Anatomical Monopolar Press-Fit Radial Head Arthroplasty: Surgical Technique and Expected Outcomes

2019 ◽  
pp. 259-268
Author(s):  
A. Marinelli ◽  
D. R. Shukla
2019 ◽  
pp. 277-284
Author(s):  
Enrico Bellato ◽  
Andrea Celli ◽  
Lorenzo Mattei ◽  
Alessandro Cunotto ◽  
Giovanni Ferrero ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rens Bexkens ◽  
Femke M. A. P. Claessen ◽  
Izaäk F. Kodde ◽  
Luke S. Oh ◽  
Denise Eygendaal ◽  
...  

Background Radiographs are part of routine clinical care after radial head arthroplasty (RHA). Therefore, the aim of this diagnostic study was to assess the interobserver reliability of radiographic assessment following RHA. Methods Anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs of 24 consecutive patients who underwent press-fit bipolar RHA were evaluated with respect to 14 parameters by 14 orthopaedic surgeons specializing in the elbow: shaft loosening (AP, lateral), subcollar bone resorption, nonbridging heterotopic ossification, capitellar erosion, capitellar osteopenia, implant size, ulnohumeral joint gapping, ulnohumeral joint degeneration, proximal radio-ulnar joint congruency, stem size, stem positioning (AP, lateral) and component dissociation or polyethylene wear of the head with increased angulation. Observer agreement was evaluated using the multirater kappa (κ) measure. Results Nine of 14 parameters had poor interobserver agreement [κ = 0.0 to 0.20, confidence interval (CI) = 0.0 to 0.31). Four parameters had fair agreement: subcollar bone resorption (κ = 0.27, CI = 0.12 to 0.40), capitellar erosion (κ = 0.30, CI = 0.20 to 0.40), ulnohumeral joint degeneration (κ = 0.35, CI = 0.22 to 0.51) and stem positioning in AP view (κ = 0.24, CI = 0.14 to 0.36). One parameter had moderate agreement: nonbridging heterotopic ossification (κ = 0.47, CI = 0.31 to 0.64). Conclusions The overall interobserver reliability of radiographic assessment following press-fit bipolar RHA was poor among experienced elbow surgeons. Therefore, radiographic evaluation after RHA should be interpreted with caution when making treatment decisions.


2012 ◽  
Vol 94-B (6) ◽  
pp. 805-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Flinkkilä ◽  
T. Kaisto ◽  
K. Sirniö ◽  
P. Hyvönen ◽  
J. Leppilahti

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 802-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan C. Levy ◽  
Nathan T. Formaini ◽  
Jennifer Kurowicki

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (12) ◽  
pp. 659-667 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jetske Viveen ◽  
Izaak F. Kodde ◽  
Andras Heijink ◽  
Koen L. M. Koenraadt ◽  
Michel P. J. van den Bekerom ◽  
...  

Since the introduction of the radial head prosthesis (RHP) in 1941, many designs have been introduced. It is not clear whether prosthesis design parameters are related to early failure. The aim of this systematic review is to report on failure modes and to explore the association between implant design and early failure. A search was conducted to identify studies reporting on failed primary RHP. The results are clustered per type of RHP based on: material, fixation technique, modularity, and polarity. Chi-square tests are used to compare reasons for failure between the groups. Thirty-four articles are included involving 152 failed radial head arthroplasties (RHAs) in 152 patients. Eighteen different types of RHPs have been used. The most frequent reasons for revision surgery after RHA are (aseptic) loosening (30%), elbow stiffness (20%) and/or persisting pain (17%). Failure occurs after an average of 34 months (range, 0–348 months; median, 14 months). Press-fit prostheses fail at a higher ratio because of symptomatic loosening than intentionally loose-fit prostheses and prostheses that are fixed with an expandable stem (p < 0.01). Because of the many different types of RHP used to date and the limited numbers and evidence on early failure of RHA, the current data provide no evidence for a specific RHP design. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:659-667. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180099


2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (9) ◽  
pp. 497-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew P. Sullivan ◽  
Reza Firoozabadi ◽  
Stephen A. Kennedy ◽  
Julie Agel ◽  
Eric Magnusson ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (3) ◽  
pp. 530-535
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Giannicola ◽  
Valerio Castagna ◽  
Ciro Villani ◽  
Stefano Gumina ◽  
Marco Scacchi

Aims It has been hypothesized that proximal radial neck resorption (PRNR) following press-fit radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is due to stress-shielding. We compared two different press-fit stems by means of radiographs to investigate whether the shape and size of the stems are correlated with the degree of PRNR. Methods The radiographs of 52 RHAs were analyzed both at 14 days postoperatively and after two years. A cylindrical stem and a conical stem were implanted in 22 patients (group 1) and 30 patients (group 2), respectively. The PRNR was measured in the four quadrants of the radial neck and the degree of stem filling was calculated by analyzing the ratio between the prosthetic stem diameter (PSD) and the medullary canal diameter (MCD) at the proximal portion of the stem (level A), halfway along the stem length (level B), and distally at the stem tip (level C). Results Overall, 50 of the 52 patients displayed PRNR. The mean PRNR observed was 3.9 mm (0 to 7.4). The degree of endomedullary stem filling at levels A, B, and C was 96%, 90%, and 68% in group 1, and 96%, 72%, and 57%, in group 2, with differences being significant at levels B (p < 0.001) and C (p < 0.001). No significant correlations emerged between the severity of PRNR and the three stem/canal ratios either within each group or between the groups. Conclusion PRNR in press-fit RHA appears to be independent of the shape and size of the stems. Other causes besides stem design should be investigated to explain completely this phenomenon. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):530–535.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document