Salvage of Painful Porous Coated Stem Ulnar Head Prosthesis With Semiconstrained Distal Radioulnar Joint Arthroplasty

Author(s):  
Asgeir Amundsen ◽  
Marco Rizzo ◽  
Richard Berger ◽  
Steven L. Moran
2021 ◽  
pp. 175319342110484
Author(s):  
Lea Estermann ◽  
Lisa Reissner ◽  
Andrea B. Rosskopf ◽  
Andreas Schweizer ◽  
Ladislav Nagy

This study aimed to analyse the clinical and radiological outcomes after ulnar head replacement and to compare partial and total ulnar head implants. Twenty-two patients with 23 implants were available with a mean follow-up time of 7 years (range 1.3 to 17) after distal radioulnar joint arthroplasty. At the final follow-up, patients had a low level of pain at rest and during effort, a median Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score of 12 and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score of 12 with partial ulnar head implants, and scores of 20 and 22 in total ulnar head implants, respectively. While the range of motion in patients with partial ulnar head implants was slightly reduced in comparison with the preoperative condition and to the patients with total ulnar head implants, there was a tendency to a higher grip strength and rotational torque. Both types of prosthesis showed sigmoid notch resorptions and resorptions around the neck. We conclude that the results after partial ulnar head replacement do not significantly differ from the total ulnar head implants in many aspects. Level of evidence: III


2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 438-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jörg van Schoonhoven ◽  
Diego L. Fernandez ◽  
William H. Bowers ◽  
Timothy J. Herbert

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
pp. 1372-1380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jörg van Schoonhoven ◽  
Marion Mühldorfer-Fodor ◽  
Diego L. Fernandez ◽  
Timothy J. Herbert

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. D. Adams ◽  
J. L. Gaffey

A variety of surgical techniques are used to treat the arthritic distal radioulnar joint, which is influenced by aetiology and previous procedures. Four types of ulnar head arthroplasty exist: total ulnar head, partial ulnar head, unlinked total distal radioulnar joint, and linked distal radioulnar joint. Although long-term outcome studies are sparse, short-term clinical and biomechanical studies have shown encouraging results, leading to expanded indications. Based on our experience and a literature review, patients are advised that pain is improved but minor pain is common after strenuous activity. Ulnar neck resorption is common, however, implant loosening is rare. Sigmoid notch erosion is concerning, but appears to stabilize and not affect outcome. A partial ulnar head replacement that retains bony architecture and soft tissue restraints may have benefit over a total ulnar head in appropriate patients. If appropriate selection criteria are met, ulnar head replacement typically produces reliable results, with low revision.


2018 ◽  
Vol 07 (05) ◽  
pp. 375-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Tang ◽  
Keiji Fujio ◽  
Robert Strauch ◽  
Melvin Rosenwasser ◽  
Taiichi Matsumoto

Background Transosseous repair of foveal detachment of the triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) is effective for distal radioulnar joint stabilization. However, studies of the optimal foveal and TFCC suture positions are scant. Purpose The purpose of this study was to clarify the optimal TFCC suture position and bone tunnels for transosseous foveal repair. Materials and Methods Seven cadavers were utilized. The TFCC was incised at the foveal insertion and sutured at six locations (TFCCs 1–6) using inelastic sutures. Six osseous tunnels were created in the fovea (foveae 1–6). Fovea 2 is located at the center of the circle formed by the ulnar head overlooking the distal end of the ulna (theoretical center of rotation); fovea 5 is located 2 mm ulnar to fovea 2. TFCC 5 is at the ulnar apex of the TFCC disc; TFCC 4 is 2 mm dorsal to TFCC 5. TFCC 1 to 6 sutures were then placed through each of the six osseous tunnels, resulting in 36 combinations, which were individually tested. The forearm was placed in five positions between supination and pronation, and the degree of suture displacement was measured. The position with the least displacement indicated the isometric point of the TFCC and fovea. Results The mean distance of suture displacement was 2.4 ± 1.6 mm. Fovea 2, combined with any TFCC location, (0.7 ± 0.6 mm) and fovea group 5, combined with TFCC 4 location (0.8 ± 0.8) or with TFCC 5 location (0.9 ± 0.6) had statistically shorter suture displacements than any other fovea groups. Conclusion For TFCC transosseous repair, osseous tunnel position was more important than TFCC suture location.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document