Al-Qahtani, Saad

Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of static versus dynamic external fixation for elbow fracture-dislocations with persistent instability after surgical management. Design: Comparative, retrospective review. Setting: Two tertiary referral upper-extremity centers. Patients: Twenty-four elbows requiring external fixation for persistent elbow instability within 90 days of surgical management of an elbow fracture-dislocation. Intervention: Static and dynamic external fixation was used in 16 and 8 patients, respectively, for a median of 39 days (interquartile range, 33–48 days). Main Outcome Measurements: Elbow range of motion, complications, and revision surgeries. Results: Immediately after static and dynamic external fixation removal, there was no difference in elbow extension [33 degrees ± 16 degrees vs. 41 degrees ± 13 degrees, mean difference (MD) 7 degrees, 95% confidence interval (CI) −6 degrees–22 degrees] or flexion (114 degrees ± 35 degrees vs. 118 degrees ± 11 degrees, MD 4 degrees, 95% CI -23 degrees–132 degrees), respectively. At last follow-up, static and dynamic external fixation groups had no difference in elbow extension (27 degrees ± 13 degrees vs. 24 degrees ± 10 degrees, MD -3 degrees, 95% CI –15 degrees–7 degrees) or flexion (129 degrees ± 12 degrees vs. 128 degrees ± 14 degrees, MD -1 degree, 95% CI -13 degrees–10 degrees), respectively. Static and dynamic external fixation groups had no difference in complications [7 (44%) vs. 5 (63%), difference 19%, 95% CI -23%–54%] or revision surgeries [6 (38%) vs. 4 (50%), difference 13%, 95% CI -27%–49%]. Conclusions: No difference in range of motion, complications, and revision surgeries was detected after static versus dynamic external fixation of persistently unstable elbow fracture-dislocations. Due to ease of application, static external fixation is our preferred treatment for these injuries. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.