# Outcomes of total elbow arthroplasty in trauma patients compared with patients following fixation of distal humerus fractures

## TL;DR

This study compares total elbow arthroplasty and open reduction in treating elbow fractures, finding better pain relief and satisfaction with arthroplasty.

## Contribution

The study provides a direct comparison of patient-reported outcomes and complication rates between TEA and ORIF for distal humerus fractures.

## Key findings

- TEA patients reported significantly lower pain and higher satisfaction than ORIF patients.
- TEA showed better flexion range of motion compared to ORIF.
- ORIF was associated with a higher rate of complications and secondary procedures.

## Abstract

Total elbow arthroplasties (TEA) aim to replicate anatomy and provide stability in the treatment of distal fractures of the humerus. In the presence of an aging population with higher functional demand, improving patients' well-being is crucial. This study aimed to analyze patients’ reported outcomes and functional outcomes for TEA in comminuted fractures of the distal humerus and to compare these outcomes with their counterpart patients who have been treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). In addition, this study aims to compare the secondary procedures rate between the two groups.

Eligible patients were those who underwent TEA or ORIF of the distal humerus and completed several patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires including the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical and Mental components (SF-12 P and SF-12 M, respectively) scores, visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and patient satisfaction ratings (1–5). A physical examination including range of motion, instability, and strength was performed for all patients.

This study found that patients following TEA have shown significantly lower pain levels (TEA: 3.72 ± 2.8; ORIF 5.2 ± 2.98, P = 0.019) and higher satisfaction levels (TEA: 4.18 ± 1.17; ORIF 3.57 ± 1.46, P = 0.035) compared with patients following ORIF. DASH score (TEA: 33.7 ± 29.4; ORIF 39.75 ± 24.6, P = 0.31) and SF-12 score (TEA: 31.7 ± 9.67; ORIF 31.25 ± 10.2, P = 0.85) were not statistically different between TEA and ORIF.

Patients following TEA demonstrated an advantage in flexion in the operative arm compared with patients following ORIF (P = 0.045). Both patients following TEA and ORIF demonstrated no statistically significant difference in protonation and supination of the operated elbow compared to the contralateral side. Although, a decreased range in extension and flexion of the operated elbow compared with the contralateral side was demonstrated in both groups (extension P = 0.005, flexion P < 0.001). The Grip Test showed no significant difference between the patients who were treated by TEA or ORIF (P = 0.99). Moreover, ORIF in comminuted fractures of the distal humerus in elders may be associated with a higher complication rate compared with TEA.

TEA following comminuted fractures of the distal humerus is associated with favorable satisfaction, pain levels, and range of motion in flexion compared with patients following ORIF of the distal humerus. Additionally, TEA may be associated with a lower rate of secondary procedures.