Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 8/2022

Open Access 19-02-2021 | Orthopaedic Surgery

LUCL reconstruction of the elbow: clinical midterm results based on the underlying pathogenesis

Authors: Stephanie Geyer, Caroline Heine, Philipp W. Winkler, Patricia M. Lutz, Andreas Lenich, Bastian Scheiderer, Andreas B. Imhoff, Sebastian Siebenlist

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 8/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Traumatic and atraumatic insufficiency of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) can cause posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI) of the elbow. The influence of the underlying pathogenesis on functional outcomes remains unknown so far. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of the initial pathogenesis of PLRI on clinical outcomes after LUCL reconstruction using an ipsilateral triceps tendon autograft.

Methods

Thirty-six patients were reviewed in this retrospective study. Depending on the pathogenesis patients were assigned to either group EPI (atraumatic, secondary LUCL insufficiency due to chronic epicondylopathia) or group TRAUMA (traumatic LUCL lesion). Range-of-motion (ROM) and posterolateral joint stability were evaluated preoperatively and at follow-up survey. For clinical assessment, the Mayo elbow performance (MEPS) score was used. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) consisting of visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, disability of arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score, patient-rated elbow evaluation (PREE) score and subjective elbow evaluation (SEV) as well as complications were analyzed.

Results

Thirty-one patients (group EPI, n = 17; group TRAUMA, n = 14), 13 men and 18 women with a mean age of 42.9 ± 11.0 were available for follow-up evaluation (57.7 ± 17.5 months). In 93.5%, posterolateral elbow stability was restored (n = 2 with re-instability, both group TRAUMA). No differences were seen between groups in relation to ROM. Even though group EPI (98.9 ± 3.7 points) showed better results than group TRAUMA (91.1 ± 12.6 points) (p = 0.034) according to MEPS, no differences were found for evaluated PROs (group A: VAS 1 ± 1.8, PREE 9.3 ± 15.7, DASH 7.7 ± 11.9, SEV 92.9 ± 8.3 vs. group B: VAS 1.9 ± 3.2, PREE 22.4 ± 26.1, DASH 16.0 ± 19.4, SEV 87.9 ± 15.4. 12.9% of patients required revision surgery.

Conclusion

LUCL reconstruction using a triceps tendon autograft for the treatment of PLRI provides good to excellent clinical outcomes regardless of the underlying pathogenesis (traumatic vs. atraumatic). However, in the present case series, posterolateral re-instability tends to be higher for traumatic PLRI and patient-reported outcomes showed inferior results.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic study, LEVEL III.
Literature
6.
go back to reference Sanchez-Sotelo J, Morrey BF, O’Driscoll SW (2005) Ligamentous repair and reconstruction for posterolateral rotatory instability of the elbow. J Bone Jt Surg Br 87(1):54–61CrossRef Sanchez-Sotelo J, Morrey BF, O’Driscoll SW (2005) Ligamentous repair and reconstruction for posterolateral rotatory instability of the elbow. J Bone Jt Surg Br 87(1):54–61CrossRef
9.
go back to reference O’Driscoll SW, Bell DF, Morrey BF (1991) Posterolateral rotatory instability of the elbow. J Bone Jt Surg Am 73(3):440–446CrossRef O’Driscoll SW, Bell DF, Morrey BF (1991) Posterolateral rotatory instability of the elbow. J Bone Jt Surg Am 73(3):440–446CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ries C, Franke S, Dietrich F, Jakubowitz E, Dehlinger F, Hollinger B (2013) Transosseous refixation of the common extensor muscle tendons in chronic lateral epicondylitis with and without additional reconstruction of the LUCL–a retrospective evaluation of 101 patients. Z Orthop Unfall 151(3):296–301. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1328578CrossRefPubMed Ries C, Franke S, Dietrich F, Jakubowitz E, Dehlinger F, Hollinger B (2013) Transosseous refixation of the common extensor muscle tendons in chronic lateral epicondylitis with and without additional reconstruction of the LUCL–a retrospective evaluation of 101 patients. Z Orthop Unfall 151(3):296–301. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1055/​s-0032-1328578CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Hohmann G (1927) Über den tennisellenbogen. Verh Dtsch Orthop Ges Hohmann G (1927) Über den tennisellenbogen. Verh Dtsch Orthop Ges
20.
go back to reference Mason ML (1954) Some observations on fractures of the head of the radius with a review of one hundred cases. Br J Surg 42(172):123–132CrossRef Mason ML (1954) Some observations on fractures of the head of the radius with a review of one hundred cases. Br J Surg 42(172):123–132CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Nestor BJODS, Morrey BF (1992) Ligamentous reconstruction for posterolateral rotatory instability of the elbow. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74-A:1235–1241CrossRef Nestor BJODS, Morrey BF (1992) Ligamentous reconstruction for posterolateral rotatory instability of the elbow. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74-A:1235–1241CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Chanlalit CLW (2013) Posterolateral rotatory instability from multiple steroids injections for tennis elbow: a case report. J Med Assoc Thai 96:104–107 Chanlalit CLW (2013) Posterolateral rotatory instability from multiple steroids injections for tennis elbow: a case report. J Med Assoc Thai 96:104–107
Metadata
Title
LUCL reconstruction of the elbow: clinical midterm results based on the underlying pathogenesis
Authors
Stephanie Geyer
Caroline Heine
Philipp W. Winkler
Patricia M. Lutz
Andreas Lenich
Bastian Scheiderer
Andreas B. Imhoff
Sebastian Siebenlist
Publication date
19-02-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 8/2022
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-03759-6

Other articles of this Issue 8/2022

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 8/2022 Go to the issue