Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 17, 2026
Treatment with Locking Intramedullary Nailing for Intertrochanteric Fracture of the Femur Utilizing a New Awl with a Distal Positioner
Published on: June 6, 2025
Comparing Radial Head Fracture Surgical Outcomes in Patients Younger and Older Than Forty
Kevin Kooi1,2,3,4, Mark Stam1,2, Ingmar Legerstee1,2,5
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hand and Arm Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Objectives:
To compare the results of radial head arthroplasty (RHA) and open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) for radial head fracture treatment based on patient age.
Design:
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting:
Two academic Level 1 Trauma centers.
Patient Selection Criteria:
Included were patients treated with RHA or ORIF for a radial head fracture (Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification 2R1A/B/C) between January 2015 and September 2022.
Outcome Measures And Comparisons:
Postoperative surgical outcomes, including reoperations, final elbow range of motion, and radiographic features, were collected. The outcomes of RHA and ORIF in patients above and below 40 years were compared using bivariate and multivariable regression analyses.
Results:
The study cohort included 161 operative radial head fractures sustained in 160 patients of which 47% were male (n = 75). Thirty-two patients were included in the RHA <40-year group [mean age 31 years, SD 5; 72% were male (n = 23)], 96 patients in the RHA ≥40-year group [mean age 60 years, SD 11; 34% were male (n = 33)], and 22 patients in the ORIF <40-year group [mean age 27 years, SD 6; 64% were male (n = 14)]. In patients <40 years old, RHA versus ORIF had comparable flexion-extension (125 degrees vs. 128 degrees, P = 0.79) prono-supination (145 degrees vs. 140 degrees, P = 0.16), and reoperation rate (22% vs. 14%, P = 0.50). Rates of post-traumatic arthritis were higher for RHA versus ORIF in this age group (57% vs. 27%, P = 0.047), although the follow-up period for radiographic assessment in the RHA <40-year group was slightly longer than the ORIF <40-year group (12.7 ± 10.4 months vs. 7.6 ± 4.6 months, P = 0.04). When comparing patients ≥40 years old with those <40 years old, outcomes of RHA had comparable flexion-extension (125 degrees vs. 125 degrees, P = 0.93) prono-supination (145 degrees vs. 150 degrees, P = 0.07), reoperation rate (22% vs. 15%, P = 041), and post-traumatic arthritis rate (57% vs. 64%, P = 0.34). Younger patients exhibited a lower frequency and severity of stem radiolucency than older patients (53% vs. 67%, P = 0.01).
Conclusions:
For patients under 40 years, ORIF and RHA yielded comparable outcomes. RHA had a higher risk of post-traumatic arthritis, favoring ORIF for younger patients if technically feasible. Older patients should be aware of the increased risk of stem lucency when undergoing RHA.
Level Of Evidence:
Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
