The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 86:1955-1960 (2004)
© 2004 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Anterior Release of the Elbow for Extension Loss
Julian M. Aldridge, III, MD1,
Thomas A. Atkins, MD1,
Eunice E. Gunneson, PA-C1 and
James R. Urbaniak, MD1
1 Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3000,
Durham, NC 27710. E-mail address for J.M. Aldridge III:
aldri004{at}mc.duke.edu
Investigation performed at the Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke
University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their
research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or
other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a
commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or
direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational
institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the
authors are affiliated or associated.
Background: There are many causes of elbow contracture. When
nonoperative techniques fail to increase the arc of motion of the elbow,
surgical intervention may be indicated. The purpose of this study was to
report the outcomes of surgical correction, predominantly with an anterior
release, of elbow flexion contractures. In addition, we evaluated the efficacy
of continuous passive motion in the immediate postoperative period.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 106 consecutive
patients who had undergone anterior elbow release for the treatment of a
flexion contracture between July 1975 and June 2001. Twenty-nine patients were
excluded because they had been followed for less than twelve months, leaving a
study group of seventy-seven patients. Postoperatively, fifty-four of the
seventy-seven patients were treated with continuous passive motion and the
other twenty-three patients were treated with extension splinting. The average
duration of follow-up was thirty-three months. The average patient age was
thirty-four years. The results were evaluated on the basis of both
preoperative and postoperative radiographs as well as clinical measurements of
elbow motion, all performed by the same examiner using the same large
(47-cm-long) goniometer.
Results: The mean preoperative extension in the seventy-seven
patients was 52°, which decreased to 20° postoperatively. The mean
flexion increased from 111° preoperatively to 117° postoperatively,
and the mean total arc of motion increased from 59° to 97°. The total
arc of motion in the patients treated with continuous passive motion increased
45°, compared with an increase of 26° in those treated with extension
splinting. There were eleven complications in ten patients. The majority were
traction neuropathies. There were two infections (one superficial and one
deep), both of which resolved following treatment.
Conclusions: Release of a pathologically thickened anterior elbow
capsule through a predominantly anterior approach to correct diminished elbow
extension is a safe and effective technique. Furthermore, compared with
splinting in extension alone, the utilization of continuous passive motion
during the postoperative period increases the total arc of motion.
Level of Evidence: Therapeutic study, Level III-2
(retrospective cohort study). See Instructions to Authors for a complete
description of levels of evidence.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. P. Steinmann, G. J.W. King, and F. H. Savoie III
Arthroscopic Treatment of the Arthritic Elbow
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
September 1, 2005;
87(9):
2113 - 2121.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|