Retrospective cohort study on radial head replacements comparing results between smooth and porous stem designs.

BACKGROUND

When necessary, radial head integrity after a fracture can be re-created by the use of a radial head arthroplasty if the radial head is judged irreparable. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of metal modular radial head replacements with a smooth vs. a porous stem.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of radial head replacements performed in the first 4 weeks after a trauma in an adult patient at our institution between 2000 and 2014 was completed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: a porous stem group (ExploR; Biomet Orthopedics, Warsaw, IN, USA) and a smooth stem group (EVOLVE; Wright Medical Group, Memphis, TN, USA). Primary outcomes were the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and Mayo Elbow Performance Index scores. Secondary outcomes were the visual analog scale score for pain, range of motion, grip strength, and radiographic evaluations.

RESULTS

Of the 80 eligible patients, 57 agreed to participate (porous stem group, 36; smooth stem group, 21). Demographic data were similar between the 2 groups. Average follow-up was 6.3 years. Average Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and Mayo Elbow Performance Index scores were similar between the 2 groups. Porous implants were more prone to osteolysis (64.3% vs. 23.5%; P = .01) and were associated with a greater loss of elbow flexion (6° vs. 1°; P = .02). The porous stem group showed a tendency toward more overstuffing (24.0% vs. 5.9%; P = .21).

CONCLUSION

Our results reveal that outcomes between smooth and porous stem metal modular radial head implants are equivalent. However, the smooth stem implant may represent the preferred option as it is associated with a lower rate of complications.