1. Radial head arthroplasty diameter impact on elbow kinematics evaluated by dynamic radiostereometric analysis
- Author
-
Johanne F. Teilmann, Emil T. Petersen, Theis M. Thillemann, Chalotte K. Hemmingsen, Josephine O. Kipp, and Maiken Stilling
- Subjects
elbow ,kinematics ,radial head arthroplasty ,radial head diameter ,radiostereometry ,Orthopedic surgery ,RD701-811 - Abstract
Abstract Purpose Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) reestablishes elbow stability after complex radial head fracture, but complication rates are high, possibly due to inappropriate implant sizing. Knowledge of impact of radial head implant diameter on elbow kinematics is limited and warranted. This study evaluated elbow kinematics of different radial head implant diameters after RHA using dynamic radiostereometric analysis (dRSA). Methods Eight human donor arms were examined with dRSA during elbow flexion with the forearm in unloaded neutral position, and in supinated‐ and pronated position without and with 10N either varus or valgus load, respectively. Elbow kinematics were examined before and after RHA with head diameters of anatomical size, −2 mm (undersized), and +2 mm (oversized). The ligaments were kept intact by use of step‐cut humerus osteotomy for repeated RHA exchange. Bone models were obtained from CT, and by AutoRSA software bone models were matched with dRSA recordings. The elbow kinematics were described using anatomical coordinate systems. Results Compared to the native radial head during elbow flexion, the anatomical sized RHA shifted 2.0 mm in ulnar direction during unloaded pronated forearm position. The undersized RHA shifted 1.5 mm in posterior direction and 2.1 mm in ulnar direction during unloaded pronated forearm position and increased the varus angle by 2.4° during supinated loaded forearm position. The oversized RHA shifted 1.6 mm in radial direction during loaded supinated forearm position. Conclusions The anatomically sized RHA should be preferred as it maintained native elbow kinematics the best. The kinematic changes with oversized and undersized RHA diameters were small, suggesting forgiveness for the RHA diameter size. Level of Evidence Level III.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF