Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Bertram The x
Clear All Modify Search
Tim Kraal Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Tim Kraal in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Lijkele Beimers Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Slotervaart Center of Orthopedic Research & Education (SCORE), The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Lijkele Beimers in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Bertram The Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Bertram The in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Inger Sierevelt Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Slotervaart Center of Orthopedic Research & Education (SCORE), The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Inger Sierevelt in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Michel van den Bekerom Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Michel van den Bekerom in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Denise Eygendaal Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Denise Eygendaal in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

  • Manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) for frozen shoulder (FS) leads to a considerable increase in range of motion and Oxford shoulder score, a significant reduction in pain and around 85% satisfaction.

  • A clearly defined indication for MUA in FS patients cannot be extracted from this review or the available literature. The associating criteria before proceeding to MUA vary widely.

  • All but one study in this review lacked a control group without intervention. Therefore, firm conclusions about the role of MUA in the treatment of FS cannot be drawn from the current literature.

  • An overall complication rate of 0.4% was found and a re-intervention rate of 14%, although most of the included papers were not designed to monitor complications.

  • The following criteria before proceeding to MUA are proposed: a patient unable to cope with a stiff and painful shoulder; clinical signs of a stage 2 idiopathic FS; lessening pain in relation to stage 1; external rotation < 50% compared to contralateral shoulder joint; a minimal duration of symptoms of three months; and failure to respond to an intra-articular corticosteroid infiltration.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:98-109. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180044

Open access
Izaäk F. Kodde Orthopedic Center Antwerp, AZ Monica Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Izaäk F. Kodde in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Jetske Viveen Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Upper Limb Unit, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Jetske Viveen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Bertram The Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Upper Limb Unit, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Bertram The in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Roger P. van Riet Orthopedic Center Antwerp, AZ Monica Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium

Search for other papers by Roger P. van Riet in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Denise Eygendaal Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Upper Limb Unit, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for other papers by Denise Eygendaal in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

  • Primary radial head arthroplasty (RHA) produces good or excellent results in approximately 85% of patients. However, complications are not uncommon and have been described in up to 23% of cases.

  • The number of RHA is increasing, and consequently the absolute number of complications is expected to rise as well. The decision on whether to revise or remove the prosthesis seems more likely to depend on the preference of the surgeon or the hospital, rather than on objectifying problems with the prosthesis.

  • The current article presents an algorithm for the work-up and treatment of most complications that can occur following RHA.

  • Five subgroups of problems were identified: osteoarthritis, stiffness, instability, infection and implant-related issues.

  • In short, the preferred treatment depends mainly on the chondral condition and stability of the elbow joint.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:398-407. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190055

Open access