ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2024
Radial head arthroplasty diameter impact on elbow kinematics evaluated by dynamic radiostereometric analysis.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Callus as an Adverse Prognostic Sign Following Radial Head Replacement for Trauma.Cureus · 2024Article
- The role of radial head morphology in proximal radioulnar joint congruency during forearm rotation.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Radial head arthroplasty diameter impact on elbow kinematics evaluated by dynamic radiostereometric analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) reestablishes elbow stability after complex radial head fracture, but complication rates are high, possibly due to inappropriate implant sizing. Knowledge of impact of radial head implant diameter on elbow kinematics is limited and warranted. This study evaluated elbow kinematics of different radial head implant diameters after RHA using dynamic radiostereometric analysis (dRSA). Methods: Eight human donor arms were examined with dRSA during elbow flexion with the forearm in unloaded neutral position, and in supinated- and pronated position without and with 10N either varus or valgus load, respectively. Elbow kinematics were examined before and after RHA with head diameters of anatomical size, -2 mm (undersized), and +2 mm (oversized). The ligaments were kept intact by use of step-cut humerus osteotomy for repeated RHA exchange. Bone models were obtained from CT, and by AutoRSA software bone models were matched with dRSA recordings. The elbow kinematics were described using anatomical coordinate systems. Results: Compared to the native radial head during elbow flexion, the anatomical sized RHA shifted 2.0 mm in ulnar direction during unloaded pronated forearm position. The undersized RHA shifted 1.5 mm in posterior direction and 2.1 mm in ulnar direction during unloaded pronated forearm position and increased the varus angle by 2.4° during supinated loaded forearm position. The oversized RHA shifted 1.6 mm in radial direction during loaded supinated forearm position. Conclusions: The anatomically sized RHA should be preferred as it maintained native elbow kinematics the best. The kinematic changes with oversized and undersized RHA diameters were small, suggesting forgiveness for the RHA diameter size. Level of Evidence: Level III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.