BACKGROUND: Interposition arthroplasty (IA) is mostly performed in younger patients where total joint replacement is contraindicated and an arthrodesis is unattractive. The outcome and complications of an IA were evaluated. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 18 consecutive cases of interposition arthroplasty (IA) (one case was excluded as a result of incomplete records). Pre- and postoperative pain and function were evaluated. Complications, re-operations and revisions were recorded. RESULTS: The mean age was 41 years (range 19 years to 59 years) at time of surgery. The primary diagnosis was post-traumatic osteoarthritis in 12 cases and inflammatory arthritis in five cases. The median follow-up was 54 months (range 8 months to 120 months). In 15 cases, at least one re-operation was performed. Seven cases were revised, with four of these to a total elbow replacement, an arthrodesis was performed in two cases and a re-do interposition was carried out in one case. The median interval from the interposition to revision was 23 months (range 8 months to 88 months). In 10 patients with the interposition currently in situ, mean visual analogue scale score for pain improved from 7.4 to 2.4 and mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved from 42 to 76 points. CONCLUSIONS: IA offered an improvement in pain and function but at a high cost. It is associated with a high complication rate the need for revision surgery.
BACKGROUND: Interposition arthroplasty (IA) is mostly performed in younger patients where total joint replacement is contraindicated and an arthrodesis is unattractive. The outcome and complications of an IA were evaluated. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 18 consecutive cases of interposition arthroplasty (IA) (one case was excluded as a result of incomplete records). Pre- and postoperative pain and function were evaluated. Complications, re-operations and revisions were recorded. RESULTS: The mean age was 41 years (range 19 years to 59 years) at time of surgery. The primary diagnosis was post-traumatic osteoarthritis in 12 cases and inflammatory arthritis in five cases. The median follow-up was 54 months (range 8 months to 120 months). In 15 cases, at least one re-operation was performed. Seven cases were revised, with four of these to a total elbow replacement, an arthrodesis was performed in two cases and a re-do interposition was carried out in one case. The median interval from the interposition to revision was 23 months (range 8 months to 88 months). In 10 patients with the interposition currently in situ, mean visual analogue scale score for pain improved from 7.4 to 2.4 and mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved from 42 to 76 points. CONCLUSIONS: IA offered an improvement in pain and function but at a high cost. It is associated with a high complication rate the need for revision surgery.
Authors: Giuseppe Rollo; Roberto Rotini; Denise Eygendaal; Paolo Pichierri; Ante Prkic; Michele Bisaccia; Riccardo Maria Lanzetti; Domenico Lupariello; Luigi Meccariello Journal: Case Rep Orthop Date: 2018-04-22
Authors: Fabian Lanzerath; Michael Hackl; Christoph-Johannes Pucher; Tim Leschinger; Stephan Uschok; Lars P Müller; Kilian Wegmann Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2022-08-30 Impact factor: 3.479