The minimum follow-up required for radial head arthroplasty

Abstract

The literature does not provide a reliable estimate of the rate of re-operation after RHA. The reproducibility of results would be improved by using a minimum follow-up of three years combined with a consensus of the definition of the reasons for failure after RHA. Cite this article: 2017;99-B:1561-70.

Short to midterm outcomes of one hundred and seventy one MoPyC radial head prostheses: meta-analysis

“…Although a long-term study is certainly needed, we speculate that the rigidity of fixation obtained with the use of autoexpanding stem systems may explain both the significant stress shielding and the low rate of painful loosening compared to other prosthetic fixation methods [6,19,35,48]. The most frequent reason of re-operation was stiffness (n = 7; 4.1%) after radial head arthroplasty [34]. According to a recent meta-analysis [34], a statistically higher rate of reoperation for stiffness was found with monopolar implants.…”

“…The most frequent reason of re-operation was stiffness (n = 7; 4.1%) after radial head arthroplasty [34]. According to a recent meta-analysis [34], a statistically higher rate of reoperation for stiffness was found with monopolar implants. However, the causes of stiffness are multifactorial and constitute a confounding bias which was not accounted for in our study.…”

“…However, the causes of stiffness are multifactorial and constitute a confounding bias which was not accounted for in our study. Post-operative stiffness can be affected by the severity of the initial injury, heterotopic ossification, complex regional pain, degenerative changes, and/or malpositioning of the implant [30,34,50]. Table 4 Complications and reoperations of radial head arthroplasty, among articles published between January 2011 and March 2017 Abdulla et al [1] Gauci et al [16] Sarris et al [44] Ricón et al [42] Lamas et al Biomechanical studies have demonstrated a significantly higher rate of instability among bipolar implants; this tendency was reaffirmed by clinical studies, though they lacked associated statistical evidence [6,36,44].…”

“…Clinical (range of motion and Mayo Elbow Performance score (MEPS)) and radiographic outcomes (periprosthetic osteolysis, loosening, heterotopic ossification, capitellar wear, overstuffing) of MoPyC implants were analyzed in order to test the first hypothesis. We also abstracted the presence of stiffness following RHA, which was defined as limited active and passive range of elbow movement [34]. Reasons for failure of RHA (re-operation with (or without) implant removal and mean time to re-operation) were assessed in order to test the secondary hypothesis.…”

Retrospective cohort study on radial head arthroplasty comparing long-term outcomes between valgus type injury and fracture dislocation

“…Several kinds of prostheses have been available for radial head replacement [8] with a growing number of articles showing advancements in implant designs and favorable outcome. However, prosthetic RHA has yet to be the gold standard for irreparable radial head fractures basically owing to insu ciency in long-term reports [9] and lack of outcome correlation in ligamentous injuries [10,11] in the majority of clinical reports. In addition, most of current articles concerning outcome assessment and complication analyses are mainly focused on unstable fractures with elbow dislocation and concomitant lateral ligament injury [12].…”