Cemented bipolar radial head arthroplasty: midterm follow-up results.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Theoretical advantages of bipolar over monopolar radial head arthroplasty include better accommodation of radiocapitellar malalignment, reduction of capitellar abrasion, and reduction of stress at the bone-to-cement and cement-to-implant interfaces. Our purpose was to report the midterm results of cemented bipolar radial head arthroplasty.
METHODS
Twenty-five patients were treated by cemented bipolar radial head arthroplasty for acute fracture of the radial head, earlier treatment that had failed, or posttraumatic sequelae. One patient refused follow-up after surgery. Results are presented for the remaining 24 patients.
RESULTS
At a mean follow-up of 50 months (range, 24-72 months), 1 prosthesis (4%) had been removed 2 years after implantation for dissociation of the prosthesis due to failure of the snap-on mechanism. There were 2 (8%) additional radiologic failures in the subluxated position: 1 prosthesis due to malalignment of the radius onto the capitellum and another due to ulnohumeral erosion. The average flexion-extension arc was 129° (range, 80°-140°), and the average pronation-supination arc was 131° (range, 40°-180°). According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, the combined excellent and good results accounted for 83%. In 8 patients, the bipolar design compensated for radiocapitellar malalignment.
CONCLUSIONS
The overall midterm outcome of this series of 25 cemented bipolar radial head arthroplasties can be considered favorable. There was 1 (4%) revision and 2 (8%) additional radiologic failures. The bipolar design was able to compensate for radiocapitellar malalignment. We suggest considering a cemented bipolar radial head prosthesis in case of concerns about radiocapitellar alignment.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.