Silicone radial head prostheses revisited: do they have a role in today’s practice? A systematic review of literature on clinical outcomes

Background Silicone radial head prostheses (SRHP) are considered obsolete due to reports of frequent failure and destructive silicone-induced synovitis. Considering the good outcomes of modern non-radial silicone joint implants, the extent of scientific evidence for this negative view is unclear. The aim of this research was to systematically analyze the clinical evidence on complications and outcomes of SRHP and how SRHP compare to both non-SRHP and silicone prostheses of other joints. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted through the Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases. Results Eight cohort studies were included, consisting of 142 patients and follow-up periods ranging from 23 months to 8 years. Average patient satisfaction was 86%, range of 71%–100%, and 58 complications were seen, but no cases of synovitis. These outcomes were in line with non-SRHP. Four case series with 11 cases of synovitis were found, all due to implant fractures years to decades after implantation. Six systematic reviews of currently used non-radial silicone joint implants showed excellent outcomes with low complication rates. Conclusions Since SRHP have satisfactory clinical results and an acceptable complication rate when selecting a patient group in suitable condition for surgical indications, it is considered that SRHP can still be chosen as a potential surgical treatment method in current clinical practice. Level of evidence2A

A randomized controlled trial of nonoperative treatment versus open reduction and internal fixation for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head: The RAMBO trial

Background: The choice between operative or nonoperative treatment is questioned for partial articular fractures of the radial head that have at least 2 millimeters of articular step-off on at least one radiograph (defined as displaced), but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments (defined as stable) and that are not associated with an elbow dislocation, interosseous ligament injury, or other fractures. These kinds of fractures are often classified as Mason type-2 fractures. Retrospective comparative studies suggest that operative treatment might be better than nonoperative treatment, but the long-term results of nonoperative treatment are very good. Most experts agree that problems like reduced range of motion, painful crepitation, nonunion or bony ankylosis are infrequent with both nonoperative and operative treatment of an isolated displaced partial articular fracture of the radial head, but determining which patients will have problems is difficult. A prospective, randomized comparison would help minimize bias and determine the balance between operative and nonoperative risks and benefits. Methods/Design. The RAMBO trial (Radial Head - Amsterdam - Amphia - Boston - Others) is an international prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. The primary objective of this study is to compare patient related outcome defined by the \u27Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score\u27 twelve months after injury between operative and nonoperative treated patients. Adult patients with partial articular fractures of the radial head that comprise at least 1/3rd of the articular surface, have ≥ 2 millimeters of articular step-off but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments will be enrolled. Secondary outcome measures will be the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), pain intensity through the \u27Numeric Rating Scale\u27, range of motion (flexion arc and rotational arc), radiographic appearance of the fracture (heterotopic ossification, radiocapitellar and ulnohumeral arthrosis, fracture healing, and signs of implant loosening or breakage) and adverse events (infection, nerve injury, secondary interventions) after one year. Discussion. The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the best treatment for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head. Trial registration. The trial is registered at the Dutch Trial Register: NTR3413. © 2014Bruinsma et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

A randomized controlled trial of nonoperative treatment versus open reduction and internal fixation for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head: The RAMBO trial

Background: The choice between operative or nonoperative treatment is questioned for partial articular fractures of the radial head that have at least 2 millimeters of articular step-off on at least one radiograph (defined as displaced), but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments (defined as stable) and that are not associated with an elbow dislocation, interosseous ligament injury, or other fractures. These kinds of fractures are often classified as Mason type-2 fractures. Retrospective comparative studies suggest that operative treatment might be better than nonoperative treatment, but the long-term results of nonoperative treatment are very good. Most experts agree that problems like reduced range of motion, painful crepitation, nonunion or bony ankylosis are infrequent with both nonoperative and operative treatment of an isolated displaced partial articular fracture of the radial head, but determining which patients will have problems is difficult. A prospective, randomized comparison would help minimize bias and determine the balance between operative and nonoperative risks and benefits. Methods/Design. The RAMBO trial (Radial Head - Amsterdam - Amphia - Boston - Others) is an international prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. The primary objective of this study is to compare patient related outcome defined by the 'Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score' twelve months after injury between operative and nonoperative treated patients. Adult patients with partial articular fractures of the radial head that comprise at least 1/3rd of the articular surface, have ≥ 2 millimeters of articular step-off but less than 2 millimeter of gap between the fragments will be enrolled. Secondary outcome measures will be the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), pain intensity through the 'Numeric Rating Scale', range of motion (flexion arc and rotational arc), radiographic appearance of the fracture (heterotopic ossification, radiocapitellar and ulnohumeral arthrosis, fracture healing, and signs of implant loosening or breakage) and adverse events (infection, nerve injury, secondary interventions) after one year. Discussion. The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the best treatment for stable, displaced, partial articular fractures of the radial head. Trial registration. The trial is registered at the Dutch Trial Register: NTR3413

Improvements in elbow motion after resection of heterotopic bone: a systematic review

Complex elbow trauma, severe burn, or a closed head injury render patients at risk for developing heterotopic ossification around the elbow. When heterotopic ossification restricts elbow motion, some patients request surgical resection. We performed a systematic review of the literature to analyze improvement in elbow motion after resection of heterotopic ossification around the elbow. We found that, on average, etiology had little impact on outcome after resection of heterotopic ossification. Resection of heterotopic bone generally leads to improvement of elbow functio

The long-term outcome of open reduction and internal fixation of stable displaced isolated partial articular fractures of the radial head

Excellent long-term results have been reported for nonoperative treatment of stable isolated displaced partial articular (Mason 2) fractures of the radial head, suggesting that the role of operative treatment can be questioned. This investigation reports the long-term outcome of operatively treated Mason 2 radial head fractures. Sixteen patients with stable displaced partial articular (Mason 2) fractures of the radial head not associated with fracture or dislocation of the proximal forearm were evaluated an average of 22 years (range, 14-30 years) after open reduction and internal fixation with screws (11 patients) or a plate and screws (5 patients). Complications included two infections (1 deep and 1 superficial), two patients with restriction of motion because of screws of excessive length, and one transient posterior interosseous nerve palsy. A second surgery for implant removal was routine (14 of 16 patients). The average flexion arc was 129 degrees (range, 110-145 degrees) and the average forearm rotation arc was 166 degrees (range, 120-180 degrees). According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Index, elbow function was excellent in nine patients, good in four, fair in two, and poor in one patient. According to the classification system of Steinberg et al., there were three good, eight fair, and five poor results. The average score on the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire was 12 points (range, 0-52). The long-term results of operative treatment of stable isolated displaced partial articular (Mason 2) fractures of the radial head demonstrate no appreciable advantage over the long-term results of nonoperative treatment of these fractures published in prior reports. Moreover, the appeal of operative treatment is diminished by the potential complication

The posttraumatic stiff elbow: an update

Posttraumatic elbow stiffness is a disabling condition that remains challenging to treat despite improvement of our understanding of the pathogenesis of posttraumatic contractures and new treatment regimens. This review provides an update and overview of the etiology of posttraumatic elbow stiffness, its classification, evaluation, nonoperative and operative treatment, and postoperative managemen

Open reduction and internal fixation compared with excision for unstable displaced fractures of the radial head

To determine if excision of the radial head for treatment of an unstable, displaced fracture is associated with a higher rate of early complications or late arthrosis as compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). Unstable, displaced fractures of the radial head treated with either excision (15 patients) or ORIF (13 patients) were compared. Implants were removed routinely during the study period. Three patients had instability after radial head excision: 2 were treated in a cast and 1 had temporary pinning of the ulnohumeral joint. Two patients in the ORIF cohort had failure of fixation that subsequently was treated with radial head excision: 1 had early hardware loosening and 1 developed a nonunion. At the 1-year follow-up evaluation there were no significant differences in the flexion or rotation arc. An average of 17 years after injury there was no significant difference in the flexion arc or rotation arc. One result was rated as unsatisfactory in each cohort according to the Mayo Elbow Performing Index. The average Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score was 5 points in the ORIF cohort and 15 points in the excision cohort. Eight patients in the excision cohort had arthrosis (5 mild, 2 moderate, 1 severe) compared with 2 patients in the ORIF cohort (1 mild, 1 moderate). Open reduction and internal fixation of an unstable, displaced fracture of the radial head occasionally fails, but it seems to reduce the risk of subsequent elbow dislocation and to protect against long-term arthrosis. Therapeutic II

Silicone radial head prostheses: the clinical course and treatment of failure—a case series

Introduction: Silicone radial head prostheses (SRHP) have a reputation of acceptable initial function but failure in the medium to long term as a result of the disintegration of the silicone material. Damaged SRHP can result in a silicone-induced synovitis and destruction of the joint. Early removal of damaged SRHP may prevent joint destruction. Literature is scarce; there are no studies describing early symptoms associated with clinical failure of SRHP and very few studies on appropriate treatment of destructed SRHP. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical course of failing SRHP and to provide practical guidance for treatment. Methods: Fifteen consecutive cases of failed SRHP, operated between 2005 and 2020, were retrospectively reviewed, using patient logs, radiographic results, and a questionnaire. Relevant data concerning pre- and postoperative complaints, function, and surgical details were gathered. Using the questionnaire, retrospective and current patient reported outcomes including Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores, pain, instability, and range of motion were analyzed. Results: The average time between implantation of the SRHP until outpatient presentation was 16 years. The average recalled SANE score before start of complaints was 8.6 out of 10 points. In 4 patients, the onset of complaints was preceded by a trauma. Five patients had symptoms for more than a year, and 9 patients for several months. Progressive pain in the elbow and/or wrist and mechanical symptoms were early and prominent symptoms of failure. Clinical signs of synovitis were frequently present. The majority of patients had a slow but progressive onset of complaints over several months before presentation. Twelve of 15 cases of failed SRHP were surgically treated. Fragmentation of the implant, osteoarthritis, and synovitis were found in all surgically treated cases. Both surgical removal and synovectomy alone, and revision to a new radial head prosthesis resulted in good medium-term outcomes with a mean SANE score of 7.3 points at 8.4 years of follow-up. Postoperative extension lags and mild instability were frequently mentioned as a reason for reimplantation of a metallic radial head implant and removal of the radial head alone, respectively. Conclusion: Both patients and physicians should be aware of early symptoms of a failing SRHP. Adequate recognition, radiographic evaluation, and early intervention may favor outcomes of failing SRHP. Surgical removal is easy to perform. In selected cases, revision of the radial head prosthesis may be considered. Both of these treatment strategies resulted in satisfying outcomes

Differences in prescription of narcotic pain medication after operative treatment of hip and ankle fractures in the United States and The Netherlands

Interactions between American and Dutch surgeons suggested differences in prescription habits for pain medication after fracture treatment. The percentages of 190 American [100 after hip open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and 90 after ankle ORIF] and 116 Dutch patients (69 after hip ORIF and 47 after ankle ORIF) receiving inpatient and outpatient prescriptions for narcotics were retrospectively compared between countries, to test the hypothesis that narcotics are prescribed more frequently in the United States as compared with The Netherlands after operative fracture treatment. Among patients with hip fractures, 85% of American and 58% of Dutch patients were prescribed narcotics during hospitalization (p < 0.001). After discharge, 77% of American and none of the Dutch patients were prescribed narcotics (p < 0.001). The multivariate model including country accounted for 11% of the variation in inpatient narcotic prescription (p < 0.001), and the model including country and surgeon accounted for 55% of the variation in outpatient narcotic prescription (p < 0.001). Among patients with ankle fracture, 98% of American and 64% of Dutch patients were prescribed narcotics during hospitalization (p < 0.001). After discharge, 82% of American patients and 6% of Dutch patients were prescribed narcotics (p < 0.001). Predictors included country and surgeon and they accounted for 20% of the variation in inpatient narcotics prescription (p < 0.001) and 49% of the variation in outpatient narcotic prescription (p < 0.001). American patients are prescribed significantly more inpatient and outpatient narcotic pain medication than Dutch patients after operative treatment of hip and ankle fracture