided into apex anterior or apex posterior variants. The latter are commonly associated with radial head fractures and lateral ligamentous injury, and have a worse prognosis. In trans-olecranon fracture-dislocation, there is significant disruption of the greater sigmoid notch and the olecranon, with various involvement of the coronoid and the proximal ulna. The article describes the radiological findings and outlines the management principles in complex elbow fracture-dislocation injuries.

Is Repair of a Small Coronoid Fracture Required in the Surgical Treatment of Terrible Triad Injury of the Elbow?

Background: Multiple treatment protocols have been described in literature for the treatment of terrible triad injury (TTI) of the elbow. We believe that repair of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) should be performed in preference to repair of a small coronoid fracture if the elbow is unstable after fixation/replacement of the radial head and repair of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL). The aim of this study is to report the outcomes of surgical treatment of patients with TTI associated with a small coronoid fracture in whom the coronoid fracture was not addressed. Methods: This study is a retrospective case series of 12 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for acute TTI with a small coronoid fracture (9 Regan-Morrey type I and 3 Regan-Morrey type II). Ten patients had complete MCL injuries. All patients underwent repair of the torn LCL and MCL and treatment of the radial head. The coronoid fracture was not surgically treated. At the final follow-up, the range of motion, degree of flexion contracture, Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) were measured. Results: The mean follow-up period was 13.5 months. At the final follow-up, the mean arc of elbow flexion was 132° and the mean flexion contracture was 10°. The mean arc of forearm rotation was 148°. None of the patients demonstrated elbow instability. The mean MEPS was 92.5 points with seven having excellent results and five having good results. The average DASH score was 11.2 points. Conclusions: Our results showed that good elbow stability, arc of motion and clinical outcomes could be achieved without repair of small coronoid fractures in the treatment of TTI. The repair of MCL injuries should be given priority over the fixation of small coronoid fractures to regain elbow stability. Level of Evidence: Level IV (Therapeutic).

Posterior (Boyd) approach to terrible triad injuries

Background

A ‘terrible triad injury of the elbow’ (TTIE) refers to an injury pattern involving posterior dislocation of the ulnohumeral joint, fracture of the radial head, and fracture of the coronoid process of the ulna. It is a complex injury to the elbow joint and can result in long-term elbow instability, pain, stiffness, and arthritis. In specific cases, it may be treated conservatively, but in most circumstances, surgical stabilization is advised.

The ‘drop sign’ is an objective static radiographically measured ulnohumeral distance of ≥4 mm seen intraoperatively and postoperatively. Although controversial, it may portend postoperative instability and arthritis. The senior author repairs these injuries in a standardized fashion through a modified Boyd rather than a lateral approach. Our aim was to assess the number of cases demonstrating an intraoperative drop sign after surgical treatment of a TTIE with this approach.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 22 consecutive patients with 23 acute TTIEs. These injuries were treated by a single surgeon using a modified Boyd (posterior) approach to the elbow. Intraoperative image intensifier x-rays were analyzed by the two authors to assess for a ‘drop sign’.

Results

None of the 23 cases had ‘drop signs’ on intraoperative imaging after stabilization. No patient has redislocated, underwent reoperation, or had symptoms of instability at follow-up.

Conclusion

None of our patient cohort had an intraoperative ‘drop sign’ after standardized stabilization for a TTIE injury using a modified Boyd approach.

Dislocations of the elbow - An instructional review

Dislocations of the elbow require recognition of the injury pattern followed by adequate treatment to allow early mobilisation. Not every injury requires surgery but if surgery is undertaken all structures providing stability should be addressed, including fractures, medial and lateral ligament insertion and the radial head. The current concepts of biomechanical modelling are addressed and surgical implications discussed.

Patterns of injury mechanism observed in terrible triad

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to classify the injury mechanism of terrible triad (TT) and suggest a treatment method according to the mechanism.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty TTs with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) were enrolled. 3D CT scans of coronoid fractures were used for classifying into O'Driscoll type representing injury mechanisms and measuring sizes. In MRI scans, lateral collateral ligament complex (LCLC) injuries were classified into distraction (D) type caused by varus force and stripping (S) type caused by forearm external rotation force. Using these findings, possible injury mechanisms were speculated and classified into groups. Characteristic soft tissue injury patterns of collateral ligaments and overlying muscles, direction of dislocation in simple radiographs, and the amount of involvement of radial head fracture were investigated. Ulnar- and radial-side instabilities of soft tissues were newly defined and investigated.

RESULTS

There were 29 (73%) cases by posterolateral external rotation (PLER), 5 (13%) cases by posteromedial external rotation (PMER), and 6 (14%) cases by posteromedial internal rotation (PMIR). Simple radiographs showed all posterolateral dislocations in PLER TT compared to posteromedial or pure posterior dislocations in PMER or PMIR TT. Regarding LCLC and overlying extensor muscle, they were all completely torn with D type in all PLER compared to D type in PMER or PMIR. The ulnar collateral ligament was spared in 5 (17%) cases among 29 PLER in contrast to complete rupture in all PMER and PMIR. In PLER, PMER, and PMIR, involvement ratios of radial head fracture were 82% (range, 27%-100%), 61% (range, 25%-100%), and 61% (range, 25%-100%), respectively, and sizes of coronoid fractures were 7 mm (range, 1-14 mm), 6 mm (range, 2-11 mm), and 10 mm (range, 2-16 mm), respectively. In PLER, PMER, and PMIR, percentages of ulnar-side instabilities were 17%, 20%, and 17%, respectively, and those of radial-side instabilities were 59%, 60%, and 83%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TT is caused by at least 3 mechanisms (PLER, PMER, and PMIR) with characteristic soft tissue injuries and fracture patterns. PLER is the main mechanism of injury. It is always observed in the form of posterolateral dislocation on simple radiographs compared with pure posterior or posteromedial dislocation of PMER or PMIR. It should be managed individually based on injury mechanisms presenting different instability patterns.

Pullout Strength of All-Suture and Metallic Anchors in Repair of Lateral Collateral Ligament Injuries of the Elbow

PURPOSE

To compare the biomechanical properties of metallic anchor (MA) and all-suture anchor (ASA) constructs in the anatomic reattachment of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament complex to its humeral insertion.

METHODS

Twenty paired male human cadaveric elbows with a mean age of 46.3 years (range: 33-58 years) were used in this study. Each pair was randomly allocated across 2 groups of either MA or ASA. A single 3.5-mm MA or 2.6-mm ASA was then inserted flush into the lateral epicondyle. A dynamic tensile testing machine was used to perform cyclic loading followed by a load to failure test. During the cyclic loading phase, the anchors were sinusoidally tensioned from 10 N to 100 N for 1,000 cycles at a frequency of 0.5 Hz. In the load to failure test, the anchors were pulled at a rate of 3 mm/s. Load at 1-mm and 2-mm displacement, as well as load to ultimate failure were assessed. Clinical failure was defined as displacement of more than 2 mm. Normality of data was assessed with the Shapiro-Wilk test. Continuous data are presented as medians and compared with the Mann-Whitney U test and categorical data was compared with the χ² test or Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

Displacement was significantly greater for the ASA group during cyclic loading starting from the tenth cycle (P < .05). Displacement of more than 5 mm within the first 100 cycles was observed in 2 anchors in the ASA group. No difference was observed in loads required to displace 1 mm (MA: 146 N [6-169] vs ASA: 144 N [2-153]; P = .53) and 2 mm (MA: 171 N [13-202] vs ASA: 161 N [9-191]; P = .97), but there was a statistically significant difference between ultimate loads in favor of ASA in the load to failure test (MA: 297 N [84-343] vs 463 N [176-620]; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

In the cyclic test, no difference in clinical failure defined as pull-out of more than 2 mm was observed between 3.5 mm MAs and 2.6 mm ASAs. In the ultimate load to failure analysis, no difference was observed between groups in force causing 1 and 2 mm of displacement, but there was a significant difference in favor of ASA in the pull to ultimate failure test.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Potential benefits of all-suture anchors include preservation of bone stock, reduced radiographic artifacts, and easier revisions. Although their use has been investigated thoroughly in the shoulder, there remains a paucity of literature regarding displacement and pull-out strength in the elbow.

The three-column concept of elbow joint stability and the Wrightington elbow fracture-dislocation classification, emphasizing the role of cross-sectional imaging

Elbow fracture-dislocation is a complex injury with a combination of osseous and soft tissue disruption. Different classification systems have been used to describe the injury pattern and help guide the management. The article describes the important cross-sectional findings in complex elbow fracture-dislocation injuries based on the relatively new Wrightington classification. This includes the various elements and patterns seen in elbow fracture-dislocations providing a simple and comprehensive system to classify these injuries and help guide the surgical management. The article also describes the three-column concept of elbow joint stability, dividing the elbow joint osseous structures into lateral, middle and medial columns. Detailed radiological assessment of the fractures pattern is vital to understand the mechanism of injury, allowing clinicians to predict the associated capsuloligamentous injury and help guide the management decisions. The Wrightington elbow fracture-dislocation classification categorizes the injuries according to the ulnar coronoid process and radial head fractures. Type A is an anteromedial coronoid fracture. Type B is a bifacet or basal coronoid fracture, with B + indicating associated radial head fracture. Type C is a combined anterolateral facet and radial head or comminuted radial head fractures. Type D is a diaphyseal ulnar fracture, with D + indicating associated radial head fracture.

Analysis of Fracture Characteristic and Medial Collateral Ligament Injury Relationships in Terrible Triad Elbow Injuries

PURPOSE

The objectives of this study were to identify the relationship between fracture characteristics and medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries in terrible triad injuries of the elbow.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2018, 60 patients who underwent surgery for terrible triad elbow injuries were retrospectively reviewed. Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessments, patients were stratified into those who had intact or low-grade partial MCL tears (low-grade MRI-MCL group) and those who had high-grade partial or full-thickness MCL tears (high-grade MRI-MCL group). We also analyzed patients according to whether they underwent MCL repair surgery. Fractures of the radial head were assessed according to Mason's classification system and measurements of fracture fragment arc on axial cuts. Fractures of the coronoid processes were assessed according to the system of Regan and Morrey and measurements of coronoid process volumes.

RESULTS

Patients in the high-grade MRI-MCL group (28 patients) had a more comminuted and higher fragment arc of radial head fractures than those in the low-grade MRI-MCL group (32 patients) (143º ± 45º vs 119º ± 31º). However, the volume of coronoid fracture fragments was smaller in the high-grade MRI-MCL than in the low-grade MRI-MCL group (359 ± 325 mm³ vs 722 ± 448 mm³). The MCL repair group (22 patients) also had a more comminuted and higher fragment arc in radial head fractures (153º ± 44º vs 117º ± 31º) and a smaller coronoid process fracture volume (236 ± 224 mm³ vs 735 ± 419 mm³) than the non-MCL repair group (38 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that high-grade MCL injuries are associated with comminuted and larger-sized radial head fractures, as well as smaller-sized coronoid process fractures in terrible triad injuries. In making a decision regarding surgical treatment, these fracture characteristics could help to predict the severity for MCL injury in terrible triad injuries.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic IV.

Current concepts in elbow fracture dislocation

BACKGROUND

Elbow fracture dislocations are complex injuries that can provide a challenge for experienced surgeons. Current classifications fail to provide a comprehensive system that encompasses all of the elements and patterns seen in elbow fracture dislocations.

METHODS

The commonly used elbow fracture dislocation classifications are reviewed and the three-column concept of elbow fracture dislocation is described. This concept is applied to the currently recognised injury patterns and the literature on management algorithms.

RESULTS

Current elbow fracture dislocation classification systems only describe one element of the injury, or only include one pattern of elbow fracture dislocation. A new comprehensive classification system based on the three-column concept of elbow fracture dislocation is presented with a suggested algorithm for managing each injury pattern.

DISCUSSION

The three-column concept may improve understanding of injury patterns and treatment and leads to a comprehensive classification of elbow fracture dislocations with algorithms to guide treatment.

Prognostic factors for traumatic elbow osteoarthritis after terrible triad surgery, and functional impact

INTRODUCTION

Terrible triad (TT) of the elbow almost always requires surgery to prevent progression to chronic instability and more or less inevitable osteoarthritis. Progression toward osteoarthritis after well-conducted surgery and associated risk factors have been little reported. We performed a retrospective study: (1) to assess rates of post-traumatic elbow osteoarthritis after surgical treatment of TT; (2) to assess functional impact; and (3) to identify prognostic factors.

HYPOTHESIS

Prevalence of osteoarthritis after surgical treatment of TT is high, impairing functional results.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A single-center retrospective study included 53 patients, with a mean age of 50±17.8 years (range, 21-84 years), undergoing surgery for acute TT in our department. All received clinical examination with ranges of motion and Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and radiographic assessment at a minimum 1 year's follow-up. Osteoarthritis at last follow-up was assessed on elbow X-ray in the humero-ulnar and radio-condylar compartments on the Broberg-Morrey classification. Functional impact on range of motion and MEPI and prognostic factors were assessed on Student test or ANOVA and Chi² or Fisher test.

RESULTS

Prevalence of Broberg-Morrey grade 2 or 3 osteoarthritis was 45.3% (24/53) in the humero-ulnar compartment and 50% (25/50) in the radio-condylar compartment. Humero-ulnar osteoarthritis impaired MEPI (76.3 points with versus 88.4 points without; p=0.003), flexion-extension (102.3° versus 115.2°; p=0.043) and pronation-supination (138.8° versus 159.3°; p=0.006). Radio-condylar osteoarthritis had no significant impact on MEPI (81.4 points with and 84.4 points without; p=0.47), flexion-extension (104.8° and 113°; p=0.23) or pronation-supination (141.8° and 156.4°; p=0.2). Humero-ulnar osteoarthritis at last follow-up was associated with dislocation or subluxation on immediate postoperative lateral view (45.8% with versus 10.3% without; p=0.004) and at last follow-up (20.8% versus 3.4%; p=0.047) and with postoperative complications (54.2% and 27.6%; p=0.049). Radio-condylar osteoarthritis at last follow-up was associated with radial head replacement rather than internal fixation (respectively, 92% and 48%; p=0.0007) and excessively high radial head implant positioning (47.8% versus 0%; p=0.023).

CONCLUSION

Prevalence of traumatic osteoarthritis after TT surgery was high, at 45.3% in the humero-ulnar compartment and 50% in the radio-condylar compartment, with clinical impact in humero-ulnar involvement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; cohort study without control group.

Reconstruction of coronoid process of the ulna: a literature review

As a pivotal part of the elbow joint structure, the coronoid process of the ulna plays a vital role in maintaining elbow joint stability. Loss of coronoid process height causes instability of the elbow joint depending on the fracture characteristics and size. The diagnosis and treatment of coronoid process fractures has gained widespread attention from orthopedic surgeons. Nevertheless, few reports have described reconstruction of coronoid process fractures and defects that affect elbow joint stability. Treatment of elbow joint instability induced by coronoid process defects is challenging because most cases are complicated by other elbow joint injuries. Moreover, the clinical efficacy remains unclear. The present narrative review was performed to examine the research progress on reconstruction of the coronoid process. The findings of this review provide evidence for clinical repair and reconstruction of coronoid process defects and contribute to the published literature on this topic.

Comparison of arthroscopy-assisted vs. open reduction and fixation of coronoid fractures of the ulna

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications for arthroscopy-assisted vs. open reduction and fixation of coronoid fractures in patients with complex elbow fracture-dislocations.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed patients with complex elbow fracture-dislocations who underwent surgical fixation for coronoid fractures of the ulna from March 2009 to January 2016. Subjects included those who received either arthroscopy-assisted (group A) or open surgery (group O) for coronoid fractures and concurrent reconstruction of the lateral column (radial head and/or lateral ulnar collateral ligament) with follow-up for at least 2 years. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale for pain, range of motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score at 2 years after surgery. For radiographic assessment, union of the coronoid, development of heterotopic ossification, and arthritic changes were evaluated. We also reviewed surgery-related complications.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (mean age, 40.0 ± 12.4 years) were enrolled in this study (group A, 15 patients; group O, 10 patients), and there were no statistical differences in baseline data between the 2 groups. Clinical outcomes did not differ between the 2 groups. All fractures were united and that the prevalence of heterotopic ossification and arthritic changes were similar between the 2 groups. However, operation-related complications were more common in group O than in group A (group A, 13.3%; group O, 40.0%), including 1 patient who underwent ulnar nerve neurolysis and anterior transposition at 3 months after the initial operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Eliciting fewer complications, arthroscopy-assisted reduction and fixation of coronoid fractures shows union rates and clinical results comparable to open fixation in patients with complex elbow fracture-dislocation.

Surgical treatment of terrible triad of the elbow

Terrible triad of the elbow associates posterior dislocation, radial head fracture and coronoid process fracture. It is a complex trauma, associating severe bone and ligament lesions, with high more-or-less long-term risk of residual instability, stiffness, pain and osteoarthritis. During the last 20 years, pathologic, biomechanical and clinical knowledge has greatly progressed. Prevention of these severe complications requires initial understanding of the lesion mechanism and precise analysis of all lesions. Surgery aims to restore perfect stability by sequential anatomic repair, enabling early mobilization to prevent onset of stiffness. The aims of the present paper were to summarize the anatomic and pathophysiological bases, highlight the crucial importance of the humeroradial column and lateral collateral ligament, and to determine the importance of the coronoid process. Some aspects of treatment are controversial: systematic medial collateral ligament repair, or use of an articulated external fixator. Finally, we propose a simple algorithm to guide repair.

Treatment of elbow instability: state of the art

The elbow is a congruent joint with a high degree of inherent stability, provided by osseous and soft-tissue constraints; however, when substantial lesions of these stabilising structures happen, instability of the elbow occurs. Significant improvements in surgical elbow instability diagnosis and treatment have been recently introduced both for acute and chronic cases. Specific stress tests, recently introduced in the clinical practice, and different imaging techniques, both static and dynamic, allow assessment of the elbow stabilisers and detection of the instability direction and mechanism even in subtle forms. Many surgical techniques have been standardised and surgical instruments and devices, specifically dedicated to elbow instability treatment, have been developed. Specific rehabilitation protocols have been designed to protect the healing of the elbow stabilisers while minimising elbow stiffness. However, despite the progress, surgical treatments can be challenging even for expert surgeons and the rate of persistent instability, post-traumatic arthritis, stiffness and pain can be still high especially in most demanding cases. The biology of the soft-tissue healing remains one of the most important aspects for future investigation. If future research will help to understand, correct or modulate the biological response of soft-tissue healing, our confidence in elbow instability management and the reproducibility of our treatment will tremendously improve. In this paper, the state of the art of the current knowledge of elbow instability is presented, specifically focusing on modern surgical techniques used to solve instability, with repair or reconstruction of the damaged elbow stabilisers.

An Individualized Intra-Articular Stabilization Device Designed Based on 3D Printing Technology for Traumatic Instability of the Ulnohumeral Joint

We aimed to design an individualized intra-articular stabilization device based on 3D printing technology and investigate the clinical effects of this device for treating traumatic instability of the ulnohumeral joint. This study enrolled nine patients with traumatic instability of the ulnohumeral joint (age: 47.2 ± 1.80 years) who received treatment between March 2018 and March 2019 in our hospital. All patients underwent a thin-layer computed tomography (CT) scan of the elbow before surgery. The original injury and repair models of the elbow were printed using 3D printing technology based on CT data. An individualized intra-articular stabilization device was designed with a 2.0 mm Kirschner wire based on the repair model. Nine patients agreed to receive surgical treatment for elbow disease and placement of the intra-articular stabilization device. The nine patients underwent open reduction through a posterior median approach, and the intra-articular stabilization device was placed in the elbow. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications were recorded and followed up. The device was removed at two postoperative months, and the Mayo score was used to evaluate elbow function. Four months after removing the intra-articular stabilization device, elbow joint function was evaluated again using the Mayo score. The mean operation time was 100.1 ± 8.2 min, and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 35.5 ± 7.1 ml. No complications occurred after operation. Two months after surgery, eight patients received an excellent Mayo score, and one patient received a good Mayo score. Four months after removal of the intra-articular stabilization device, eight patients received an excellent Mayo score, and one patient received a good Mayo score. The individualized intra-articular stabilization device can increase ulnohumeral stability and achieve rapid functional recovery of the elbow.

Analysis of twenty-five cases of terrible triad injury of the elbow surgically treated with a single lateral approach

BACKGROUND

The objective was to analyze the long-term clinical outcome of terrible triad injury of the elbow following surgical intervention with a single lateral approach.

METHOD

We treated twenty-five patients with terrible triad injury of the elbow from July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2020, and performed post hoc analysis. All patients underwent standardized surgery which entailed: plate fixation for the ulnar coronoid process, fixation or replacement of the radial head, and repair of the lateral ligament but not the medial collateral ligament.

RESULTS

We followed up each patient for an average of 22.9 months (range, 12 to 36 months) after surgery. Patients had an average angle scope of elbow flexion and extension that ranged from 8° to 120°. Average pronation of the elbow was 75° (range, 10°-85°), and average supination was 72° (range, 25°-80°). Patient-reported outcome measures were excellent: the DASH and Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS) were 96%. We were unable to follow-up one patient (4%). Among the remaining 24 patients, one patient (4%) presented with heterotopic ossification and stiffness following arthrolysis in the elbow one year after the initial surgery. We did not observe any joint dislocation, subluxation, or joint instability in the elbow after surgery.

DISCUSSION

The single lateral approach, a sequential surgery for terrible triad injury of the elbow, can improve initial stability of the elbow. Patients are able to perform rehabilitative exercises sooner in their recovery, which helps to reduce stiffness. Heterotopic ossification is also reduced.

Comparison of Surgical Techniques for Fixation of Terrible Triad Injuries of the Elbow: A Meta-Analysis

Treatment of the terrible triad injury of the elbow remains a difficult problem. There are several ways to treat the radial head and coronoid fractures; controversy still exists regarding the best way to treat each. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of radial head and coronoid fractures treated using current protocols. No differences in functional outcomes were found between the different surgical techniques. There is no superior current protocol for treating these injuries. Surgical treatment should be dictated by fracture type and surgeon experience. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):328-332.].

Does the Coronoid Always Need to Be Fixed in Terrible Triad Injuries of the Elbow? Mid-Term Postoperative Outcomes Following a Standardized Protocol

The purpose of this study was to investigate mid-term outcomes and complications after operative treatment according to a standardized protocol for terrible triad injuries. Twenty-four patients that were treated by a single surgeon with a standardized surgical protocol were retrospectively reviewed. After the complete reconstruction of radial head and/or lateral collateral ligament (LCL) complex through a lateral approach, coronoid process, and/or medial collateral ligament (MCL) complex through a medial approach were fixed if the elbow is unstable. For coronoid fractures, only type III were fixed in four cases (16.7%). Twenty-two LCL (91.7%) and five MCL (20.8%) complexes were repaired. At the final follow-up, the mean MEPS and Quick-DASH score were 91.5 and 17.3, respectively. There was no recurrent instability after operation in all cases. This study revealed that operative treatment that was based on our standardized protocol for terrible triad injuries yielded satisfactory mid-term clinical and radiographic outcomes without any recurrent instability. These results suggest that Type I and II coronoid fractures in terrible triad injuries do not need to be fixed if the radial head and ligamentous complex are completely reconstructed.

Terrible triad of the elbow with an ipsilateral Essex-Lopresti injury: case report

Terrible triad of the elbow and the Essex-Lopresti injury are both rare lesions with a historically poor clinical outcome. We present the case of a unique association of the two injuries with an elbow dislocation, radial and coronoid process fractures and a distal radioulnar joint dislocation due to an interosseous membrane rupture. The case was managed with closed reduction of the elbow dislocation and distal radioulnar joint followed by open reduction and repair of the damaged structures in the elbow and an unloading of the interosseous membrane. A high index of suspicion with a detailed examination of the elbow, forearm and wrist associated to a comprehensive imaging were mandatory for a complete diagnosis and an adequate treatment. Six months after the accident, the patient made a good recovery.