Terrible Triad Injuries of the Elbow

Non-operative management of terrible triad injuries of the elbow; not so terrible?

Introduction

Terrible triad injuries (TTIs) of the elbow have traditionally been reported to have poor outcomes, hence requiring surgical stabilisation. We identified and reviewed patients with TTIs treated non-operatively within our department.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients with TTI treated non-operatively with standardised elbow-instability rehabilitation from 2010 to 2020. We used Mason and Morrey classifications for radial head and coronoid fractures, respectively. Non-operative indications included a congruent joint on CT, significant co-morbidities pre-disposing to high-risk surgery and/or patient preference. Outcomes included Oxford Elbow Score (OES), ROM and complications.

Results

Nineteen patients were included (mean age 49; 37% female). At an average of 6 years (range 2-11 years) post-treatment, mean OES was 46 ± 7. At last clinic review, mean 6 months (2-15), average ROM was 131 ± 11° flexion, 8 ± 10° extension, 85 ± 12° supination and 85 ± 13° pronation. One patient required arthrolysis and another had an incongruent ulnohumeral joint which developed clicking with a functional ROM.

Conclusion

Our report suggests non-operatively managed and appropriately rehabilitated TTI injuries can achieve good function and ROM. We recommend conservative management as a viable option in cases with joint congruency and no mechanical block in patients with significant co-morbidities or those refusing surgery but patients must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

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.

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.

The Terrible Triad of the Elbow Accompanied by Capitellum and Humerus Shaft Fracture: A Rare Case Report

The terrible triad of the elbow consists of radial head fracture and coronoid process fracture in addition to posterior dislocation of the elbow. It indicates high-risk complications such as instability, malunion, nonunion, and proximal radioulnar synostosis. We describe a rare case that was admitted to the emergency service with a terrible triad of the elbow with additional capitellum fracture, lateral collateral ligament (LCL) injury, and ipsilateral humeral shaft fracture. We treated the patient urgently by performing osteosynthesis of the humeral shaft fracture, radial head fracture, coronoid fracture, capitellum fractures, and repair of the LCL rupture. The terrible triad of the elbow also can be accompanied by adjacent column fractures, including the humeral shaft. In such complex cases, preoperative planning should be done well, and the entire anatomy should be demonstrated with additional imaging. Optimal treatment of all the fractured bones and ligaments is critical for early rehabilitation. The main aim of surgery is to acquire desired results by starting an early rehabilitation, including joint movement.

Terrible triad injuries are no longer terrible! Functional outcomes of terrible triad injuries: a scoping review

Background

The terrible triad injury (TTI) of the elbow is a combination of a posterolateral dislocation of the elbow joint combined with fractures of the radial head and coronoid process most often caused by a fall on an outstretched hand. The injury pattern was named for its poor outcomes and high complication rates following surgical repair, but increased understanding of elbow anatomy and biomechanics has led to the development of standardized surgical protocols in an attempt to improve outcomes. Most existing literature on terrible triad injuries is from small retrospective cohort studies and surgical techniques to improve outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the functional outcomes, prognosis, and complications following current surgical treatment of TTIs.

Methods

A scoping review was performed to evaluate the literature. In total, 617 studies were identified and screened by 2 reviewers, with 43 studies included for qualitative analysis. These 43 studies underwent data extraction for functional outcomes using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score (DASH) and were stratified accordingly. Secondary outcome measures assessed in the study were a range of motion (ROM) and complication rate.

Results

The average MEPS was 90 (excellent) from a total of 37 studies with 1609 patients, and the average DASH score was 16 from 16 studies with 441 patients. Another 6 studies with a total of 127 patients reported a mean Q-DASH score of 13. A total of 39 studies consisting of 1637 patients had a mean forearm rotation of 135 degrees, and 36 studies consisting of 1606 patients had a mean flexion-extension arc of 113 degrees. Among the studies, there was a 30% complication rate with a need for revision surgery in 7.8% of cases. The most common complications were radiographic evidence of heterotopic ossification (11%) and ulnar nerve neuropathy (2.6%).

Discussion/Conclusions

This study shows that current surgical treatment for terrible triad injuries has resulted in improved outcomes. Based on primary outcome measures using MEPS and DASH scores, almost all of the studies have highlighted good or excellent functional outcomes. This highlighted the marked improvement in outcome scores since the term was coined, suggesting that terrible triad injuries may no longer be so terrible.

Elbow Instability

The stability of the elbow is based on a combination of primary (static) and secondary stabilizers (dynamic). In varus stress, the bony structures and the lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) are the primary stabilizers, and in valgus stress, the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) is the primary stabilizer. The flexor and extensor tendons crossing the elbow joint act as secondary stabilizers. Elbow instability is commonly divided into acute traumatic and chronic instability. Instability of the elbow is a continuum, with complete dislocation as its most severe form.Posterolateral rotatory instability is the most common elbow instability and can be detected at imaging both in the acute as well as the chronic phase. Imaging of suspected elbow instability starts with radiographs. Depending on the type of injury suspected, it is followed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography evaluation for depiction of a range of soft tissue and osseous injures. The most common soft tissue injuries are tears of the LUCL and the radial collateral ligament; the most common osseous injuries are an osseous LUCL avulsion, a fracture of the coronoid process, and a radial head fracture.Valgus instability is the second most common instability and mostly detected in the chronic phase, with valgus extension overload the dominant pattern of injury. The anterior part of the UCL is insufficient in valgus extension overload due to repetitive medial tension seen in many overhead throwing sports, with UCL damage readily seen at MRI.

Clinical Management of Arthrofibrosis: State of the Art and Therapeutic Outlook

* Arthrofibrosis is a pathologic condition that is characterized by excessive periarticular scar-tissue formation. Arthrofibrosis may occur secondary to injury, surgical trauma, hemarthrosis, or infection, or it may occur idiopathically.* The pathogenesis of arthrofibrosis is incompletely understood but involves the dysregulation of normal reparative pathways, with transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-[beta]) as a principal mediator.* Current treatment options for arthrofibrosis primarily involve physiotherapy, operative manipulation, and surgical debridement, all with imperfect results.* Currently, there are no pharmacologic treatment options for arthrofibrosis. This has prompted increased investigational interest in the development of antifibrotic intra-articular therapies.

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.

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.

What Factors Are Associated with Reoperation After Operative Treatment of Terrible Triad Injuries?

BACKGROUND

Terrible triad injuries of the elbow, consisting of posterior ulnohumeral joint dislocation with associated fractures of the radial head and coronoid process, are challenging injuries due to the difficulty in restoring stability to the joint surgically while also attempting to allow early ROM to prevent stiffness. Furthermore, complications are both debilitating and relatively common, frequently requiring reoperation.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What patient-, injury-, or surgery-related factors are associated with reoperation after surgical treatment of terrible triad injuries of the elbow? (2) What are the most common causes of reoperation after these injuries?

METHODS

Between January 2000 and June 2017, we identified 114 patients who had surgery for terrible triad injuries at two tertiary-care referral centers. Of those, 40% (46 of 114) were lost to follow-up before 1 year, and an additional 5% (6 of 114) were excluded because they underwent the index surgery at an outside institution (n = 4) or underwent closed reduction with or without percutaneous pinning (n = 2). That left 62 patients for analysis in this retrospective study with a minimum of 1-year follow-up (median 22 months; range 12 to 65) or who met the endpoint of reoperation before 1 year. During the study period, indications for surgical treatment of terrible triad injuries of the elbow included joint incongruity or instability precluding early ROM. In our study cohort, 45% (28 of 62) underwent reoperation. Indications for reoperation after surgical treatment included stiffness that interfered with activities of daily life, symptomatic prominent hardware, ulnar neuropathy, instability of the elbow joint at rest or with range of motion, and infection. Patient-related (such as age, sex, race), injury-related (for example, ipsilateral extremity fracture, open fracture), and surgery-related factors (for instance, time to surgery, radial head treatment) as well as outcomes were collected by the treating surgeon at the time of follow-up and ascertained using chart review. The primary outcome measure was reoperation after surgical treatment of a terrible triad injury of the elbow. Bivariate analysis was used to assess whether explanatory variables were associated with reoperation after surgical treatment of terrible triad injuries of the elbow.

RESULTS

Of the patient-, injury-, and surgery-related factors that were analyzed, only radial head treatment was associated with an increased reoperation risk (p = 0.03). No other variable met criteria for inclusion in our multivariable logistic regression model (p < 0.10), and therefore, a multivariable logistic regression model was not performed. The most common indication for reoperation was stiffness (21% [13 of 62 patients]), followed by symptomatic hardware (18% [11 of 62 patients]), nerve symptoms (ulnar neuropathy 16% [10 of 62 patients] and incisional neuroma 2% [1 of 62 patients]), instability (6% [4 of 62 patients]), and wound problems (infection 2% [1 of 62 patients]).

CONCLUSION

The reoperation risk after surgical treatment of terrible triad injuries of the elbow is high. No patient- or injury-related factors were associated with the reoperation risk. Based on our finding, we recommend fixation of radial head fractures in these injuries when feasible and compatible with early postoperative motion, and we suggest the use of radial head excision or arthroplasty as a secondary options.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

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.

Treatment of terrible triad injuries at a mean follow-up of nine years

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the sustainability of the early clinical and radiological outcomes of terrible triad injuries at long-term follow-up.

METHODS

Twelve consecutive patients who underwent fixation of terrible triad injuries with minimum of seven years of follow-up. Functional and radiological outcomes at one year and final follow-up were compared. We assessed Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Quick-Disability of the Arm Shoulder and Hand, and modified-American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Scores. Radiological evaluation included Broberg and Morrey classification and Hastings classification for heterotopic ossification.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 55 years, with a median follow-up of 9.3 years. At final evaluation, mean flexion, extension, supination, and pronation were 145°, 6°, 82°, and 80°, respectively; mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score, modified-American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Scores, and Quick-Disability of the Arm Shoulder and Hand scores were, respectively, 97, 92, and 4.9 points. There was no statistical difference between early and final follow-up range of motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score, and Quick-Disability of the Arm Shoulder and Hand. However, radiological changes were observed in 66% of the patients at final follow-up. Two patients underwent reoperation, with final satisfactory results.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggested that using a standardized protocol, satisfactory clinical outcomes at early follow-up could be maintained over time. However, early complications and osteoarthritic changes at long-term follow-up can be expected.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV Cases series.

Protocolised surgical treatment of terrible triad of elbow. Results and complications

BACKGROUND

Terrible triad of elbow is a complex lesion with a high rate of complications. Our goal is to analyse both clinical results and complications after performing protocolised surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The database of our hospital was used during 2005-2015, collecting characteristics of the patient, the fracture, the surgery and the associated complications, as well as functional results and range of mobility.

RESULTS

A total of 62 triads were obtained, of which 27 (43%) were women and 35 (56%) were men. All had a Kaplan lateral approach and those who needed it were complemented with a medial approach to repair the LCM. The radial head was synthesized in 14 (22%) cases, a prosthesis was placed in 45 (74%) cases and other actions in 3 (5%) cases. Osteosynthesis of the choroid process was performed by transosseous harpoon±suture in 41 (62%) patients and by synthesis in 12 (19%) cases. In 9 (14%) cases, no action was taken. In 100% of the cases the LCL was repaired and in 9 (14%) the LCM also had to be repaired. Twenty-two percent of the patients required ESA due to instability after the surgical technique. With respect to results, a range of mobility was obtained between 120°/-20° of flexoextension and 98°/85° of pronosupination. In terms of complications, we obtained a total of 17 (27%).

CONCLUSIONS

Elbow triads are complex lesions where protocolised surgery is necessary, nevertheless the complication rate was 27% in our series.

The naked capitellum: a surgeon's guide to intraoperative identification of posterolateral rotatory instability

HYPOTHESIS

This study's purpose was to provide a reproducible way for surgeons to intraoperatively assess the elbow's lateral ulnar collateral ligament origin and determine whether there is posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI) despite an intact common extensor origin (CEO). We hypothesized that we could re-create clinically relevant disruption of lateral supporting structures despite an intact CEO and illustrate progressive elbow PLRI.

METHODS

The relationship of the lateral capsule to the capitellum articular surface was noted in 8 cadaveric upper extremities. The lateral capsule and extensor origin were sequentially sectioned at 4 stages: intact, release to the lateral epicondyle, release of the posterior capsular insertion, and release of the CEO. Posterior and lateral translation of the radial head (RH) relative to the capitellum was measured with the forearm in extension and supination.

RESULTS

The average specimen age was 78.9 years. The lateral capsule originated within 1 to 2 mm of the capitellum articular surface. Lateral capsular sectioning to the 6-o'clock position of the lateral epicondyle created an unstable elbow with posterior and lateral RH translation. Sequential sectioning of the posterior capsular insertion created significant additional RH translation posteriorly (P < .05). With release of the capsule and the extensor origin, the elbow was grossly unstable.

CONCLUSIONS

The elbow's lateral capsuloligamentous complex plays an important role in preventing PLRI. Larger degrees of elbow laxity are associated with further peel back of the capsuloligamentous complex despite an intact CEO. The surgeon must retract the extensor origin intraoperatively to assess for lateral ulnar collateral ligament and/or lateral capsule disruption to prevent a missed case of PLRI.

Pediatric Terrible Triad Injury of the Elbow: A Rare and Easily Missed Injury: A Case Report

CASE

We report the case of a pediatric terrible triad injury of the elbow consisting of an ulnohumeral dislocation, a radial neck fracture, and a coronoid chondral injury, which was diagnosed at 14 days following injury. We describe our surgical technique and provide details of the postoperative course, including the development of a rotational contracture following heterotopic ossification.

CONCLUSION

We describe a rare and challenging injury that should be recognized early and managed surgically to maintain acceptable elbow function.

The radiocapitellar synovial fold: a lateral anatomic landmark for sizing radial head arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Successful radial head arthroplasty relies on reproduction of anatomy. We hypothesized that the radiocapitellar synovial fold could serve as a reference point in radial head prosthesis sizing. Our study aimed to define the relationship between the synovial fold and the radial head in elbows with and without lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of 34 elbows to determine the normal relationship between the radiocapitellar synovial fold and the radial head. Next, we used cadaveric dissections to evaluate the anatomic relationships with the LUCL intact and disrupted, as well as in the setting of sizing with a radial head prosthesis. The fold-to-radial head distance (FRHD) was measured on all images and analyzed to determine the relationship of the synovial fold and radial head.

RESULTS

The FRHD in cadavers with an intact LUCL and native radial head measured an average of 1.5 mm proximal to the radial head. With the LUCL disrupted and a native radial head, the FRHD measured an average of 1.2 mm proximal to the radial head. The mean difference between the groups was 0.5 mm (P = .031), suggesting that the fold migrated distally in the cadavers with a disrupted LUCL.

CONCLUSION

The radiocapitellar synovial fold may be a helpful landmark for radial head sizing. The synovial fold is always just proximal to the articular surface of the radial head. Using this information, the surgeon can prevent overlengthening as the implant should not be placed proximal to the fold.

Does Timing of Surgery Affect Treatment of the Terrible Triad of the Elbow?

BACKGROUND This study investigated the influence of surgical timing on the treatment of terrible triad of the elbow (TTE). MATERIAL AND METHODS After exclusion, 63 patients were enrolled in this study: 20 patients were classified into the emergency group (group A, within 24 h after injury), 26 into the early surgery group (group B, from 4 to 14 days after injury), and 17 into the delayed surgery group (group C, more than 14 days after injury). All patients underwent the same approach, and elbow motion and complication rates were recorded and compared. RESULTS Fifty-eight patients were followed up (mean 20.5±1.9 months), and 5 patients had lost partial final data. At 1 month after the operation, elbow motion in group A was higher than in group B and group C (P<0.01); however, 3 or more months later, there was no distinct difference between group A and group B (P>0.05), while both group A and group B showed better outcomes than group C at all time points (P<0.05). Moreover, group A and group B had better higher elbow motion, MEPS, excellent and good rate than group C at the final clinical visit (all P<0.05). No postoperative pain or complication rate differences were found among the 3 groups except for elbow stiffness (2 in group A, 3 in group B, and 7 in group C) (P<0.05) which required reoperation to enhance elbow function. CONCLUSIONS Emergency or early operation for TTE patients were more effective than delayed operation.

Outcomes following surgical management of complex terrible triad injuries of the elbow: a single surgeon case series

BACKGROUND

Terrible triad injuries of the elbow are complex injuries to treat and we report our outcomes following surgical management.

METHODS

Twenty-two consecutive patients who underwent fixation of terrible triad injuries between 2007 and 2012 were identified. Clinical outcomes were assessed by examination, visual analogue scores (VAS), Oxford Elbow Score (OES), Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and QuickDash score (QD).

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 47 years, with a mean follow-up of 32 months. All patients underwent lateral ligament repair, with additional medial ligament repair in four cases. Thirteen patients required repair of the coronoid and 18 patients required surgery to the radial head. The mean flexion-extension arc was 113°, with mean prono-supination of 136°. The functional elbow scores revealed good outcomes in the majority (mean OES of 37, MEPI of 79 and QD of 21). The overall complication rate was 41%. In total, 23% required reoperation, with one patient requiring fasciotomy for acute compartment syndrome and four requiring subsequent removal of metalwork as a result of stiffness.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognition of this complex injury pattern and appropriate restoration of the joint stability are the prerequisites. Systematic surgical approach is effective and can provide both stability and good function, in most cases.

Applying a Hybrid Experimental-Computational Technique to Study Elbow Joint Ligamentous Stabilizers

Much of our understanding of the role of elbow ligaments to overall joint biomechanics has been developed through in vitro cadaver studies using joint motion simulators. The principle of superposition can be used to indirectly compute the force contributions of ligaments during prescribed motions. Previous studies have analyzed the contribution of different soft tissue structures to the stability of human elbow joints, but have limitations in evaluating the loads sustained by those tissues. This paper introduces a unique, hybrid experimental-computational technique for measuring and simulating the biomechanical contributions of ligaments to elbow joint kinematics and stability. in vitro testing of cadaveric joints is enhanced by the incorporation of fully parametric virtual ligaments, which are used in place of the native joint stabilizers to characterize the contribution of elbow ligaments during simple flexion–extension (FE) motions using the principle of superposition. Our results support previously reported findings that the anterior medial collateral ligament (AMCL) and the radial collateral ligament (RCL) are the primary soft tissue stabilizers for the elbow joint. Tuned virtual ligaments employed in this study were able to restore the kinematics and laxity of elbows to within 2 deg of native joint behavior. The hybrid framework presented in this study demonstrates promising capabilities in measuring the biomechanical contribution of ligamentous structures to joint stability.

[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.

Risk of Subluxation or Dislocation After Operative Treatment of Terrible Triad Injuries

OBJECTIVE

The management of terrible triad injuries has evolved over the last 2 decades to include routine radial head fixation or replacement, reattachment of the lateral collateral ligament, with or without coronoid fixation. Our objective was to determine the likelihood of and factors associated with subluxation or dislocation after operative treatment of terrible triad injuries among a large group of surgeons using current techniques.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Two level I trauma centers.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS

A total of 107 patients with operatively treated terrible triad injuries from January 2000 to June 2015.

INTERVENTION

Review of patient- and surgery-related factors during the first postoperative month.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

Radiographic subluxation of the ulnohumeral joint.

RESULTS

One hundred of the 107 patients (93%) treated with open fixation of terrible triad injuries had no radiographic subluxation or redislocation. Two patients (2%) had slight transient radiographic subluxation ("drop sign") that corrected with active exercises within weeks of surgery. Five patients (5%) had persistent radiographic subluxation, 3 treated with a second surgery (3%). When treated within 2 weeks of injury, recurrent subluxation or dislocation after operative fixation of terrible triad injuries was rare (1%), provided that the radial head was replaced and the lateral collateral ligament reattached.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiographic subluxation is very uncommon with current operative management of terrible triad injuries of the elbow within 2 weeks. Patients treated more than 2 weeks after injury might benefit from ancillary fixation to limit subluxation (ie, cross pinning, external fixation, or internal joint stabilizer).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Surgical Outcomes and Complications in Treatment of Terrible Triad of the Elbow: Comparisons of 3 Surgical Approaches

BACKGROUND This study compared the efficacy of combined lateral and medial approach, lateral approach, and anterior medial approach in treatment of terrible triad of the elbow (TTE). MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty-eight TTE patients hospitalized in our center were retrospectively analyzed, among which 14 patients were arranged for combined lateral and medial approach, 12 for lateral approach, and 12 for anterior medial approach. All included patients underwent open reduction, collateral ligament repair, and postoperative function exercise. Follow-up was conducted for 13~22 months. The elbow motion, excellent and good rate, healing time, and complication rate were recorded and compared. RESULTS These 3 approaches significantly improved the postoperative elbow motion, MEPS, VAS, excellent and good rate, and open reduction (all P<0.05). The VAS score for lateral approach was evidently higher than that for combined lateral and medial approach (P<0.05). Combined lateral and medial approach and anterior medial approach had better performance on elbow motion, MEPS, and excellent and good rate than lateral approach (both P<0.05). Lateral approach and anterior medial approach had a significantly reduced healing time compared with combined lateral and medial approach (both P<0.05), while anterior medial approach had a higher complication rate compared with anterior medial approach and lateral approach (both P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Lateral combined medial surgery approach contributes to wide surgical exposure, facture stability, and decreased complication rate, and thus has superior efficacy than the other 2 surgical approaches.