Total Elbow Arthroplasty

Total elbow arthroplasty has continued to evolve over time. Elbow implants may be linked or unlinked. Unlinked implants are attractive for patients with relatively well preserved bone stock and ligaments, but many favor linked implants, since they prevent instability and allow replacement for a wider spectrum of indications. Inflammatory arthropathies such as rheumatoid arthritis represent the classic indication for elbow arthroplasty. Indications have been expanded to include posttraumatic osteoarthritis, acute distal humerus fractures, distal humerus nonunions and reconstruction after tumor resection. Elbow arthroplasty is very successful in terms of pain relief, motion and function. However, its complication rate remains higher than arthroplasty of other joints. The overall success rate is best for patients with inflammatory arthritis and elderly patients with acute distal humerus fractures, worse for patients with posttraumatic osteoarthritis. The most common complications of elbow arthroplasty include infection, loosening, wear, triceps weakness and ulnar neuropathy. When revision surgery becomes necessary, bone augmentation techniques provide a reasonable outcome

Aseptic loosening rate of the humeral stem in the Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty. Does size matter?

BACKGROUND Aseptic implant loosening is one of the most common complications leading to revision surgery in total elbow arthroplasty. Different humeral stem lengths are available with varying designs. In general, the decision of which stem length to use depends on the surgical diagnosis or simply the surgeon preference. Often, the longer stem is used for post-traumatic or revision cases while for rheumatoid patients the shorter stem is preferred. There are no data in the literature to favor one humeral stem size over the other according to the diagnosis. METHODS We analyzed the total elbow joint database of the Coonrad-Morrey design at our institution for aseptic loosening leading to revision and compared the revision rate and the survival of the 4- and 6-inch humeral stems. RESULTS Overall, revision for aseptic humeral loosening is infrequent and occurred in only 16 of 711 total elbow arthroplasties during a mean follow-up of 88 months. There was no significant difference in the revision rate between the 2 stem lengths (1.9% for the 4-inch stems and 2.6% for the 6-inch stem). CONCLUSION Revision rate was correlated to the surgical diagnosis and was significantly higher for post-traumatic patients than for rheumatoid patients (5.1% vs 0.66%, P < .001). Of interest, and possibly not surprising, the mean time to revision was shorter for the 4-inch stems than it was for the 6-inch stems (37 vs 95 months, P = .034)