Purpose: Osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) of the capitellum most commonly affects adolescent pitchers and gymnasts, and presents with pain and mechanical symptoms. Fragment excision is the most commonly employed surgical treatment; however, patients with larger lesions have been reported to have poorer outcomes. It’s not clear whether this is due to increased contact pressures on the surrounding articular surface, or if fragment excision causes instability of the elbow. The purpose of this study was to determine if fragment excision of simulated OCD lesions of the capitellum alters kinematics and stability of the elbow.

Method: Nine fresh-frozen cadaveric arms were mounted in an upper extremity joint motion simulator, with cables attaching the tendons of the major muscle tendons to motors and pneumatic actuators. Electromagnetic receivers attached to the radius and ulna enabled quantification of the kinematics of both bones with respect to the humerus. Three-dimensional CT scans were used to plan lesions of 12.5% (mean 0.8cm2), 25%, 37.5%, 50%, and 100% (mean 6.2cm2) of the capitellar surface, which were marked on the capitellum using navigation. Lesions were created by burring through cartilage and subchondral bone. The arms were subjected to active and passive flexion in both the vertical and valgus-loaded positions, and passive forearm rotation in the vertical position.

Results: No significant differences in varus-valgus or rotational ulnohumeral kinematics were found between any of the simulated OCD lesions and the elbows with an intact articulation with active and passive flexion, regardless of forearm rotation and the orientation of the arm (p> 0.7). Radiocapitellar kinematics were not significantly affected during passive forearm rotation with the arm in the vertical position (p=0.07–0.6).

Conclusion: In this in-vitro biomechanical study even large simulated OCD lesions of the capitellum did not alter the kinematics or laxity of the elbow at either the radiocapitellar or ulnohumeral joints. These data suggest that excision of capitellar fragments not amenable to fixation can be considered without altering elbow kinematics or decreasing stability. Further study is required to examine other factors, such as altered contact stresses on the remaining articulation, that are thought to contribute to poorer outcomes in patients with larger lesions.

Accurate implant alignment with the flexion-extension axis of the elbow is likely critical for optimal function and durability following elbow replacement arthroplasty. Implant alignment can be optimised by imaging the contralateral normal elbow prior to surgery and transferring this information to the diseased elbow in the operating room through registration. Successful registration is dependent on the presence of unique anatomical landmarks. Bone loss can create a challenge for registration as key anatomical landmarks are absent, limiting the number of sampling areas. This study investigated the effect of intraoperative sampling area on registration accuracy. We hypothesised that a low registration error can be achieved by acquiring surface data from areas unlikely compromised due to injury and readily available to the surgeon during typical surgical exposures.

CT images of twenty cadaveric distal humeri were acquired. Surface data was acquired from nineteen anatomical landmarks of the distal humerus using a hand-held laser scanner (FastSCANTM, Polhemus). Registration to the CT image was performed for thirty-nine landmark combinations. Only six combinations are discussed for succinctness.

Combining data from the anterior articular surface and humeral shaft, the lowest registration error was achieved in translation (0.8±0.3 mm) and rotation (0.3±0.2°). However, using data from the posterior shaft and proximal medial supracondylar column, a registration error of 1.1±0.2 mm and 0.4±0.2° was achieved.

Based on the results of this study, a low registration error can be achieved by acquiring data from two areas that are located proximal to the articular surface (the proximal medial supracondylar column and posterior humeral shaft), readily available surgically, and unlikely compromised due to distal humeral fractures, non-unions or bone loss due to severe erosive arthritis. Registration error was similar to the reported resolution of the laser scanner. Overall, this study demonstrates the promise for a successful registration of the contralateral normal elbow to physical surface data of the diseased or injured elbow using only a small portion of undamaged bone structure.

Purpose: Accurate determination of the flexion-extension axis of the elbow is critical to the successful placement of elbow arthroplasties, articulated external fixators and ligament reconstructions. We expect axis alignment using computer-assisted techniques to improve the outcome of these procedures. For image-based procedures, registration (i.e. the transformation needed to align two sets of points) during surgery is critical for accurate alignment. A surface-based registration technique, employing a hand-held laser scanner, was evaluated against a stand-alone paired-point registration method to determine whether it led to improved alignment of the elbow’s flexion-extension axis.

Methods: Twelve cadaveric distal-humeri were selected for registration. To perform paired-point (TP-PP) registration, key anatomical landmarks (capitellum, trochlear sulcus and distal humeral shaft) were digitized using a tracked-probe (TP) and an electromagnetic tracking device (Flock of Birds, Ascension Tech). Using the geometric centers of these landmarks, TP-PP registration to CT data was performed. Surface registration was achieved using the iterative closest point (ICP) least-squares algorithm and the results were evaluated for two devices; registration employing the tracked-probe (TP-ICP) and registration employing a hand-held laser scanner, HHS-ICP (FastSCAN, Polhemus). For surface registration, to be consistent with the amount of the joint exposed during a typical surgical procedure, only the articular surface was used for alignment.

Results: Registration error (Figure 1) was lowest for the HHS-ICP method with a mean of 0.8±0.3-mm (maximum error, 1.4-mm) in translation, compared with a mean error of 1.5±0.5-mm (maximum error, 2.4-mm) for the TP-ICP method and 1.9±1.0-mm (maximum error, 4.4-mm) for the TP-PP method (p< 0.001). Errors in TP-PP registration were greatest in the coronal plane while TP-ICP registration often resulted in an error along the transverse plane (Figure 2).

Conclusions: Overall, the reliability of surface-based registration combined with the implementation of the hand-held laser scanner demonstrated greater registration accuracy. A reliable surface-based registration technique may lead to a more accurate determination of the elbow’s flexion-extension axis during surgical procedures, leading to improved joint motion and implant longevity. The implications of these results can also be extended to other joints that employ comparable computer-assisted surgical techniques.