Conservative management of elbow dislocations with an overhead motion protocol

Elbow terrible triad: Advancing current concepts in the treatment of 13 cases

Background

The "terrible triad" of the elbow is characterized by a combination of elbow dislocation with fractures of the radial head and the coronoid process of the ulna. This injury is notoriously complex due to the rupture of key elements that ensure elbow stability, resulting in poorer outcomes compared to simpler joint injuries. Despite advances in treatment protocols, an optimal surgical approach and fixation technique standard have not yet been established.

Methods

This descriptive study focused on reviewing the anatomical and clinical characteristics of the elbow joint, considering the most current biomechanical concepts. Management protocols implemented in our practice were evaluated, including specific surgical techniques and fixation methods based on a deep understanding of elbow anatomy and biomechanics. Retrospective data were collected from patients treated at our centers, analyzing postoperative clinical and radiographic outcomes.

Results

The implementation of a treatment based on updated concepts of elbow biomechanics and anatomy showed a significant improvement in postoperative joint stability and functional recovery of patients. There was a reduction in complication rates and an improvement in clinical outcomes compared to traditional approaches. The selection of specific fixation techniques and surgical approaches allowed for more effective management of the "terrible triad," adapting to the particularities of each case and optimizing results.

Conclusion

This study highlights the importance of a detailed understanding of elbow biomechanics and anatomy for the effective management of the "terrible triad." The implementation of protocols based on these principles can significantly improve clinical outcomes and reduce complications, offering a comprehensive approach to addressing this complex pathology.Level of Evidence: IV.

Conservative and surgical management of simple elbow dislocations: SMDA-SEC consensus and guidelines

Purpose

Proper management of simple elbow dislocations is mandatory to avoid elbow stiffness, chronic instability, heterotopic ossification, or deformity of the elbow. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review of the current treatments of simple elbow dislocations to identify the best non-surgical and surgical management for patients with simple elbow dislocations (SED).

Methods

A review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, and Google Scholar databases was performed using the following keywords: "elbow dislocation", "simple elbow dislocation", "traumatic elbow dislocation", "treatment", "management", "reduction", "rehabilitation", "functional outcome", "range of motion", "complications", "recovery time" over the years 1976-2024.

Results

The literature search and cross-referencing resulted in a total of 345 references, of which 283 were rejected due to off-topic abstract and/or failure to fulfil the inclusion criteria. After reading the remaining full-text articles, we included 60 studies, investigating non-surgical management or surgical management of simple elbow dislocations.

Conclusion

The SMDA-SEC consensus panel provided recommendations to improve the management of patients with SED in clinical practice. Early mobilization is recommended for all cases of simple elbow dislocations. The CMA-EC panel was unable to advise or against the short-period (1-3-wk) immobilization, prolonged (3-wk) immobilization or operative treatment due to insufficient or conflicting evidence.

[Radial Head Arthroplasty: Pearls and Pitfalls]

Fractures of the radial head are among the more common injuries of the upper extremity. Their incidence is increasing, and these fractures are often associated with ligamentous injuries or occur as part of complex injury patterns, such as the terrible triad, Monteggia-like lesions, or Essex-Lopresti injuries. Radial head fractures are classified according to the Mason/Johnston system. In cases where the fracture is not reconstructable, or when osteosynthesis fails, radial head arthroplasty may be indicated.Several prosthetic designs are available, each offering unique features. These include differences in polarity, modularity, and shaft fixation techniques, such as cemented, cementless, or "intentionally loose" fixation. This article, supported by case reports, highlights the indications, surgical approach, and implantation techniques for radial head arthroplasty. Additionally, common pitfalls are discussed, along with strategies to prevent or manage them. These pitfalls include postoperative elbow stiffness, elbow joint instability, and prosthetic overstuffing.

The outcomes of surgical treatment of complex radial head fractures

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of complex radial head fractures at mid-term follow-up, and determine whether open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or radial head arthroplasty (RHA) should be recommended for surgical treatment.

Methods

Patients who underwent surgery for complex radial head fractures (Mason type III, ≥ three fragments) were divided into two groups (ORIF and RHA) and propensity score matching was used to individually match patients based on patient characteristics. Ultimately, 84 patients were included in this study. After a mean follow-up of 4.1 years (2.0 to 9.5), patients were invited for clinical and radiological assessment. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire score were evaluated.

Results

Patients treated with ORIF showed significantly better postoperative range of motion for flexion and extension (121.1° (SD 16.4°) vs 108.1° (SD 25.8°); p = 0.018). Postoperative functional scores also showed significantly better results in the ORIF group (MEPS 90.1 (SD 13.6) vs 78 (SD 20.5); p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the complication rate (RHA 23.8% (n = 10) vs ORIF 26.2% (n = 11)). Implant-related complications occurred in six cases (14.3%) in the RHA group and in five cases (11.9%) in the ORIF group.

Conclusion

Irrespective of the patient's age, sex, type of injury, or number of fracture fragments, ORIF of the radial head should be attempted initially, if a stable reconstruction can be achieved, as it seems to provide a superior postoperative outcome for the patient compared to primary RHA. If reconstruction is not feasible, RHA is still a viable alternative. In the surgical treatment of complex radial head fractures, reconstruction shows superior postoperative outcomes compared to RHA. Good postoperative results can be achieved even after failed reconstruction and conversion to secondary RHA. Therefore, we encourage surgeons to favour reconstruction of complex radial head fractures, regardless of injury type or number of fragments, as long as a stable fixation can be achieved.

Complex elbow fracture-dislocations- what factors are associated with a poor post-operative outcome?

PURPOSE

Despite standardized treatment algorithms, patients with complex elbow fracture-dislocation frequently suffer from poor post-operative elbow function leading to reduced quality of life. Up to now, there is no valuable data regarding risk factors that lead to poor post-operative outcome after surgical reconstruction of complex elbow fracture-dislocations.

METHODS

From 06/2010 to 12/2020 134 patients (51.3 ± 15.1 years, 44% women) undergoing surgical treatment of complex elbow fracture-dislocations could be included in this study. Follow-up period was 4.4 years (SD 2.5). All patients were clinically evaluated for elbow movement, elbow stability and common elbow scores (MEPS, OES, DASH-Score). Potential risk factors for poor post-operative outcome were identified using bi- and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Overall good post-operative outcome has been achieved, mean MEPS was 88.8 ± 17.6. Post-operative complications occurred in 31.3% of the cases, while 25.4% required surgical revision. Patients with transolecranon dislocation fractures showed the significantly worst functional outcomes (p = 0.01). In addition, it has been shown that a patient's age of more than 70 years (OR = 10, p = 0.003) and a BMI of more than 35 kg/m2 (OR = 7.6, p = 0.004) are independent risk factors for a poor post-operative outcome. In contrast, gender and time to surgery showed no significant influence on post-operative outcome.

CONCLUSION

In most cases, good post-operative functional results can be achieved using standardized treatment protocols. However, complication and revision rates remain high. Patients older than 70 years of age or with a BMI over 35 kg/m2 are at risk for an inferior outcome and require close follow-up monitoring.

Complex Elbow Fracture-Dislocations: An Algorithmic Approach to Treatment

Elbow stability arises from a combination of bony congruity, static ligamentous and capsular restraints, and dynamic muscular activation. Elbow trauma can disrupt these static and dynamic stabilizers leading to predictable patterns of instability; these patterns are dependent on the mechanism of injury and a progressive failure of anatomic structures. An algorithmic approach to the diagnosis and treatment of complex elbow fracture-dislocation injuries can improve the diagnostic assessment and reconstruction of the bony and ligamentous restraints to restore a stable and functional elbow. Achieving optimal outcomes requires a comprehensive understanding of pertinent local and regional anatomy, the altered mechanics associated with elbow injury, versatility in surgical approaches and fixation methods, and a strategic rehabilitation plan.

Ulnohumeral Cross-Pinning in the Management of Traumatic Elbow Instability

PURPOSE

Traumatic elbow instability (subluxation and dislocation) represents a challenging clinical entity that can be complicated by persistent intraoperative instability after attempted stabilization or recurrent postoperative instability. Both static and dynamic supplemental stabilization procedures have been described for cases where fracture fixation and ligament repair fail to restore stability. There is a paucity of prior studies involving ulnohumeral cross-pinning (UCP), which is a type of static supplemental stabilization. Our purpose was to assess complications and outcomes after UCP.

METHODS

We reviewed all surgical cases involving primary and revision UCP for traumatic elbow instability at a single center from 2017-2023. Baseline demographics were recorded. Outcomes including radiographs, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures, and surgical complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients undergoing UCP were included with a mean follow-up of 27 months. Five cross-pinnings (36%) were performed during revision procedures. Mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH), and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores were 2.4, 34, and 69, respectively. The mean flexion-extension and pronation-supination arcs were 114° and 140°, with 85% achieving at least a 100° arc for flexion and forearm rotation. Five patients (36%) had complications, all of which required reoperation. Two complications involved postoperative instability: one radial head subluxation and one radial head dislocation. Both occurred in revision UCP cases indicated for recurrent postoperative instability.

CONCLUSIONS

Ulnohumeral cross-pinning for persistent and recurrent elbow instability results in maintained ulnohumeral joint alignment, functional arcs of elbow range of motion, and acceptable patient-reported outcome measures, particularly in the setting of a primary procedure indicated for persistent intraoperative instability. Ulnohumeral cross-pinning is a reasonable supplemental stabilization procedure for complex elbow instability.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Early range of motion results in good elbow function following conservative treatment of non-displaced radial head fractures

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the range of motion (ROM), elbow function and predictors for good elbow function after conservative treatment of non-displaced radial head fractures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All patients with non-displaced radial head fractures (displacement < 2 mm), that were diagnosed between January 1st 2017 and December 31st 2021 in a level I trauma center, were included in this retrospective case series and the charts were evaluated for ROM and elbow function. Elbow function was categorized as "good" or "bad" depending on the ROM measured defined by Morrey et al. Overall, 73 patients (33 male, 40 female) with an average age of 38 years (+/- 13 years) could be included.

RESULTS

Conservative treatment had good clinical results for ROM and elbow function. After 6 weeks mean flexion was 131° (SD 13°), extension 8° (SD 7°), Pronation 83° (SD 11°) and Supination 83° (SD 13). Patients with a good elbow function after one week showed a good elbow function after completing the treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical assessment after one week should always be performed and the study showed that it is a good predictor for good elbow function. In cases of bad elbow function further controls should be considered.

Postoperative Elbow Instability: Options for Revision Stabilization

Persistent and recurrent postoperative elbow instability includes a spectrum of pathologies ranging from joint incongruity and subluxation to dislocation. Restoration of osseous anatomy, particularly the coronoid, is a priority in restoring elbow alignment and maintaining ulnohumeral joint stability. After managing bony deficiencies, soft-tissue and ligamentous structures are typically addressed. When required, both static and dynamic adjunctive stabilization procedures have been described, which aid in maintaining a concentric reduction. In these complex procedures, both complication avoidance and early recognition of postoperative complications assist in obtaining a good result. In this review, we discuss current treatment options for revision stabilization for patients with persistent and recurrent elbow subluxation or dislocation after primary stabilization.

Treatment Outcomes of Simple Elbow Dislocations: A Systematic Review of 1,081 Cases

BACKGROUND

The treatment of simple elbow dislocations (SEDs) has become more functional last decade with a tendency to shorter immobilization of the elbow, whereas simultaneously, surgical stabilization has been promoted by some authors. The primary aim of this study was to systematically review the literature and analyze the outcomes and complications of different treatment options for acute and persistent SEDs, including operative and nonoperative treatments with varying immobilization periods.

METHODS

A literature search was performed based on the online medical databases MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane databases. Articles presenting patients with a SED were eligible for inclusion. When an SED persists for >3 weeks, it is categorized as persistent. Various outcome measures were assessed, including the range of motion (ROM), patient-reported outcome measures, and complication rates. To get insight into the severity of complications, all complications were categorized as minor or major. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used to assess the methodological quality of nonrandomized studies. The risk of bias in the randomized studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS

A total of 37 articles were included with 1,081 dislocated elbows (1,078 patients). A fair quality of evidence was seen for the nonrandomized studies and a low risk of bias for the randomized study. Nonoperative treatment was administered to 710 elbows, with 244 elbows treated with early mobilization, 239 with 1- to 3-week immobilization, and 163 with ≥3-week immobilization. These groups showed a ROM flexion-extension arc (ROM F/E) of 137, 129, and 131°, respectively. Surgical treatment as open reduction and ligament repair or reconstruction was performed in 228 elbows and showed a ROM F/E of 128°. All persistent SEDs were treated surgically and showed a ROM F/E of 90°.

CONCLUSION

The early mobilization treatment showed the most consistent satisfactory outcomes in the literature compared with the other treatment options. Nevertheless, there remains ambiguity regarding which patients would benefit more from surgery than nonoperative treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Acute elbow dislocation: a critical appraisal of the literature

Background

The purpose of this study was to perform a narrative review of acute elbow dislocation (AED). There are certain aspects of the management of AED that are controversial, including type and length of immobilization, indications for surgery, type of surgery, and new evidence available.

Material and methods

A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and Embase databases for studies regarding AED. Preference was given to studies according to their level of evidence. Studies regarding the outcome of conservative and surgical treatment, including patient-reported outcomes, complications, and conversion to stabilization or revision surgery were included.

Results

We found only 1 level I study and 3 level II randomized clinical trials. The rest consisted of level III-V evidence. Conservative care continues to be the standard of care for stable AEDs. Shorter immobilization periods are favored when possible. A consensus definition of an unstable elbow still needs to be improved. Unstable simple elbow dislocation may benefit from surgical intervention with different techniques showing similar outcomes. Advances in surgical procedures and suture designs, including tapes, and ligament augmentation, need to prove their role in managing acute elbow instability.

Conclusion

There is a need for higher quality studies after the reduction of an AED, including discerning the outcome of specific patterns of injury and particular groups of patients like high-level athletes or people with preoperative laxity. Comparison between different surgical techniques is warranted, including arthroscopic techniques and types of ligament augmentation to promote early motion and reduce postoperative stiffness.

Mid-term outcome following radial head arthroplasty in acute trauma: risk factors for poor outcome

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were to evaluate the outcomes of a single type of radial head implant in a large cohort of patients at mid-term follow-up and to determine the associated risk factors for inferior functional outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective follow-up assessment of 65 patients (33 women and 32 men; mean age, 53.3 years [range, 22-81 years]) who underwent radial head arthroplasty (RHA) for acute trauma between 2012 and 2018, after a minimum follow-up period of 3 years. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Oxford Elbow Score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, and Mayo Modified Wrist Score were evaluated, and all available radiographs were analyzed. All complications and revision procedures were assessed. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify potential risk factors for a poor outcome following RHA.

RESULTS

After an average follow-up period of 4.1 years (range, 3-9.4 years), the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 77.2 (standard deviation [SD], 18.9); mean Oxford Elbow Score, 32.0 (SD, 10.6); mean Mayo Modified Wrist Score, 74.6 (SD, 13.7); and mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, 29.0 (SD, 21.2). Average range of motion measured 10° (SD, 15°) in extension, 125° (SD, 14°) in flexion, 81° (SD, 14°) in pronation, and 63° (SD, 24°) in supination. The overall complication and reoperation rates were 38.5% and 30.8%, respectively, with severe elbow stiffness being the most common reason for revision. Patient age >50 years, the use of an external fixator, the presence of accompanying medial collateral ligament injuries, and the development of higher-grade osteoarthritis were associated with a poor outcome.

CONCLUSION

Satisfactory medium-term outcomes can be achieved using a monopolar, long-stemmed RHA in patients with acute trauma. However, complication and revision rates are high, frequently leading to inferior outcome scores. Additionally, a higher patient age, the use of an external fixator, the presence of accompanying medial collateral ligament injuries, and the occurrence of higher-grade osteoarthritis were associated with a poor outcome; these factors should raise awareness by the treating trauma surgeon.

[Terrible triad injuries]

The complex injury pattern of a posterior elbow dislocation with concomitant radial head and coronoid fractures is usually referred to as a terrible triad injury. Due to the concomitant compromise of several osteoligamentous structures of the elbow joint relevant for stability, these injuries pose a particularly major challenge to the treating trauma surgeons. For this reason, a careful preoperative analysis of all relevant injury components is mandatory in order to make an adequate treatment decision. In most cases, surgical treatment addressing all elements relevant for stability is necessary to achieve a stable and congruent elbow joint. Only this enables early functional follow-up treatment and minimizes the complication rate. Delayed or even insufficient treatment with persistent (sub)dislocation must be avoided at all costs, otherwise there is a high risk of serious posttraumatic functional disorders of the elbow with rapid progression of osteoarthritis.

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.

[Elbow joint dislocation : Frequent concomitant injuries and current treatment concepts]

Dislocations of the elbow joint are among the most prevalent dislocation injuries in the human body after shoulder joint dislocations and represent a challenge in the clinical routine because of the concomitant injuries and complications. They predominantly affect young adults who become injured during athletic or daily activities. A distinction is generally made between a simple elbow dislocation and a dislocation fracture of the elbow; however, a uniform classification or treatment algorithm has not yet been established, especially for simple elbow dislocations with associated ligamentous, muscular and capsular concomitant injuries. Due to this and the complexity of this injury, a standardized approach is needed to initiate the optimal treatment at an early stage and to correctly select the narrow treatment pathway between impending chronic instability and elbow stiffness.

Anteromedial coronoid facet fractures and associated ligament lesions: A case series

INTRODUCTION

Varus posteromedial rotational injury mechanisms lead to fractures of the coronoids process' anteromedial facet. As these fractures are often unstable, rapid fracture treatment is vital to prevent progressive osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twelve patients with a fracture of the anteromedial facet treated surgically were enrolled in the study. Computed tomography images were used to classify the fractures according to the system by O'Driscoll et al. Clinical follow-up included each patient's medical record, surgical treatment algorithm, all complications encountered during the follow-up period, Disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand score, subjective elbow value, and pain.

RESULTS

A total of 8 men (66.7%) and 4 women (33.3%) were treated surgically and followed-up after a mean period of 45 ± 23 months. The mean DASH score was 11.9 ± 12.9 points. One patient complained of transient neuropathy in the innervation area of the ulnar nerve, however, this existed already pre-operatively and resolved after less than three months.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented patient cohort shows that AMF fracture of the coronoid process are unstable lesions according to the bony instability and the frequently ruptured collateral ligament complexes which need to be addressed. The MCL seems to be affected more frequently than previously appreciated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV; Case Series; Treatment Study.

Functional outcomes of elbow injuries managed according to the Wrightington classification of elbow fracture-dislocations

Background

This study aims to review the functional outcomes of patients managed by the application of the Wrightington elbow fracture-dislocation classification system and its corresponding management algorithms.

Methods

This is a retrospective consecutive case series of patients over the age of 16 with an elbow fracture-dislocation managed according to the Wrightington classification. The primary outcome was the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) at the last follow-up. Range of movement (ROM) and complications were collected as a secondary outcome.

Results

Sixty patients qualified for inclusion (32 female, 28 male) with a mean age of 48 years (19-84). Fifty-eight (97%) patients completed a minimum of three months follow-up. Mean follow-up was six months (3-18). The median MEPS at the final follow-up was 100 (interquartile range [IQR] 85-100) and median ROM of 123° (IQR 101-130) degrees. Four patients underwent secondary surgery and had improved outcomes with the average MEPS score improving from 65 to 94 following the second surgery.

Conclusions

The results of this study show that good outcomes can be achieved for complex elbow fracture-dislocations through pattern recognition and management with an anatomically based reconstruction algorithm as described by the Wrightington classification system.

[Augmented primary sutures "internal bracing" following ligamentous elbow dislocation]

OBJECTIVE

Aim of surgical treatment is the primary stabilization of the unstable elbow following a ligamentous elbow dislocation.

INDICATIONS

Ligamentous elbow dislocations are typically accompanied by injuries to the surrounding musculature and collateral ligaments of the elbow joint. Surgical treatment is indicated in case of failure of nonoperative therapy, i.e., when a dislocation can only be prevented in immobilization > 90° and pronation of the elbow or an active muscular centering of the elbow fails after 5-7 days.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Contraindications for a solely "internal bracing" augmented primary suture are generally in the case of accompanying bony injuries in elbow dislocations, extensive soft-tissue injuries, and septic arthritis of the elbow.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

The augmented primary suture of the elbow is performed using both a lateral (Kocher or Kaplan) and medial (FCU split) approach to the elbow. After reduction of the elbow, the collateral ligaments are first augmented with high-strength polyethylene suture and fixed in the distal humerus together with another high-strength polyethylene augmentation suture. The extensors and flexors are then fixed to the medial and lateral epicondyle, respectively, using suture anchors.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

The aim of the postoperative management is early functional exercise of the elbow. The elbow is placed in an elbow brace to avoid varus and valgus load.

RESULTS

Between August 2018 and January 2020, a total of 12 patients were treated with an augmented primary suture following unstable ligamentous elbow dislocation. After a mean follow-up of 14 ± 12.7 months, the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 98.5 points with a mean functional arc of 115°. None of the patients reported a recurrent dislocation or persistent instability of the elbow.

Patient satisfaction, joint stability and return to sports following simple elbow dislocations: surgical versus non-surgical treatment

PURPOSE

While conservative management is commonly promoted for simple elbow dislocations, the importance of primary surgical treatment in these injuries is still undetermined. The objective of this study was to report patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sports (RTS) and joint stability using ultrasound in patients following conservative or surgical treatment after simple elbow dislocation.

METHODS

Patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months after conservative (CT) or surgical treatment (ST) following simple elbow dislocation were included in this retrospective study. To evaluate patients' postoperative outcome and satisfaction, the Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS) was used, and validated scores such as the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS), the Quick Disability of Arm and Shoulder Score (Quick-DASH) and RTS were assessed. For objective assessment of residual joint instability, a standardized clinical examination as well as a dynamic ultrasound evaluation of the affected and the contralateral elbow was performed.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (26 women, 18 men) with an average age of 41.5 ± 15.3 years were available for follow-up survey (65.5 ± 30.4 months; range 26-123). 21 patients were treated conservatively and twenty-three patients received surgical treatment. CT and ST resulted in similar outcome with regard to ROM, ESAS (CT: 99.4 ± 1.5; ST: 99.8 ± 0.3), MEPS (CT: 97.3 ± 6.8 points; ST: 98.7 ± 3.3) and Quick-DASH (CT: 7.8 ± 10.4; ST: 6.3 ± 7.9) (n.s.). There was no difference in elbow stability and laxity measured by ultrasound between the study groups and compared to the healthy elbow (n.s.). Two patients of the CT group (10%) complained about persistent subjective elbow instability. RTS was faster after surgical compared to conservative treatment (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Both, conservative and surgical treatment results in high patient satisfaction and good-to-excellent functional outcome after simple elbow dislocation. Even though ultrasound evaluation showed no significant differences in joint gapping between groups, 10% of conservatively treated patients complained about severe subjective instability. Surgically treated patients returned faster to their preoperatively performed sports. Thus, primary surgical treatment may be beneficial for high demanding patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, Level III.

Elbow arthroplasty in trauma-current concepts review

Introduction

Despite advancements in modern locking plate technology, distal humerus fractures in the elderly remain difficult to treat. A subset of fractures in this osteoporotic bone includes multiple, shallow articular fragments that renders fixation unreliable, precluding early motion and acceptable functional outcomes. Arthroplasty, in the form of either Total Elbow Arthroplasty (TEA) or Distal Humeral Hemiarthroplasty (DHH) are alternative treatment options in this cohort and are being increasingly used.

Methods

This article reviews the use of TEA or DHH for acute distal humerus fracture, including patient selection, pre-operative planning, surgical approach, implant positioning, rehabilitation, outcomes and complications.

Results

Arthroplasties are being increasingly used for acute distal humerus fractures, however they introduce potential complications not seen with fixation. Due care must be employed to correct implant positioning which is a function of implant rotation, implant length and implant sizing. We describe a robust technique for epicondyle repair in DHH and unlinked TEA to avoid instability. Outcomes of DHH and TEA for acute distal humerus fracture are encouraging, however further long-term outcome and comparative data regarding arthroplasty is required.

Conclusions

Short to medium term outcomes demonstrate that both DHH and TEA are valuable options for selected patients, although attention to technique is required to minimise potential complications.

Survivorship of anatomic press-fit short-stem radial head replacement with a pyrocarbon bearing

BACKGROUND

Restoring the radial head as a stabiliser of the elbow is considered important in cases where there is an associated bony or ligamentous injury. A variety of radial head prostheses are available. There are no reports of the survivorship of a short-stem press-fit radial head prostheses with pyrocarbon bearing.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

With institutional review board approval, a retrospective case-note analysis was performed of a consecutive single-surgeon case series of the Integra LifeScience pyrocarbon radial head prostheses (Carbon Modular Radial Head) from October 2010 to October 2019 in a tertiary referral centre. The series was divided into acute trauma and salvage cohorts. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

36 patients were included, 23 (64%) for acute injuries and 13 (36%) for failed initial treatment. Of the acute injuries, 20 (87%) had a Wrightington type-C elbow fracture-dislocation. Reoperation was performed in 4 (11%) patients; 10 (28%) had possible loosening on radiographs. The implant survival rate was 94% at shortest follow-up of 17 months (mean 70 months).

DISCUSSION

Treatment of complex radial head fractures using a pyrocarbon-bearing, anatomic press-fit design provides satisfactory short-term survivorship in this case series. The implant should be used with caution in salvage cases, due to higher rates of loosening seen in this cohort.

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. 

Overhead arm positioning in the rehabilitation of elbow dislocations: An in vitro biomechanical study

STUDY DESIGN

In vitro biomechanical study.

INTRODUCTION

Elbow stiffness is a common complication following elbow dislocation. Overhead exercises have been proposed to initiate early motion to reduce stiffness through employing gravity to stabilize the elbow. The implications of this position with regard to elbow kinematics after dislocation have not been reported.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To determine the influence of the overhead position on elbow stability following combined medial and lateral collateral ligament (MCL and LCL) injuries.

METHODS

Passive and simulated active extension were performed on 11 cadaveric elbows with the arm in the overhead, dependent, and horizontal positions and with the forearm in pronation, neutral, and supination. Internal-external rotation (IER) and varus-valgus angulation (VVA) of the ulnohumeral joint were assessed for the intact elbow and after simulated MCL-LCL injury. Repeated-measures analyses of variance were conducted to analyze the effects of elbow state, arm position, forearm rotation, and extension angle.

RESULTS

During passive extension with the arm overhead, the pronated position resulted in more internal rotation than supination (-2.6 ± 0.7°, P = .03). There was no effect of forearm rotation on VVA. The overhead position increased internal rotation relative to the dependent position when the forearm was neutral (-8.5 ± 2.5°, P = .04) and relative to the horizontal position when the forearm was supinated (-12.7 ± 2.2°, P= .02). During active extension, pronation increased valgus angle compared to the neutral (+1.2 ± 0.3°, P= .04) and supinated (+1.5 ± 0.4°, P= .03) positions, but did not affect IER. There was no difference between active and passive motion with the arm overhead (P > .05).

DISCUSSION

Movement of the injured elbow in the overhead position most closely replicated kinematics of the intact elbow compared to the other arm positions.

CONCLUSIONS

Overhead elbow extension results in similar kinematics between an intact elbow and an elbow with MCL and LCL tears. As such, therapists might consider early motion in this position to reduce the risk of elbow stiffness after dislocation.

Early functional mobilization for non-operative treatment of simple elbow dislocations: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review aims to elucidate a non-operative rehabilitation program that optimizes recovery based on published approaches and outcomes.

METHODS

Searches of four databases from inception to 1 January 2020 were performed to identify clinical studies addressing the non-operative management of simple elbow dislocations.

RESULTS

Of 2435 studies that were eligible for title screen, 15 studies satisfied inclusion criteria. Three randomized control studies demonstrated that early mobilization expedited the return of range of motion, function and return to work or activities, however, resulted in increased pain within the six-week rehabilitation period compared to Plaster of Paris casting for 21 days. Patients returned to work sooner after early mobilization (10 vs. 18 days; p = 0.02) compared to Plaster of Paris casting. In all studies, early mobilization resulted in similar re-dislocation rates of 1.3% (3/237) versus 2.2% (12/549) in those with Plaster of Paris casting as well as lower incidence of heterotopic ossification (36% vs. 54%). No significant differences between rehabilitation protocols were determined; however, the large majority of recent papers utilized rehabilitation protocols.

CONCLUSION

Early mobilization of simple elbow dislocations results in early return of Range-of-Motion, function and return to work with no increase in complication rates; however, increased pain during the rehabilitation period.

Simple traumatic elbow dislocations; benefit from early functional rehabilitation: A systematic review with meta-analysis including PRISMA criteria

INTRODUCTION

Elbow dislocation is the second most frequent joint dislocation after shoulder dislocation. They have a high relevance because they can result in subsequent damage and limitations in range of motion. The treatment options are controversially discussed.The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review the literature and analyze the evidence of early functional rehabilitation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed via Ovid Medline, whereby 1645 publications were identified and evaluated in a stepwise approach. Of these publications 29 met the inclusion criteria of the authors and described simple elbow dislocations in 5765 patients.Data from the studies and subgroups included were initially categorized descriptively in conservative and surgical primary therapies, in immobilizing (immobilization lasting 2 weeks or longer) and free-functional follow-up treatments, and those data were then extracted from each subgroup in absolutes. We then pooled these numbers into descriptive statistics to ensure their comparability. We determined the success rates from the numbers of excellent and good results of the specific used outcome scores.

RESULTS

The effect estimate of the conservative therapy's success rate was 84% and for surgical treatment 80% (P < .0001). The difference between the immobilizing treatment (78% success rate) and early-function therapy (83% success rate) was significant (P = .002).In a subgroup analysis the success rate of conservative and immobilizing therapy was 79%, of conservative and early-functional therapy 91%, of surgical and immobilizing groups' was 77% and of the surgical and early-functional therapies was 93%. The difference among the 4 treatment options was significant (P < .0001), as were differences between the 2 conservative groups (P < .0001) and between the 2 surgical groups (P = .044).

DISCUSSION

Conservative therapy is the dominant therapy. Regardless of the primary therapy chosen in simple elbow dislocations: early functional follow-up care seems to be superior to immobilizing therapy with a duration more than 2 weeks.

Elbow hemiarthroplasty for intra-articular distal humerus fractures: results and technique

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to report results of elbow hemiarthroplasty for comminuted, intra-articular distal humerus fractures in low-demand elderly female patients.

Methods

This is a retrospective case series of eight patients who underwent elbow hemiarthroplasty for comminuted, intra-articular distal humerus fractures between 2015 and 2019. Patients were considered for the procedure if the humeral fractures were deemed nonreconstructable by open reduction internal fixation. Patients were excluded if the extensor mechanism was not intact, evidence of significant ulnohumeral osteoarthritis, or a fracture to the proximal radius or ulna. A "triceps-on" approach was used in all cases. Appropriate sizing of the spool and length of the implant were determined by intraoperative fluoroscopy. Both ulnar collateral ligament and the lateral ulnar collateral ligaments were repaired through the central spool after final placement of the implant. Postoperative radiographs, clinical data, and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score were used to assess elbow pain and function.

Results

Seven patients were included in final analysis. One patient was excluded from final analysis after sustaining a ground-level elbow dislocation at 13 weeks postoperatively, which subsequently revised to total elbow arthroplasty. The average age at the final follow-up was 72.1 years and duration of follow-up was 29.9 months (range 11.4-58.8 months). Average elbow range of motion was 21° ± 15° extension, 135° ± 9° flexion, 87° ± 5° pronation and 84° ± 8° supination. The average Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 88.3 (range 85-95; or "good" to "excellent") at the final follow-up. Postoperative ulnar neuropathy was reported by one patient at the first postoperative visit. This was followed up clinically and evaluation at 24 months revealed mild residual sensory deficits and adequate strength and motor function.

Conclusion

Elbow hemiarthroplasty using the humeral component of the total elbow arthroplasty is an option for treatment of isolated, comminuted distal humerus fractures in select patient populations. The ideal candidates are elderly, low-demand, and able to adhere to postoperative activity and weight-bearing restrictions. Overall patient satisfaction with off-label use of humeral component of commercially available total elbow implants in the United States is promising, yet development of a more anatomic spool is warranted to further optimize outcomes intraoperatively. Some advantages of elbow hemiarthroplasty are a less-demanding operation and avoids complications associated with linked design including polyethylene wear, periprosthetic fracture, or implant loosening. Limitations of this study include small sample size and retrospective nature of the study.

The post-traumatic stiff elbow: A review

Upper extremity function is highly dependent on elbow motion in order to adequately position the hand in space. Loss of this motion due to stiffness following trauma can cause patients substantial disability, leading to difficulties with performing activities of daily living. Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is challenging to treat, and therefore prevention is of paramount importance. Key measures that can be used to prevent elbow stiffness are early surgical intervention for fracture or joint instability, as well as active mobilisation, which helps to prevent oedema and an increase in viscosity of inflammatory exudates. Other options include splinting and continuous passive mobilisation. Once non-operative methods of addressing post-traumatic stiffness have been exhausted, arthrolysis of the stiff elbow can be performed via open or arthroscopic means depending on the type of pathology involved (intrinsic or extrinsic contracture) and experience of the surgeon with elbow arthroscopy. The particular open approach used depends on several factors, which include the formation and location of any heterotopic ossification present. Improvements in range of motion can be expected with both open and arthroscopic techniques, which can be effective and rewarding for patients. Post-operative rehabilitation, particularly early active mobilisation, should be considered essential in order to optimise patient outcomes following surgery. This review aims to explore elbow stiffness following traumatic aetiology, assessing its pathogenesis and prevention, as well as reviewing surgical treatment options and post-operative rehabilitation.

An Update on Simple Elbow Dislocations: A Protocol for Early Return to Sport in High School Wrestlers

ABSTRACT

The principles and management of simple elbow dislocations have evolved over time. In the past, a conservative approach of immobilization and slow rehabilitation were used. More modern treatments emphasize an understanding of the soft tissues about the elbow joint and prescribe an aggressive approach to regaining motion. Elbow stiffness is a common effect of the injury. We outline our treatment principles in a series of high school wrestlers with simple elbow dislocation. The ultimate goal is to return to sport in a safe but early timeframe. We recommend a brief period of immobilization with close follow-up and no motion restrictions after immobilization is removed. This review and case series emphasize the importance of aggressive but safe return to sport in high school wrestlers with an elbow dislocation.

Elbow Fracture-Dislocations: Determining Treatment Strategies

Elbow dislocations represent common injuries. A quarter of these injuries involve at least 1 fracture. The sequel of elbow fracture-dislocations can be fraught with complications, including recurrent instability, posttraumatic arthritis, elbow contracture, and poor functional results. The 3 main patterns of injury are valgus posterolateral rotatory instability, varus posteromedial rotatory instability, and transolecranon fracture-dislocation. This article discusses each pattern individually, including the anatomy, the typical injury pattern, and treatment strategies. It also discusses common complications that can occur.

Rehabilitation of Elbow Instability

The elbow is the second most commonly dislocated major joint in adults with estimated incidence of 5 dislocations per 100,000 persons per year. A comprehensive understanding of elbow anatomy and biomechanics is essential to optimize rehabilitation of elbow injuries. This allows for implementation of a systematic therapy program that encourages early mobilization within a safe arc of motion while maintaining joint stability. To optimize outcomes, close communication between surgeon and therapist is necessary to allow for implementation of an individualized rehabilitation program. This article reviews key concepts that enable the clinician to apply an evidence-informed approach when managing elbow instability.

Early Rehabilitation after Surgical Repair of Medial and Lateral Collateral Elbow Ligaments: A Report of Three Cases

Elbow ligament injuries are commonly caused by overuse; degeneration; and trauma; such as from a fall or collision. The purpose of this study was to present the results of three cases involving patients undergoing early rehabilitation after surgical treatment for complex injury of the elbow medial collateral ligament (MCL) and lateral collateral ligament (LCL). Two patients were non-athlete middle-aged women and one was a recreational judo player. Surgery was performed through open incision or arthroscopically. Rehabilitation consisted of range of motion (ROM) exercise; muscle strength restoration; and neuromuscular training. Passive ROM exercise and isometric strength exercise began at 7 days; isotonic strength training at 6 weeks; and neuromuscular training at 3 months after operation. Center- and home-based methods of exercise participation were combined. Center-based exercises were performed 1–2 times per week for the first 6 months and 1–2 times per month for the next 6 months. Patients also performed home-based and self-monitoring exercise. Examinations included ROM using a goniometer; muscle strength test using isokinetic equipment; and Oxford elbow score. In the six months after surgery; flexion ROM was 130° for Case A (health side 145°), 110° for Case B (health side 145°), and 135° for Case C (health side 135°); grip strength was restored to 13 kg (health side 28 kg), 16 kg (health side 25 kg), and 38 kg (health side 52 kg); and isokinetic flexion strength was improved to 30 Nm (health side 58 Nm), 21 Nm (health side 50 Nm), and 72 Nm (health side 80 Nm), respectively. In conclusion; patients who underwent early rehabilitation recovered ROM and muscle strength and returned to daily activity without any side effects. This study showed that patients with elbow MCL and LCL injuries took approximately 3 months to recover meaningful ROM; approximately 6 months to recover muscle strength; and 4–8 months to play light recreational sports. In addition; it took patients 6 weeks to return to their daily activities and 6 months to improve questionnaire scores in their function and pain during daily activity. In follow-up two years after surgery; all three patients had full ROM and muscle strength within 10% of the healthy side

Elbow Dislocation

This article is a brief overview of the elbow dislocations focusing on updates in treatment and rehabilitation protocols. The fight between obtaining elbow stability without leading to long-term elbow stiffness has been a continued focus in field of sports medicine. This article highlights advances made to help treat the injuries appropriately and obtain optimal patient outcomes.

Primary Ligament Repair for Acute Elbow Dislocation

The elbow is the second most common site for joint dislocation after the shoulder. Elbow dislocations are classified according to the direction of dislocation, with most (80%) being posterolateral. A spectrum of soft-tissue injury may also be present, depending on the direction of dislocation and the energy applied. Most dislocations of the elbow can be treated nonoperatively, but recurrent instability and/or stiffness occur in up to 10% and 40% of patients, respectively. The aim of early surgical stabilization is to prevent these long-term complications. To avoid overtreatment, magnetic resonance imaging is used to identify patients at a greater risk of complications by determining the grade of soft-tissue injury. Those with grade-3 or 4 injuries are managed with fluoroscopic examination under anesthesia. (1) The patient is positioned supine. Fluoroscopic examination is performed with the elbow in full extension and in 30° of flexion. Varus stress is applied with the forearm in pronation. If >10° of joint opening is found, open surgical repair of the lateral ligament complex and common extensor origin is performed. (2) A 5-cm incision is made using a direct lateral approach centered on the lateral epicondyle. The tough lateral fascia may be intact and should be incised in line with the anconeus interval. (3) A rent in the common extensor origin may be found, which can be used for the approach; otherwise, proceed with a Kocher approach to identify the sleeve avulsion of the lateral ligament complex from the humerus. (4) A number-2 synthetic braided suture is used to whip-stitch the lateral ulnar collateral ligament, which is repaired to the lateral epicondyle with use of a bone anchor. The trailing suture ends from the anchor are used to repair the common extensor tendon origin with use of a Mayo needle. (5) With the forearm in supination to externally rotate the humerus and lock the shoulder, valgus instability is assessed with the elbow in full extension and in 30° of flexion. If the medial joint line opens >10°, repair the medial structures in the same manner as the lateral ligament complex through an incision posterior to the medial epicondyle while protecting the ulnar nerve. (6) The patient is referred to physiotherapy for immediate hourly overhead exercises. This approach should prevent complications of recurrent instability or stiffness, as early results have been encouraging with no complications recorded.

[Acute and chronic instability of the elbow joint]

Elbow dislocations are frequent and present with a broad spectrum of subsequent ligamentous and soft tissue injuries. Beside clinical examination, fluoroscopy, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can specify the extent of the injuries and provide a foundation for decision-making between conservative and operative treatment. This article highlights the basic underlying biomechanics and anatomy, discusses the trauma mechanisms and presents clinical and imaging diagnostic procedures. Treatment algorithms for conservative and surgical treatment are presented in detail. In addition to acute instability, chronic instability of the elbow has recently been recognized as the cause of a large variety of symptoms, often resulting in significant functional impairment. The most commonly used techniques for reconstruction of the medial and lateral collateral ligaments and the rehabilitation protocols are described in detail.

[Chronic ligamentous instability of the elbow]

BACKGROUND

Chronic ligamentous instability of the elbow is an important pathology as it is accompanied with pronounced dysfunction. Moreover, it represents an established risk factor for the development of osteoarthritis. Posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI) caused by insufficiency of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) is the most common type of chronic elbow instability and is usually a sequel of traumatic elbow dislocation. Chronic overload can lead to insufficiency of the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) with subsequent valgus instability, especially in overhead athletes.

DIAGNOSTICS

Subjective instability and recurrent elbow dislocations are not always the main symptoms but elbow instability is instead often characterized by pain and secondary joint stiffness. Many clinical tests are available yet eliciting them can be difficult and inconclusive. A "drop sign" on lateral radiographs as well as the detection of collateral ligament injuries and joint incongruity on MRI scans can support the suspected diagnosis. In some cases, instability can only be verified by diagnostic arthroscopy.

TREATMENT

Reconstruction of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) for treatment of PLRI generally leads to good clinical results, yet recurrent instability remains an issue and has been reported in 8 % of cases. UCL reconstruction for chronic valgus instability leads to a return-to-sports rate of about 86 % in the overhead athlete. Ulnar neuropathy, which is seen in approximately 6 % of patients, represents the most common complication. On the rare occasion of multidirectional instability, the box-loop technique can be used for simultaneous reconstruction of the LUCL and UCL with a circumferential graft. 15 cases with promising results have been reported in literature thus far.

[Elbow dislocation fractures]

The treatment of complex elbow dislocation fractures is a challenge to both the treating surgeon as well as to the patient due to the complex bony and soft tissue anatomy of the joint. In order to establish an expedient treatment algorithm, all osseous and ligamentous injuries need to be thoroughly assessed. Furthermore, a detailed knowledge of the joint-stabilizing structures, practicable surgical approaches as well as the possible techniques for fracture fixation and/or arthroplasty are essential to facilitate early rehabilitation of the elbow and avoid injury-related complications. Any unnecessary delay in treatment of this complex injury can result in posttraumatic functional disorders, recurrent instability and secondary arthrosis. In conclusion, the goals of surgical treatment must be the correct restoration of the joint anatomy and stability as the prerequisites for any successful treatment of elbow fracture dislocations in order to enable early motion of the joint.

Simple elbow dislocation

The elbow is the second most commonly dislocated major joint in adults. Good long-term outcomes have been reported after non-operative management; however, a small proportion (<10%) of patients have a poor outcome and some do require surgical intervention. A review of the anatomy, pathoanatomy, management and outcomes of simple elbow dislocations is presented. Emphasis is placed on emerging concepts regarding the soft tissue injury, the stabilising structures that are injured, the sequence and mechanism of injury and the relationship to elbow stability. The benefits of nonsurgical and surgical management are discussed and a treatment algorithm based on the pathoanatomy is proposed.

Extensive soft tissue lesions in redislocated after simple elbow dislocations

BACKGROUND

The majority of simple elbow dislocations (no associated fractures) can be treated nonoperatively with a short period of immobilization followed by guided aftercare. This case series describes the soft tissue injuries in a rare subset of patients in whom the elbow redislocated despite adequate immobilization.

METHODS

During a 6-year period, 8 patients were identified. They were all treated with reduction and casting in 90° of flexion or more. At 1 week of follow-up, redislocation had occurred in all patients and open soft tissue repair was performed. The injuries were documented and the patients were followed up clinically and with radiographs.

RESULTS

Extensive soft tissue injuries, including both collateral ligament injuries and muscle origin avulsions from either or both sides, were found in all patients. The functional result at follow-up was satisfactory in all patients.

CONCLUSION

Vast soft tissue injuries including both collateral ligaments and muscle origins should be expected in the event of early severe instability of a dislocated elbow joint.

Management Of Recent Elbow Dislocations: Functional Treatment Versus Immobilization; A Prospective Study About 60 Cases

Objective:

To determine our therapeutic posture trough a comparison of functional treatment results versus immobilization in two different periods.

Introduction:

For years, the treatment of recent elbow dislocations consisted of reduction and immobilization during 21 days. Given the frequency of stiffness other methods have been tried out.

Method:

A prospective study was carried out from January 2010 to December 2014. Sixty patients averaging 28.3 years of age underwent elbow dislocation reduction. They were categorized into three separate groups. Patients in the first group had their elbow immobilized for 21 days whereas Group 2 patients were immobilized for 10 days. Group 3 patients were applied a functional treatment followed by a functional rehabilitation. Patients were evaluated according to the Mayo Clinic Elbow Performance Index and the results analyzed with statistical software (SPSS, version 18).

Results:

During the first month, the functional results of the patients were excellent and good in 19%, 94.7% and 90% respectively for Groups 1, 2 and 3. The pain was intense (10 on the visual analogue scale) in group 3 associated with swelling. At day 90, the results of the patients in Groups 2 and 3 were excellent in 100% of the cases versus 90% for Group 1. At 6 months, all the results were the same. We have not noted any instability, or recurrence or periarticular ossification in our patients.

Conclusion:

The treatment of stable elbow dislocations remains orthopedic. The risk of instability and pain motivates a short 10-day immobilization period followed by early mobilization.

Conservative management of the post-traumatic stiff elbow: a physiotherapist's perspective

Elbow stiffness is a common consequence following trauma with the management of this condition posing a challenge to therapists and surgeons alike. This paper discusses the role of conservative treatment, such as exercise and splinting, in the prevention and management of the stiff elbow, along with a review of available evidence, to justify their usage.