Patient and Surgeon Factors Associated With Prosthetic Replacement Rather Than With Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of a Radial Head Fracture

• Published in: Hand (New York, N.Y.) Vol. 17; no. 2; pp. 308 - 312
• Main Authors: O’Connor, Casey M., Kortlever, Joost, Vagner, Gregg A., Reichel, Lee M., Ring, David
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.03.2022
• Subjects: Humans; Radius Fractures - surgery; Range of Motion, Articular; Retrospective Studies; Surgeons; Surgery; Treatment Outcome; terrible triad; radial head fracture; arthroplasty; prosthesis
• ISSN: 1558-9447; 1558-9455
• DOI: 10.1177/1558944720918358

Background: The decision between radial head arthroplasty and open reduction internal fixation in the context of a terrible triad elbow fracture-dislocation is debated. This study investigated both surgeon and patient factors associated with surgeons’ recommendations to use arthroplasty. Methods: One hundred fifty-two surgeon members of the Science of Variation Group participated. Surgeons were asked to complete an online survey that included surgeon demographics and 16 patient scenarios. The patient scenarios were randomized using 2 patient variables and 2 anatomical variables. Multilevel logistic mixed regression analysis was performed to identify surgeon and patient variables associated with recommendations for radial head arthroplasty. Results: We found that radial head replacement was recommended in 38% of the scenarios. Scenarios with older patients, with fractures of the whole head, and those involving 3 fracture fragments were independently associated with radial head replacement. Conclusion: We found that most surgeons recommended radial head fracture fixation rather than arthroplasty. Surgeons were more likely to recommend fixation for younger patients with partial articular fractures or with fractures with 3 or fewer fracture fragments. It seems that surgeons are uneasy about using a prosthesis in a young active patient.