| Literature DB >> 29576646 |
Debadyuti Baksi1, A K Pal2, D P Baksi3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sideswipe injuries of elbow often poses significant functional loss resulting from devastating injuries involving osseoligamentous structures as well as multilevel soft tissue injuries around the elbow. Inspite of treatment, no conscientious treatment opinion is available in the literature to provide optimum functional outcome. The objective of this study is to evaluate the results of prosthetic replacement of old healed sideswipe injuries of elbow with gross dysfunctional disabilities resulting from loss of bones and muscles around the joint.Entities:
Keywords: Elbow; Prosthesis; arthroplasty; elbow joint; replacement; side swipe injuries; total elbow arthroplasty
Year: 2018 PMID: 29576646 PMCID: PMC5858212 DOI: 10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_179_17
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian J Orthop ISSN: 0019-5413 Impact factor: 1.251
Functional outcome of prosthetic replacement of elbows in old healed sideswipe injuries
Figure 1A photograph of disassembled components of the prosthesis. Its humeral hinge section (A) is shorter than the ulnar one (B) and has a larger hole than the diameter of the smooth part of the main hinge screw (arrow) to allow 7 –10 degree side to side laxity. Two flanges are incorporated on each side of the shank of humeral prosthesis stem. Inset - Flanges are seated in the longitudinal slots made on each side of lower cut end of the humerus in it's coronal plane
Figure 2(a) Clinical photograph of a 45 years old female (Case 8) sustained side swipe injuries on right elbow treated by wound debridement and pedicle skin grafting, showing healed wound with unstable joint. (b) Radiograph of the above patient 3 years and 2 months after initial injury anteroposterior and lateral views showing ununited condyles of humerus with ununited loose piece of olecranon process and loss of radial head. (c) Three weeks postoperative radiograph anteroposterior and lateral views of the above patient showing third generation elbow prosthetic replacement. The flanges of the humeral stem is seen outside the humeral shaft due to its segmental loss, a loop of S.S wire is seen at upper end of ulna used for anchorage of triceps. (d) Radiograph at 3 months postoperative period anteroposterior and lateral views showing patchy new bones formation around the bare lower part of humeral stem and around the posteromedial aspect of hinge components. (e) Radiograph of 9 months anteroposterior and lateral views showing consolidated sheets of new bone around the shank and flanges of humeral stem of prosthesis, sparing the prosthetic joint. (f) Radiograph at 12 years and 7 months follow up of same patient showing consolidated new bone formation around posteromedial aspect of shank and flanges of humeral stem of prosthesis, sparing the prosthetic joint No evidence of radiolucency noted around the prosthetic stem. (g) Clinical photograph of the above patient at 12 years and 7 months follow up showing right elbow flexion arc 0° to 135°. No deterioration of motions of elbow is noted even after posteromedial new bone formation due to sparing the prosthetic joint