Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Apr;139(4):507-517.
doi: 10.1007/s00402-019-03111-z. Epub 2019 Jan 17.

Radial head replacement versus reconstruction for the treatment of the terrible triad injury of the elbow: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Steven Kyriacou  1 , Yash Gupta  2 , Harraj Kaur Bains  2 , Harvinder Pal Singh  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Radial head replacement versus reconstruction for the treatment of the terrible triad injury of the elbow: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Steven Kyriacou et al. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019 Apr.

Abstract

Introduction: The terrible triad injury of the elbow (TTIE) remains challenging to manage and has been associated with high complication rates and poor outcomes. There is a trend towards performing radial head replacement (REP) in preference to radial head reconstruction (REC) as arthroplasty provides early stability and may allow mobilisation sooner, potentially resulting in a better functional outcome. This systematic review compares the outcome of patients with TTIE treated with either REC or REP.

Materials and methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL were searched for studies published in English involving at least ten patients exclusively with a TTIE managed operatively, including both patients with either REC or REP. Data collection was in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis protocol. The outcomes of interest were Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and range of motion (ROM). Post-operative complications were also compared.

Results: 9 studies involving 210 patients were included (98 REPs and 112 RECs). There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.51) demonstrated between in the mean MEPS of the REP group (mean 88.6) and REC group (mean 88.5). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference demonstrated between the REP and REC groups in terms of ROM. The risk of re-operation was high in both the REP (18.4%) and REC (17.9%) group. The overall complication rate of all patients included in the study was high (65%).

Conclusions: Comparable results with good outcomes in terms of functional scores and ROM can be achieved with both REP and REC when treating TTIE, although the re-operation rate for both remains relatively high. Given there is no apparent clear advantage between the two treatment groups, we would suggest that REC should be performed when a satisfactory fixation can be achieved as the longevity of REP in young patients with a TTIE is currently uncertain.

Keywords: Head; Radial; Reconstruction; Replacement; Terrible; Triad.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow chart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot MEPS
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot flexion
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Forest plot extension
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot pronation
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Forest plot supination
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Funnel plot demonstrating mild heterogeneity of MEPS between studies included in meta-analysis
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. RN H (1996) Fractures and dislocations of the elbow. In: Rockwood and Green’s fractures in adults, 4th ed
    1. Leigh WB, Ball CM. Radial head reconstruction versus replacement in the treatment of terrible triad injuries of the elbow. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(10):1336–1341. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Watters TS, et al. Fixation versus replacement of radial head in terrible triad: is there a difference in elbow stability and prognosis? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(7):2128–2135. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3331-x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Giannicola G, et al. Terrible triad of the elbow: is it still a troublesome injury? Injury. 2015;46 Suppl 8:S68–S76. doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(15)30058-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mathew PK, Athwal GS, King GJ. Terrible triad injury of the elbow: current concepts. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17(3):137–151. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200903000-00003. - DOI - PubMed