Aims. Arthroplasties of the elbow, including total elbow arthroplasty, radial head arthroplasty, distal humeral hemiarthroplasty, and radiocapitellar arthroplasty, are rarely undertaken. This scoping review aims to outline the current research in this area to inform the development of future research. Methods. A scoping review was undertaken adhering to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines using Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and trial registries, limited to studies published between 1 January 1990 and 7 February 2021. Endnote software was used for screening and selection, and included randomized trials, non-randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies, analytical cross-sectional studies, and case series of ten or more patients reporting the clinical outcomes of elbow arthroplasty. The results are presented as the number of types of studies, sample size, length of follow-up, clinical outcome domains and instruments used, sources of
The aim of this audit was to assess and improve the completeness and accuracy of the National Joint Registry (NJR) dataset for arthroplasty of the elbow. It was performed in two phases. In Phase 1, the completeness was assessed by comparing the NJR elbow dataset with the NHS England Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data between April 2012 and April 2020. In order to assess the accuracy of the data, the components of each arthroplasty recorded in the NJR were compared to the type of arthroplasty which was recorded. In Phase 2, a national collaborative audit was undertaken to evaluate the reasons for unmatched data, add missing arthroplasties, and evaluate the reasons for the recording of inaccurate arthroplasties and correct them.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to review the provision of total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) in England, including the incidence, the characteristics of the patients and the service providers, the types of implant, and the outcomes. We analyzed the primary TEAs recorded in the National Joint Registry (NJR) between April 2012 and December 2022, with mortality data from the Civil Registration of Deaths dataset. Linkage with Hospital Episode Statistics-Admitted Patient Care (HES-APC) data provided further information not collected by the NJR. The incidences were calculated using estimations of the populations from the Office for National Statistics. The annual number of TEAs performed by surgeons and hospitals was analyzed on a national and regional basis.Aims
Methods
The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of distension arthrography in the treatment of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. The secondary aim was to assess which patient and procedural factors predicted the recurrence of symptoms after the procedure. All patients referred to our shoulder clinic over a ten-year period, between 2008 and 2018, with a clinical diagnosis of capsulitis and symptoms persisting for more than six months, were offered treatment with a distension arthrogram. All procedures were performed by one of five musculoskeletal radiologists, with a combination of steroid, local anaesthetic, and a distention volume of 10 ml, 30 ml, or 50 ml. Patient demographics, procedural details, recurrence of symptoms, and the need for further intervention were evaluated.Aims
Methods
Patient-specific instrumentation has been shown to increase a surgeon’s precision and accuracy in placing the glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty. There is, however, little available information about the use of patient-specific planning (PSP) tools for this operation. It is not known how these tools alter the decision-making patterns of shoulder surgeons. The aim of this study was to investigate whether PSP, when compared with the use of plain radiographs or select static CT images, influences the understanding of glenoid pathology and surgical planning. A case-based survey presented surgeons with a patient’s history, physical examination, and, sequentially, radiographs, select static CT images, and PSP with a 3D imaging program. For each imaging modality, the surgeons were asked to identify the Walch classification of the glenoid and to propose the surgical treatment. The participating surgeons were grouped according to the annual volume of shoulder arthroplasties that they undertook, and responses were compared with the recommendations of two experts.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to use national registry database information to estimate cumulative rates and relative risk of revision due to infection after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. We included 17 730 primary shoulder arthroplasties recorded between 2004 and 2013 in The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) data set. With the Kaplan–Meier method, we illustrated the ten-year cumulative rates of revision due to infection and with the Cox regression model, we reported the hazard ratios as a measure of the relative risk of revision due to infection.Aims
Patients and Methods
We explored the trends over time and the geographical
variation in the use of subacromial decompression and rotator cuff
repair in 152 local health areas (Primary Care Trusts) across England.
The diagnostic and procedure codes of patients undergoing certain
elective shoulder operations between 2000/2001 and 2009/2010 were extracted
from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. They were grouped
as 1) subacromial decompression only, 2) subacromial decompression
with rotator cuff repair, and 3) rotator cuff repair only. The number of patients undergoing subacromial decompression alone
rose by 746.4% from 2523 in 2000/2001 (5.2/100 000 (95% confidence
interval (CI) 5.0 to 5.4) to 21 355 in 2009/2010 (40.2/100 000 (95%
CI 39.7 to 40.8)). Operations for rotator cuff repair alone peaked
in 2008/2009 (4.7/100 000 (95% CI 4.5 to 4.8)) and declined considerably
in 2009/2010 (2.6/100 000 (95% CI 2.5 to 2.7)). Given the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of these operations
and the significant increase in the number of procedures being performed
in England and elsewhere, there is an urgent need for well-designed
clinical trials to determine evidence of clinical effectiveness. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:70–4.
