Little is known about the potential negative or positive effects of peritendinous infiltration with corticosteroids in the non-surgical treatment of partial distal biceps tendon tears. Peritendinous fluid, synovitis, and bursitis often accompany partial tears and can be a source of persistent pain. We hypothesize that peritendinous corticosteroid infiltration is a safe non-surgical treatment option for complaints related to a partial distal biceps tendon rupture. Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis was performed on a cohort of 52 patients with partial distal biceps tears (<50% of the footprint involved), as confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging. All patients received an ultrasound-guided intrabursal peritendinous infiltration with 1 mL of triamcinolone acetonide (10 mg/mL) and 4 mL of 2% lidocaine HCl. Patient files were reviewed for demographic information, date of injury, injury mechanism, treatment modality (operative or nonoperative), clinical follow-up (2011–2021), and complications, including progression to a complete rupture. Results: The median duration of follow-up after infiltration was 15 months (1.2–45 months). No infiltration-related complications were observed following infiltration therapy. Surgical reconstruction was ultimately performed in 65% of the patients with a partial tear. One patient sustained a trauma to the elbow in the weeks following infiltration, resulting in a complete tear. Conclusions: Infiltration with corticosteroids is a safe treatment option for patients with a partial tear of the distal biceps who failed progressive exercise therapy. Surgical reconstruction was avoided in 35% of patients following infiltration treatment. Level of evidence: IV.

Background: Silicone radial head prostheses (SRHP) are considered obsolete due to reports of frequent failure and destructive silicone-induced synovitis. Considering the good outcomes of modern non-radial silicone joint implants, the extent of scientific evidence for this negative view is unclear. The aim of this research was to systematically analyze the clinical evidence on complications and outcomes of SRHP and how SRHP compare to both non-SRHP and silicone prostheses of other joints. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted through the Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases. Results: Eight cohort studies were included, consisting of 142 patients and follow-up periods ranging from 23 months to 8 years. Average patient satisfaction was 86%, range of 71%–100%, and 58 complications were seen, but no cases of synovitis. These outcomes were in line with non-SRHP. Four case series with 11 cases of synovitis were found, all due to implant fractures years to decades after implantation. Six systematic reviews of currently used non-radial silicone joint implants showed excellent outcomes with low complication rates. Conclusions Since SRHP have satisfactory clinical results and an acceptable complication rate when selecting a patient group in suitable condition for surgical indications, it is considered that SRHP can still be chosen as a potential surgical treatment method in current clinical practice.

anaDistalhumerus fractures (DHFs) are challenging to treat due to the locally complex osseous and soft tissue anatomy. Adequate exposure of the articular surface of the distal humerus is crucial when performing an anatomical reconstruction of the elbow. Even though “triceps-on” approaches are gaining popularity, one of the most commonly used surgical treatments for DHF is olecranon osteotomy. The incidence of complications related to this approach is unclear. This review was performed to assess the type and frequency of complications that occur with the olecranon osteotomy approach in the treatment of DHF. A literature search was conducted in the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library digital databases up to February 2020. Only English articles describing complications of olecranon osteotomy in the treatment of DHF were included. Data on patient and surgical characteristics and complications were extracted. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS. A total of 41 articles describing 1,700 osteotomies were included, and a total of 447 complications were reported. Of these 447 complications, wound infections occurred in 4.2% of osteotomies, of which 1.4% were deep infections and 2.8% were superficial. Problems related with union occurred in 3.7% of osteotomies, 2% of which represented non-union and 1.7% delayed union. The high risk of complications in olecranon osteotomy must be considered in the decision to perform this procedure in the treatment of DHF.

Background: Injection therapy around the distal biceps tendon insertion is challenging. This therapy may be indicated in patients with a partial distal biceps tendon tear, bicipitoradial bursitis and tendinopathy. The primary goal of this study was to determine the accuracy of manually performed injections without ultrasound guidance around the biceps tendon. Methods: Seven upper limb specialists, two general orthopedic specialists and three orthopedic surgical residents manually injected a cadaver elbow with acrylic dye using an anterior and a lateral infiltration approach. After infiltration the cadaveric elbows were dissected to determine the location of the acrylic dye. Results: In total, 79% of the injections were localized near the biceps tendon. Of these injections, 20% were localized on the radius near the bicipitoradial bursa. In total, 53% of the performed infiltrations were injected by anterior and 47% by lateral approaches. Of the injections near the distal biceps (79%), 47% were injected by an anterior and 53% by a lateral approach. Of the injections on the radius (20%), 33% were injected by anterior and 67% by lateral approach. Of the inaccurate injections (21%), 75% were injected anterior and 25% lateral. Conclusion Manual infiltration without ultrasound guidance for distal biceps pathology lacks accuracy. We therefore recommend ultrasound guidance for more accurate infiltration.

Background: Injection therapy around the distal biceps tendon insertion is challenging. This therapy may be indicated in patients with a partial distal biceps tendon tear, bicipitoradial bursitis and tendinopathy. The primary goal of this study was to determine the accuracy of manually performed injections without ultrasound guidance around the biceps tendon. Methods: Seven upper limb specialists, two general orthopedic specialists and three orthopedic surgical residents manually injected a cadaver elbow with acrylic dye using an anterior and a lateral infiltration approach. After infiltration the cadaveric elbows were dissected to determine the location of the acrylic dye. Results: In total, 79% of the injections were localized near the biceps tendon. Of these injections, 20% were localized on the radius near the bicipitoradial bursa. In total, 53% of the performed infiltrations were injected by anterior and 47% by lateral approaches. Of the injections near the distal biceps (79%), 47% were injected by an anterior and 53% by a lateral approach. Of the injections on the radius (20%), 33% were injected by anterior and 67% by lateral approach. Of the inaccurate injections (21%), 75% were injected anterior and 25% lateral. Conclusion Manual infiltration without ultrasound guidance for distal biceps pathology lacks accuracy. We therefore recommend ultrasound guidance for more accurate infiltration.