0
Articles   |    
The Coonrad-Morrey Total Elbow Arthroplasty in Patients Who Have Rheumatoid Arthritis. A Ten to Fifteen-Year Follow-up Study*
DAVID R. J. GILL, M.B., CH.B., F.R.A.C.S.†; BERNARD F. MORREY, M.D.‡, ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
View Disclosures and Other Information
Investigation performed at the Department of Orthopedics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1998 Sep 01;80(9):1327-1335
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Sixty-nine patients (seventy-eight elbows) who had rheumatoid arthritis were managed with a Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty between 1981 and 1986. At the time of the present review, forty-one patients (forty-six elbows) were alive and had been followed for at least ten years after the procedure (Group 1). The remaining twenty-eight patients (thirty-two elbows) had died or had had a revision less than ten years after the procedure or had been followed for less than ten years (Group 2). The patients in Group 1 had a younger mean age at the time of the procedure, but all other preoperative parameters were similar for both groups.At the latest follow-up evaluation, 97 per cent of the elbows (forty-five of the forty-six in Group 1 and thirty-one of the thirty-two in Group 2) were not painful or were only mildly painful. The mean arc of flexion-extension was 28 to 131 degrees; this represents an increase of 13 degrees (15 degrees in Group 1 and 7 degrees in Group 2) compared with the preoperative value. The mean arc of pronation was 68 degrees, and the mean arc of supination was 62 degrees; this represents an increase of 21 degrees. The results for seventy-four of the seventy-eight elbows (all forty-six in Group 1 and twenty-eight of the thirty-two in Group 2) were considered satisfactory by the patients. One patient thought that the status of the elbow was unchanged compared with preoperatively, and three thought that it was worse.Seventy-six of the seventy-eight elbows had long-term radiographic evaluation; the two remaining elbows were excluded because a resection arthroplasty had been performed. There were two loose ulnar components; one was associated with an infection, and the other had been causing no symptoms at the time of the patient's death. In addition, both components were radiographically loose in an elbow that had had a revision without cement after a previous total elbow arthroplasty. Five bushings (7 per cent) were completely worn, and six (8 per cent) were partially worn.Complications occurred in eleven elbows (14 per cent) and were serious, necessitating reoperation, in ten (13 per cent). Delayed complications included three avulsions of the triceps, two deep infections, two ulnar fractures, and one fracture of an ulnar component. In addition, two elbows were revised because of aseptic loosening. No patient had persistent ulnar neuritis or serious skin complications.At the latest clinical follow-up evaluation, according to the Mayo elbow performance score, forty-three of the seventy-eight elbows had an excellent result; twenty-six, a good result; seven, a fair result; and two (both in Group 2), a poor result. The rate of survival of the prosthesis was 92.4 per cent, with 86 per cent good or excellent and 14 per cent fair or poor results.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org

    References

    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe





    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    03/19/2014
    Virginia - OrthoVirginia
    03/27/2014
    Massachusetts - Boston Medical Center and Boston University School of Medicine
    12/04/2013
    NY - Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
    02/19/2014
    OH - University Hospitals Case Medical Center