1 / 47

Lateral Elbow Instability

Lateral Elbow Instability. Travis Marion, MD. MSc. BEd . Academic Half Day Apr 2012. Outline. Intro – definitions Anatomy Biomechanics Evaluation Mechanism of injury Acute  Terrible Triad Fracture classification Management Reconstruction Priniciples Outcomes

rae
Download Presentation

Lateral Elbow Instability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Lateral Elbow Instability Travis Marion, MD. MSc. BEd. Academic Half Day Apr 2012

  2. Outline • Intro – definitions • Anatomy • Biomechanics • Evaluation • Mechanism of injury • Acute  Terrible Triad • Fracture classification • Management • Reconstruction Priniciples • Outcomes • Chronic  PRLI • Management • Outcomes

  3. Anatomy

  4. Anatomy Proximal Ulna • Greater sigmoid notch • Lesser sigmoid notch • Sublime tubercle • Coronoid process

  5. Anatomy

  6. Anatomy Coronoid Process • Tip • Body • Anterolateral facet • Anteromedial facet

  7. Anatomy Radial Head • Articulates • Capitellum • Radial notch • Safe Zone2

  8. Anatomy MCL21 • Anterior bundle • Posterior bundle • Transverse

  9. Anatomy LCL19,20 • RCL • LUCL • Accessory lateral collateral • Annular

  10. Biomechanics

  11. Biomechanics Primary Stabilizers • Ulnohumeral articulation3 • MCL • LCL complex4 Secondary Stabilizers • Radial capitellar4, 30 • Joint capsule • Common flexor/pronator and extensors • Compressive force • Anconeus, triceps and bracialis • Rotatory stabilizer • ECU, EDM

  12. Evaluation

  13. Evaluation • History • Severity • Mechanism • Precipitants • Chonic • Inciting event • Clicking/snapping/clunking/locking • Apprehensive maneuver • Past medical history • Physical Acute • Inspection • Open vs closed • Alignment • Joint above and below • Detailed neurologic • Physical Chronic • Full pain free ROM • Pain free stressing • Special tests • Closed reduction • Imaging • Radiographs • pre/post reduction • AP/Lat/Oblique • CT

  14. Instability Classification

  15. Classification18 • Timing (acute, chronic or recurrent) • Articulations (elbow vs radial head vs both) • Direction of displacement (valgus, varus, anterior, posterolateralrotatory) • Degree of displacement (subluxation or dislocation) – see slide 18 • Simple or complex

  16. Mechanism

  17. Mechanism of Injury • FOOSH, elbow extended • Posteriorly directed force3 • Ulna levers out of trochlea • Valgus stress/posterolateral roll out/supination6 • Capsuloligamentous failure lateral to medial, MCL anterior bundle last to rupture6 • Radial head, coronoidfx

  18. Mechanism

  19. Mechanism

  20. Acute Traumatic Instability

  21. Classification Simple Dislocations • Capsuloligamentous injury • No osseous injury Complex Dislocations • Associated osseous injury

  22. Patterns of Fracture Dislocation • Terrible Triad • Posterior dislocation of radial head • Varusposteromedialrotatory instability • Anterior olecranon fracture dislocations

  23. Fracture Classification

  24. Fracture Classification Fracture Classification Regan and Morrey7 O`Driscoll8

  25. Fracture Classification

  26. Traumatic Instability Terrible Triad1 • Elbow dislocation • Coronoid fracture • Radial head fracture

  27. Management

  28. Management Nonsurgical • Concentrically reduced ulnohumeral and radiocapitellar • Stable to allow sufficient ROM (extension to 30°) • Congruency evaluated under fluoroscopically • CT evaluation • Radial head fx minimally reduced with no mechanical block • Type I coronoid fracture • Tx as simple dislocation • Splint at 90° • Isometric biceps/triceps

  29. Management Surgical • Incision • Advantages • Posterior • Access to medial and lateral • Precludes requirement for secondary incision • Reduced injury to cutaneous inervation9 • Improved cosmesis • Disadvanages • Large flaps

  30. Management Kocher • Anconeus (radial) ECU (PIN) EDC split

  31. Management No Replacement • Pros • No healing required • Exposure to coronoid • Faster recovery • Cons • Non anatomic • Overstuffing • Stiffness

  32. Management Yes ORIF • Pros • Anatomic • No overstuffing • Cons • Non union • Malunion • Implant complications • PIN palsy

  33. Management Yes No Medial approach Hotchkiss Can address trochlear fractures Ulnar nerve dissection May address MCL if warranted • One less incision • No ulnar nerve dissection • Amenable to ORIF vs suture technique • Use targeting devices to aid in fixation positioning

  34. Management LCL Repair • Origin at isometric point on lateral epicondyle • Suture anchors vs bone tunnels • Check anatomy • Check stability • If unstable repair the MCL • Persistent instability = external fixator

  35. Reconstruction Principles • < 10% coronoid fractures little effect on stability5 • MCL repair more effective than coronoid repair5 • Most triads involve more than 10% • MCL most important valgus stabilizer • Requires radial head • Radial head acts as buttress • Radial head tensions LCL providing varus stability

  36. Outcomes Pugh and McKee, 2002 • Mean arc 20º and 135º • Mean rotation 135º • Delay in treatment or revision 20% greater loss of motion • 25% revision Pugh et al, JBJS AM, 2004 • 36 patients, multicentred • 112º flexion arc • 136º rotation • 15 excellent, 13 good, 7 fair, 1 poor • 8 revisions (synostosis, instability, contracture release, wound infection) • Prolonged immobilization worse prognosis

  37. Outcomes Frothman et al, J Hand Surgery, 2007 • 30 patients • 117º flexion arc • Rotation 135º • 77% excellent results • Single surgeon, no MCL repairs Similar Findings • Chemama et al, OrthopTraumatolSurg Res, 2010 • Rodriguez-Martin et al, IntOrthop, 2011 • Jeong et al, J OrthopSci, 2010 Lindenhovius et al, J Hand Surgery 2008 • Acute within 2 weeks (ave 6 days) vssubacute repair > 3 weeks (ave 7 weeks) • No difference except 20º more flexion arc

  38. Chronic Instability

  39. PosterolateralRotatory Instability • Most common type of symptomatic instability • First described 1991 • Recurrent proximal radio-ulnar displacement • Prox radius and ulna rotate externally in relation to the humerus • Radioulnar joint intact and rotates as a single unit as opposed to isolated radial head dislocation

  40. PRLI • Failure of LCL complex • Trauma • iatrogenic • chronic attenuation29 • Physical exam • PRLI - analogous to pivot shift • Table top relocation test

  41. PRLI Radiographs • Avulsion of LCL complex • Degenerative changes • Faber/King lesion (post capitellum lesion analogous to hill sachs) • Drop sign --. Ulnohumeral distance > 4mm on plane lateral

  42. Management Management • Avoid further ligamentous injury • Arthrotomy anterior to LUCL, anterior capsular release • Suture anchor vs lateral ligamentous reconstruction

  43. Outcomes Jones et al, J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2012 • 8 patients with purely ligamentous PRLI • Surgical graft reconstructionr • Mean f/u 7.1 years • 75% resolution • 25% occasional instability with ADLs Olsen and Sojberg, JBJS Brm2003 • Triceps tendon graft in 18 patients • 4 persistent apprehension • 5 moderate pain Sanchez-Sotelo et al, JBJS Br, 2005 • 12 patients, ligamentous repair, 32 reconstruction • 5 persistent instability (3 from repaired, 2 from recon) • 17 rated excellent • 17 good • 10 fair Similar Findings • Lee and Teo, J Shoulder and Elbow, 2003

  44. References • 1Hotchkiss, Rockwood and Green’s, 1996 • 2Matthew et al, JAAOS, 2009 • 3Mezera and Hotchkiss, Rockwood and Green’s, 2001 • 4Schneeberger et al, JBJS AM, 2004 • 5Beingessner et al, J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2007 • 6O’Driscoll et al, JBJS, 1991 • 7Regan and Morrey, JBJS AM, 1989 • 8O`Driscoll et al, Instr Course Lect, 2003 • 9Dowdy et al, JBJS BR, 1995 • 10Morrey et al, CORR, 1991 • 11Pugh and McKee, 2002 • 12Pugh et al, JBJS AM, 2004 • 13Frothman et al, J Hand Surgery, 2007 • 14Chemama et al, OrthopTraumatolSurg Res, 2010 • 15Rodriguez-Martin et al, IntOrthop, 2011 • 16Jeong et al, J OrthopSci, 2010 • 17Lindenhovius et al, J Hand Surgery 2008 • 18O’Driscoll, CORR, 2000 • 19Mehta and Bain, JAAOS, 2004 • 20Imatani et al, Jshoulder Elbow Surg, 1999

  45. References • 21Morrey and An, ClinOrthop, 1985 • 22Cohen and Hastings, JBJS Am, 1997 • 23Dunning et al, JBJS AM, 2001 • 24O`Driscoll et al, JBJS, 1991 • 25Jones et al, J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2012 • 26Sanchez-Sotelo et al, JBJS Br, 2005 • 27Lee and Teo, J Shoulder and Elbow, 2003 • 28Olsen and Sojberg, JBJS Br, 2003 • 29Beuerlein et al, JBJS Am, 2004 • 30Hall and McKee, JBJS, 2005

  46. Questions

  47. Nathan L Sacevich circa 1998 • Future ambition: sports medicine doctor • Most memorable experience: losing the soccer championship • Nickname: Nate Dogg • Closet friends: Mack Daddy, Mr Sauce, P Squared (no mention of Travis) • Remembered by: his “stylo” (his style?) • When no one was looking: he liked to get his thug on • People thought: • he looked like a back street boy • “the illest playa”

More Related