Neurobionplus
Home About Journal AHEAD OF PRINT Current Issue Back Issues Instructions Submission Search Subscribe Blog    
Login 

Users Online: 2322 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 


 
 Table of Contents    
LETTER TO EDITOR  
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 48  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 536
Primary total elbow arthroplasty


Department of Orthopaedics, Bone and Joint Hospital,Govt. Medical College, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication2-Sep-2014
 

How to cite this article:
Khan HA. Primary total elbow arthroplasty. Indian J Orthop 2014;48:536

How to cite this URL:
Khan HA. Primary total elbow arthroplasty. Indian J Orthop [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Dec 10];48:536. Available from: http://www.ijoonline.com/text.asp?2014/48/5/536/139891
Sir,

We read with interest the article by Kumar and Mahanta [1] titled as "Primary total elbow arthoplasty" and would like to discuss the few issues regarding this manuscript.

  1. The authors have not mentioned whether they have locked the humeral and ulnar components before inserting them into the respective bones and if not, which component was fixed first (authors preference in 11 cases).
  2. The authors have not mentioned how to put the hinge screw (medially) and then look for the slot for locking screw which is to be fixed from anterior side. Since the working space from anterior side is little after engaging the two components. With linked implants, disassembly of the components or breakage of the axle locking mechanism or disassociation of the components occur which represents failure. [2],[3]
  3. Regarding implant size the author says "The vertical height of the prosthetic hinge was compared with the gap between the cut ends of the humerus and ulna in both, extension and flexion. It may be necessary, to resect more bone from the distal humerus to accommodate the hinge, in patients with marked contractures of the flexors and extensors". The authors have not mentioned whether they used different stem sizes (humeral or ulnar) in different patients and whether they compared length with the normal side (preoperatively or intraoperatively) which might have been the reason for limb length discrepancy in (36%) of patients in the present study.


 
   References Top

1.Kumar S, Mahanta S. Primary total elbow arthroplasty. Indian J Orthop 2013;47:608-14  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Madsen F, Søjbjerg JO, Sneppen O. Late complications with the Pritchard Mark II elbow prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1994;3:17-23  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Little CP, Graham AJ, Carr AJ. Total elbow arthroplasty: A systematic review of the literature in the English language until the end of 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87:437-44  Back to cited text no. 3
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Hayat Ahmad Khan
B and J Hospital, Sgr, J and K - 190 002
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.139891

Rights and Permissions




 

Top
 
 
 
  Search
 
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  
 


 
    References
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1110    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded63    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal