Effectiveness of revision following linked versus unlinked total elbow arthroplasty

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to specifically evaluate the implications of unlinked and linked designs on the survivorship of revision surgery.

Methods

Between 1972 and 1990, 352 linked and 151 unlinked prostheses were inserted at our institution. One-hundred and twenty-two elbows (24%) underwent subsequent revision: 55 linked (16%) and 67 unlinked (44%). Survivorship of the initial and revision total elbow replacement was calculated using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. Comparisons were made between revisions done after a failed primary linked or unlinked designs. The unlinked revised to a linked device was more reliable than when revised to another unlinked device: 1 year survival 84% compared to 47%.

Results

Initial survival was 56% at 367 months and 84% at 371 months for the unlinked and linked cohorts, respectively (P < .001). A second revision was required in 12 of the 35 elbows (30%) in the linked cohort and 14 of the 50 elbows (28%) in the unlinked.

Conclusions

At our institution, primary linked implants display significantly better long-term survivorship (P < .001) than did the unlinked designs. Unlinked designs are most reliably converted to a linked implant.

Level of evidence

Level 3; Treatment study, retrospective case-control study.