Barret Hugo, Mansat Pierre, Langlais Tristan, Favard Luc, Chammas Michel, Coulet Bertrand
Hand and Upper Limb Surgery Department, Lapeyronie University Hospital, Montpellier, France.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Riquet Hospital, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2023 Feb 13;38:102128. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2023.102128. eCollection 2023 Mar.
Few multicenter studies have analyzed the outcome of revision surgery of radial head arthroplasties (RHA) in the medium term follow up. The objective is twofold: to determine the factors associated with revision of RHAs and to analyze the results of revision with 2 surgical techniques: isolated removal of the RHA or revision with a new RHA (R-RHA).
There are associated factors of RHA revision and RHA revision results in satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes.
Twenty-eight patients were included in this multicenter retrospective study, with all surgical indications for initial RHA being traumatic/post-traumatic. The mean age was 47 ± 13 years with a mean follow-up of 70 ± 48 months. This series included two groups: the isolated RHA removal group (n = 17) and the revision RHA with new radial head prosthesis (R-RHA) group (n = 11). Evaluation was clinical and radiological with univariate and multivariate analysis.
Two factors associated with RHA revision were identified: a pre-existing capitellar lesion (p = 0.047) and a RHA placed for a secondary indication (<0.001). Revision for all 28 patients resulted in improved pain (pre-op Visual Analog Scale 4.7 ± 3 vs. post-op 1.57 ± 2.2, p < 0.001), mobilities (pre-op flexion 118 ± 20 vs. post-op 130 ± 13, p = 0.03; pre-op extension -30 ± 21 vs post-op -20 ± 15, p = 0.025; pre-op pronation 59 ± 12 vs post-op 72 ± 17, p = 0.04; pre-op supination 48 ± 2 vs post-op 65 ± 22, p = 0.027) and functional scores. Mobility and pain control were, for stable elbows, satisfactory in the isolated removal group. When the initial or revision indication was instability, the DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand = 10 ± 5) and MEPS (Mayo Elbow Performance score = 85 ± 16) scores were satisfactory in the R-RHA group.
In the case of a radial head fracture, RHA is a satisfactory first-line solution without pre-existing capitellar injury, its results being much weaker in the case of ORIF failure and fracture sequelae. In case of RHA revision, isolated removal or R-RHA adapted according to the pre-operative radio-clinical exam.
IV.
很少有多中心研究在中期随访中分析桡骨头置换术(RHA)翻修手术的结果。目的有两个:确定与RHA翻修相关的因素,并分析两种手术技术的翻修结果:单纯取出RHA或用新的RHA进行翻修(R-RHA)。
存在RHA翻修的相关因素,且RHA翻修可带来令人满意的临床和功能结果。
本多中心回顾性研究纳入了28例患者,所有初次RHA的手术指征均为创伤性/创伤后。平均年龄为47±13岁,平均随访时间为70±48个月。该系列包括两组:单纯RHA取出组(n = 17)和用新的桡骨头假体进行RHA翻修组(R-RHA组,n = 11)。通过单因素和多因素分析进行临床和影像学评估。
确定了与RHA翻修相关的两个因素:术前存在的肱骨小头病变(p = 0.047)和因次要指征而进行的RHA置入(<0.001)。所有28例患者的翻修均使疼痛得到改善(术前视觉模拟评分4.7±3,术后1.57±2.2,p < 0.001)、活动度提高(术前屈曲角度118±20,术后130±13,p = 0.03;术前伸展角度-30±21,术后-20±15,p = 0.025;术前旋前角度59±12,术后72±17,p = 0.04;术前旋后角度48±2,术后65±22,p = 0.027)以及功能评分提高。对于稳定的肘关节,单纯取出组的活动度和疼痛控制情况令人满意。当初始或翻修指征为不稳定时,R-RHA组的上肢功能障碍评分(DASH,上肢、肩部和手部功能障碍评分 = 10±5)和梅奥肘关节功能评分(MEPS,梅奥肘关节性能评分 = 85±16)令人满意。
对于桡骨头骨折,若无术前肱骨小头损伤,RHA是一种令人满意的一线治疗方案,而在切开复位内固定失败和骨折后遗症的情况下,其效果要差得多。在进行RHA翻修时,应根据术前影像学和临床检查采用单纯取出或R-RHA。
IV级。