Eli S Kupperman1, Asher I Kupperman2, Scott A Mitchell3. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. Electronic address: eskupperman@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Optimal treatment strategies for radial head fractures remain a subject of debate. We examined national practice patterns in the management of radial head fractures to determine rates of surgical treatment, type of surgery employed, and the incidence of reoperation. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2011, we identified patients with radial head fractures along with their associated injuries by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes in a national database of orthopedic insurance records. For those who underwent surgery, the type of intervention was identified and each patient was observed to determine whether a subsequent procedure was needed by 1 and 2 years. Chi-square analysis was performed to make comparisons between groups. RESULTS: A total of 58,404 radial head fractures were identified between 2007 and 2011; of these, 2,981 underwent surgical treatment (5.1%). Rates of surgical intervention were significantly higher in the context of associated injuries. Among the 2,981 radial head fractures treated surgically, 57.1% underwent open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), 37.9% were treated with radial head arthroplasty, and 4.9% underwent radial head excision. When the surgically treated radial head fracture was associated with a coronoid fracture, elbow dislocation, or proximal ulna fracture, 64.2%, 54.3%, and 47.2% were treated with arthroplasty, respectively, compared with 32.6%, 41.9%, and 52.6% treated with ORIF, respectively. After initial surgical treatment, 12.7% and 14.4% of radial head fractures that underwent ORIF required a secondary surgery at 1 and 2 years, respectively, compared with 8.6% and 10.7% of radial head arthroplasties and 8.3% and 8.4% of resections. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of arthroplasty were significantly higher in the context of associated injury, particularly in the setting of a coronoid fracture or elbow dislocation. Fractures initially treated with ORIF had a higher rate of revision surgery at both 1 and 2 years after the index procedure compared with arthroplasty. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.
PURPOSE: Optimal treatment strategies for radial head fractures remain a subject of debate. We examined national practice patterns in the management of radial head fractures to determine rates of surgical treatment, type of surgery employed, and the incidence of reoperation. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2011, we identified patients with radial head fractures along with their associated injuries by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes in a national database of orthopedic insurance records. For those who underwent surgery, the type of intervention was identified and each patient was observed to determine whether a subsequent procedure was needed by 1 and 2 years. Chi-square analysis was performed to make comparisons between groups. RESULTS: A total of 58,404 radial head fractures were identified between 2007 and 2011; of these, 2,981 underwent surgical treatment (5.1%). Rates of surgical intervention were significantly higher in the context of associated injuries. Among the 2,981 radial head fractures treated surgically, 57.1% underwent open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), 37.9% were treated with radial head arthroplasty, and 4.9% underwent radial head excision. When the surgically treated radial head fracture was associated with a coronoid fracture, elbow dislocation, or proximal ulna fracture, 64.2%, 54.3%, and 47.2% were treated with arthroplasty, respectively, compared with 32.6%, 41.9%, and 52.6% treated with ORIF, respectively. After initial surgical treatment, 12.7% and 14.4% of radial head fractures that underwent ORIF required a secondary surgery at 1 and 2 years, respectively, compared with 8.6% and 10.7% of radial head arthroplasties and 8.3% and 8.4% of resections. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of arthroplasty were significantly higher in the context of associated injury, particularly in the setting of a coronoid fracture or elbow dislocation. Fractures initially treated with ORIF had a higher rate of revision surgery at both 1 and 2 years after the index procedure compared with arthroplasty. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.