Elbow Hemiarthroplasty Versus Total Elbow Arthroplasty for Irreparable Distal Humeral Fractures. A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- Linkoeping University
- Enrollment
- 42
- Locations
- 3
- Primary Endpoint
- Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire
Overview
Brief Summary
Distal humeral fractures can be difficult to treat, in particular when the joint surface is affected (intra-articular fractures). If rigid internal fixation with plates and screws can be obtained it is considered to be the treatment of choice. In elderly patients, poor bone quality (osteopenia) and fragmentation of the articular surface can make rigid internal fixation non-reliable or even impossible. Total elbow arthroplasty has been shown to be of value in this type of situation. Elbow hemiarthroplasty has been proposed as an alternative to total elbow arthroplasty. The theoretical advantages as opposed to total elbow arthroplasty are: no restriction in the weight allowed to be lifted, complications related to polyethylene wear debris are avoided as there is no polyethylene liner and there is no ulna component that can loosen. Wear of the native ulna and instability are potential complications of elbow hemiarthroplasty.
The aim of this multicenter study is to test the hypothesis that elbow hemiarthroplasty gives better elbow function than total elbow arthroplasty for irreparable distal humeral fractures.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Eligibility Criteria
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire
Time Frame: 24 months
The DASH questionnaire aims to assess symptoms and functional status of the upper extremities. It is a patient reported outcome measure that contains 30 core items. The score ranges from 0 to 100 points with higher scores indicating greater impairment.
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported
Investigators
Lars Adolfsson
Prof, MD, PhD
Linkoeping University