No abstract

Background/purposeRadial head replacement is frequently used in treatment of radial head fractures or sequela. Impossibility to restore a correct anatomy, acute elbow traumatic instability and failure of osteosynthesis hardware are the most common indications. The authors describe their case studies and results on the implantation of various radial head prostheses.MaterialsBetween June 2005 and June 2016, 28 radial head prostheses were implanted in the same number of patients with an average follow-up of 49 months (6–104). Indications for implantation were: Mason type III and IV radial head fractures and post-traumatic arthritis due to failure of previous treatments. Monopolar prostheses were used and were press-fit implanted via Kaplan’s lateral access and Kocher’s anconeus approach to the humeroradial joint. At the follow-up, assessments were made of the pain, according to the visual analogic scale, range of motion (ROM), stability and functionality according to the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, presence of osteolysis and mobilization during radiography tests, personal satisfaction of the patients, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation outcomes measurements.ResultsAt the follow-up, we recorded an average level of pain of 1.8 in patients under acute treatments for radial head fractures and a marked reduction in the remaining cases from 6.7 to 2.1. ROM was found on average to be 107° of flexion–extension and 159° of pronosupination. Personal satisfaction was good–excellent in 23 cases. There was no case of infection; removal of the implant was necessary in three cases due to mobilization of the stem and oversized implants. In six cases, bone resorption was seen at the level of the prosthetic collar and it was in all cases asymptomatic.ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that the use of prostheses, if well positioned, is a valid solution in the treatment of secondary arthritis and fractures of the radial head with poor prognosis, with good results in the reduction of pain, recovery of movement and improved quality of life.

We used high-resolution ultrasound to examine 35 median nerves (35 patients) with failed carpal tunnel decompression to identify the cause of failure. The carpal tunnel was examined before revision surgery, and the results were correlated with surgical findings. The cross-sectional area was measured, and nerve morphology was analysed at the sites of compression. We found persistent median nerve compression in 30 out of 35 patients. In 20 patients, the compression was caused by a residual transverse carpal ligament, in four by perineural fibrosis, in five by both of these causes and in one by tenosynovitis. In four patients, evidence of median nerve injury with an epineural/fascicular lesion was detected; and in one, no abnormalities were found. Surgical findings were consistent with the ultrasound findings except in one patient where tenosynovitis was associated with a giant cell tumour, which was missed by ultrasound. High-resolution ultrasound can provide helpful information in preoperative diagnosis of failed carpal tunnel decompression with good correlation between the ultrasound and surgical findings. Level of evidence: IV

(half-pin) osteolysis. Functional recovery was delayed by the presence of other fractures. EF is a simple, quick and safe procedure to stabilise fractures in polytraumatised patients. According to damage control orthopaedic (DCO) concepts, it is possible to replace EF with internal synthesis after an interval as this reduces the risks of internal osteosynthesis when performed in the emergency period. EF can also be maintained as definitive treatment but should a change to internal synthesis be needed, it is possible to do it safely after excluding bone infection.

From 1997 to 2003 (7 years follow-up) we treated 33 complex traumas of the upper limbs with the use of external fixation: forearm or humeral complete amputation, complex crash, sometimes with hand crash associated. Often a revascularisation was necessary like as a secondary skin coverage for soft tissue loss or following ischaemic necrosis. Three patients were reluctant to agree to a secondary amputation for large soft tissue necrosis and infection. A high percentage of cases need a successive operation because of bone non-union. Revision of our casistic helps us answer the following: how complex and long is the prognosis of this kind of patient, which are the most important choices we have to make, how important is the length of time taken to make a decision and what are the weak spots in the treatment of these traumas.