Hand & Upper Limb

ORIF Olecranon

ORIF olecranon fracture — tension band wiring and plate fixation — FRCS/FRACS exam preparation

Core Procedure
intermediate
By OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team

Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow • Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

High-yield overview

Posterior approach — tension band wiring (transverse) or dorsal plate fixation (comminuted/oblique) | intermediate

Surgical Imaging

3D CT reconstruction of olecranon fracture showing intermediate comminuted fragment
3D CT of comminuted olecranon fracture: the intermediate fragment (arrow) is clearly delineated between the proximal articular piece and the ulnar shaft — critical for pre-operative planning of fixation strategy.Credit: Chalidis BE et al., Orthop Rev 2011 (PMC3044106) — CC BY-NC 3.0
Post-operative lateral elbow X-ray showing posterior plate fixation of olecranon fracture
Post-operative lateral elbow X-ray: posterior locking plate spanning the olecranon fracture with screws engaging the anterior ulnar cortex. Articular reduction maintained; olecranon tip aligned with the trochlear notch.Credit: Chalidis BE et al., Orthop Rev 2011 (PMC3044106) — CC BY-NC 3.0

Critical Danger Structures — 5 Anatomical Zones

Ulnar Nerve

Location: Runs medial to the olecranon in the cubital tunnel, passes between the two heads of FCU distal to the medial epicondyle. At risk during medial soft-tissue dissection and plate application on the medial column.

Protection: Identify and mobilize the ulnar nerve with a vessel loop before any medial dissection. Never place retractors blindly medial to the olecranon. If a medial plate extension is planned, transpose the nerve anteriorly.

K-wire Migration

Risk: Parallel K-wires that do not engage the anterior cortex or are not bent at 180 degrees can migrate proximally or distally. Proximal migration toward the shoulder has been reported. Distal migration through soft tissue can cause tendon or nerve injury.

Prevention: Both K-wires must penetrate and engage the anterior ulnar cortex confirmed on lateral fluoroscopy. Bend the tip 180 degrees into the olecranon. Confirm wire stability on intraoperative stress testing.

Triceps Avulsion

Risk: Vigorous reduction or excessive retraction can disrupt the triceps insertion at the posterior olecranon. Unrecognized avulsion results in extensor mechanism failure — the patient cannot actively extend against gravity.

Prevention: Handle the fracture fragment and periosteum gently. At closure, test active extension against gravity and confirm a complete arc. Repair any avulsed fibres with transosseous sutures before skin closure.

Posterior Interosseous Nerve

Location: Enters the supinator 10–20 mm distal to the radial head. At risk only if the approach is extended laterally (e.g., combined radial head or lateral column pathology).

Protection: Maintain full forearm supination if extending the approach laterally. Do not place retractors deep to the supinator. Limit lateral dissection to within 2 cm of the radial head.

Tension Band Wire Loop Slippage

Risk: If the figure-of-8 wire loop does not pass through the triceps tendon and seat anterior to the axis of rotation (i.e., anterior ulnar cortex level), the construct does not generate compression — it generates distraction and will fail. Wire loop slippage off the K-wire tips also destabilises fixation.

Prevention: Pass the figure-of-8 wire through the triceps tendon, not superficially around it. Seat the wire loop anterior to the K-wires on both cortices. Confirm compression at the fracture site with intraoperative fluoroscopy and manual stress testing before closure.

Mnemonic

MAYOMAYO — Olecranon Fracture Classification

Mnemonic

PLATEPLATE — Indications for Plate Over Tension Band Wiring

Indications and Fixation Decision

Mayo Classification and Operative Indications

Mayo TypeDescriptionTreatment
I (undisplaced)Less than 2 mm displacement, intact extensor mechanismCast or splint in 45-90 degrees for 2–3 weeks; early ROM
IIA (displaced, non-comminuted, stable)Greater than 2 mm, no elbow instability, two main fragmentsTBW (transverse) or plate (oblique/proximal)
IIB (displaced, comminuted, stable)Comminution present, no instabilityPlate fixation preferred over TBW
IIIA (unstable, non-comminuted)Elbow instability, subluxation, or dislocationPlate fixation mandatory; address instability
IIIB (unstable, comminuted)Instability with comminutionPlate fixation; may need ligament reconstruction

TBW vs Plate — Decision Summary

Tension Band Wiring is appropriate for:

  • Simple transverse fractures (Mayo IIA) in good bone quality
  • Fractures involving less than 80% of the articular surface
  • Active patients with good bone stock
  • Osteotomy fixation (as part of distal humerus ORIF approach)

Plate Fixation is preferred for:

  • Comminuted fractures (Mayo IIB or IIIB)
  • Oblique fracture patterns
  • Fractures involving more than 80% articular surface
  • Osteoporotic or elderly patients
  • Mayo type III (any elbow instability)
  • Very proximal fractures (fragment too small for K-wires)
  • Fractures extending into the coronoid

Key Evidence

Wolfgang et al. (CORR, 1987; PMID 3665240): Landmark series of 45 displaced olecranon fractures treated by TBW over 13 years, with good or excellent results in 29 of 30 isolated fractures (97%). Established TBW as a reliable technique; true K-wire migration was uncommon and considered avoidable with correct technique.

Hume and Wiss (CORR, 1992; PMID 1446443): Prospective randomised trial of 41 displaced olecranon fractures comparing TBW versus plate fixation. Loss of reduction (significant articular step-off or gap) occurred in 53% after TBW versus 5% after plate; good clinical results in 37% (TBW) versus 63% (plate). Symptomatic metal prominence followed TBW in 42%. Concluded plate fixation should be carefully considered for displaced fractures.

Schliemann et al. (Acta Orthop Belg, 2014; PMID 24873093): Comparison of TBW versus precontoured locking compression plate in isolated Mayo type IIA fractures. No significant difference in DASH or Mayo Elbow Performance Score; locking plates did not improve functional or radiographic outcome and were more expensive. Implant-related irritation requiring removal was more frequent after TBW.

Carter, Duckworth et al. (JBJS Essent Surg Tech, 2018; PMID 30588367): Modern operative-technique reference reporting a prospective randomised trial of plate versus TBW in 67 active adults — no difference in patient- or surgeon-reported outcomes, but implant removal was required in roughly 1 in 2 patients after TBW. Notably, infection and revision surgery occurred exclusively after plate fixation.

Biomechanical Principles of Tension Band Wiring

The tension band principle is fundamental to orthopaedic surgery and applies to any fracture surface under eccentric loading:

  • The axis of rotation of the elbow passes through the centre of the trochlea
  • Triceps contraction applies a posterior (distracting) force to the olecranon
  • A tension band wire positioned anterior to the axis of rotation converts this deforming force into compression at the fracture site
  • This is only effective when the fracture surface is transverse (perpendicular to the long axis) and the posterior cortex is intact
  • In an oblique fracture, the wire generates shear rather than compression — fixation fails

Why TBW fails in certain patterns:

  • Comminuted fractures: no stable cortex to resist compression — fragments split
  • Osteoporotic bone: K-wires pull out of soft bone — cannot maintain wire tension
  • Very proximal fractures: insufficient bone in the proximal fragment for K-wire purchase

An evidence-based caveat: cadaveric cyclic-loading work (Hutchinson et al., JBJS Am 2003; PMID 12728033) showed that the AO K-wire tension band did not generate measurable compression across the osteotomy gap and that an intramedullary 7.3 mm cancellous screw with a tension band was roughly five times stiffer than the classic K-wire construct. The clinical implication for the exam is that the tension-band "compression" concept holds best as a model rather than a guaranteed mechanical fact — favour passive over aggressive active extension early, and consider screw-based or plate constructs where stiffness matters.

Non-operative Management (Mayo Type I)

Mayo type I fractures (less than 2 mm displacement, intact extensor mechanism) may be managed non-operatively:

  • Posterior splint or collar-and-cuff in 45–90 degrees flexion for 2–3 weeks
  • Begin early active ROM at 2–3 weeks; avoid passive extension
  • Serial radiographs at 1 and 3 weeks to confirm no secondary displacement
  • Failure — secondary displacement of greater than 2 mm — requires operative intervention
  • Outcomes comparable to operative management in undisplaced fractures (Duckworth et al., JBJS 2014)

Positioning and Preparation

Patient Position: Lateral decubitus with the injured elbow uppermost, draped free over a padded bolster. This allows full elbow extension and easy fluoroscopy access. Alternatively: prone on chest rolls, or supine with arm across chest on a hand table. Confirm ability to obtain AP and lateral fluoroscopy views before draping.

Tourniquet: Sterile or non-sterile pneumatic tourniquet on the proximal arm. Inflate to 250 mmHg for an upper limb. Consider tourniquet release after 90 minutes if the procedure is prolonged.

Equipment needed: 1.6 mm K-wires (two), 1.25 mm stainless steel wire, wire twister (Kocher clamp), wire bender/pin bender, Weber reduction clamp, fluoroscopy unit, pre-contoured locking olecranon plate (available but may not be used), oscillating saw (if combined with osteotomy work).

Fluoroscopy positioning: Confirm clear AP (elbow extended) and lateral (90 degrees flexion) views are obtainable before incision. The lateral view is critical for confirming K-wire anterior cortex engagement.

Critical Decision Points

Decision 1 — TBW or Plate?

At fracture exposure, reassess the pattern under direct vision. If the fracture is:

  • Simple transverse, good bone quality, young patient → proceed with TBW as planned
  • More oblique than expected on radiographs → switch to plate
  • More comminuted than pre-operative imaging suggested → switch to plate
  • Bone quality poor (K-wires do not hold during provisional fixation) → switch to plate

Exam tip: It is entirely appropriate to change the planned technique intraoperatively based on direct assessment. This demonstrates good surgical judgment. State in the viva: "I would re-assess the fracture pattern under direct vision and be prepared to convert to plate fixation if the pattern does not suit TBW."

Decision 2 — Articular Congruity

After any reduction manoeuvre, confirm there is no articular step-off under direct vision and on fluoroscopy. Post-traumatic elbow arthritis directly correlates with articular incongruity. A step-off of greater than 2 mm is unacceptable.

Decision 3 — Elbow Stability (Mayo III Fractures)

After olecranon fixation in any fracture that had associated subluxation or dislocation, perform a stress test under fluoroscopy:

  • Valgus stress: opens more than 3 mm → MCL injury
  • Varus stress: LUCL disruption (posterolateral rotatory instability)
  • Posterior stress with the elbow in extension: posterior instability

Address each component before closure. Leaving residual instability results in re-dislocation post-operatively.

Clinical Decision Scenarios

Use these scenarios to practise clinical reasoning and management decisions

CLINICAL SCENARIOStandard

CLINICAL PROMPT

"A 35-year-old cyclist falls directly onto the elbow and presents with point tenderness over the olecranon. Radiographs show a transverse olecranon fracture displaced 5 mm with a maintained joint line. The elbow is stable. Describe your decision-making and operative technique."

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This is a Mayo IIA olecranon fracture — displaced (greater than 2 mm) but stable with no elbow instability. The transverse pattern and good bone quality in a 35-year-old make this an appropriate case for **tension band wiring**. The principle of TBW is to convert the deforming triceps extension force into compression at the fracture site, using a figure-of-8 wire loop seated anterior to the axis of rotation. **Pre-operative planning**: AP and lateral radiographs confirm pattern; no CT required for a simple transverse fracture. Counsel the patient that hardware removal is required in approximately 70–80% of TBW cases due to K-wire and wire prominence — this is a planned second procedure, not a complication. **Operative technique**: Lateral decubitus positioning. Posterior midline incision curving around the olecranon tip. Identify and protect the ulnar nerve with a vessel loop before any reduction. Irrigate the haematoma. Anatomically reduce the fracture under direct vision with a pointed clamp — no articular step-off is acceptable. Insert two parallel 1.6 mm K-wires from the olecranon tip angled 45 degrees, confirming both engage the anterior cortex on lateral fluoroscopy. Drill a transverse hole 3–4 cm distal to the fracture. Pass 1.25 mm stainless steel wire through this hole and through the triceps tendon substance in a figure-of-8 pattern around the K-wire tips. Tighten symmetrically, confirming fracture compression on fluoroscopy. Bend K-wire tips 180 degrees and bury. Confirm full ROM and extensor mechanism integrity. Splint in 45 degrees. **Post-op**: Remove splint at 2 weeks; early active ROM; hardware removal planned at 12–18 months once union confirmed.
CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

CLINICAL PROMPT

"A 65-year-old woman with known osteoporosis sustains a fall from standing. She presents with a comminuted olecranon fracture (Mayo IIIB) with associated subluxation of the elbow. How do you manage this?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This is a complex Mayo IIIB fracture — comminuted olecranon fracture with elbow instability. TBW is absolutely contraindicated here. This requires **plate fixation** and assessment and management of the associated elbow instability. **Pre-operative assessment**: AP, lateral, and oblique radiographs. CT scan to characterise the comminution and identify any associated coronoid fracture or radial head fracture (terrible triad pattern). Neurovascular examination documenting ulnar nerve function. **Operative plan**: Posterior midline approach, lateral decubitus positioning. Identify and protect the ulnar nerve first — may need transposition if medial column involvement anticipated. **Fracture fixation**: Pre-contoured dorsal locking plate (or lateral 90-degree plate) bridging the comminuted segment. In osteoporotic bone, locking screws are mandatory — they resist toggling in soft bone. Reduce the articular surface anatomically; provisional K-wires hold reduction while the plate is applied. Aim for at least 3–4 bicortical locking screws distally. **Instability assessment**: Once the olecranon is fixed, assess elbow stability under fluoroscopy — varus, valgus, and posterior stress. If elbow remains unstable, explore for associated LUCL or MCL disruption. Repair the lateral ligamentous complex from the lateral epicondyle if disrupted. If a coronoid fracture is identified involving more than 50% of height, fix it through a separate medial or anterior approach. If the radial head is fractured and the elbow remains unstable, ORIF or radial head arthroplasty may be required. **Post-op**: Hinged elbow brace if instability was addressed. Early motion at 2 weeks. Longer protection phase (4 weeks) given instability and bone quality.
CLINICAL SCENARIOStandard

CLINICAL PROMPT

"A patient returns at 6 months after TBW of a Mayo IIA olecranon fracture. They have pain directly over the olecranon and a palpable prominence. Radiographs confirm fracture union with prominent K-wire tips visible subcutaneously. How do you manage this?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This is hardware prominence — the most common reason for re-operation after tension band wiring, occurring in 70–80% of cases. The fracture is united so implant removal is both safe and appropriate. **Counselling**: Reassure the patient that this is a known and expected outcome of TBW, not a failure. Removal is a straightforward day-case procedure. **Timing**: Union is confirmed radiographically at 6 months — appropriate to proceed. Do not remove hardware before union (minimum 3–4 months). **Procedure**: Day-case, general anaesthesia or sedation. Fluoroscopy available. Re-open the posterior midline incision over the olecranon. Identify the K-wire tips and wire loop. Untwist the figure-of-8 wire and remove both limbs. Use a wire retrieval device or needle driver. Remove the K-wires using a pin puller or wire holder — pull in the direction of insertion. Fluoroscopy confirms complete removal. Irrigate and close. **Post-operative**: The patient may mobilise immediately. **Important**: Counsel about re-fracture risk through the K-wire tracts in the first 6 weeks after removal — avoid heavy lifting or falls. Full unrestricted activity after 6 weeks. **If plate fixation had been used**: Hardware removal rate is only 15–25%, and the procedure is more involved — plate removal requires the same approach, removal of all screws, and similar post-removal precautions.

ORIF Olecranon — Exam Summary

Clinical summary

Evidence Base

Randomised trial — TBW vs plate fixation for displaced olecranon fractures

Level I
Hume MC, Wiss DAClin Orthop Relat Res (1992)
Clinical Implication: Plate fixation produces more reliable reduction and fewer reduction-loss events than TBW in displaced fractures. Reserve TBW for simple stable transverse patterns; favour plate fixation whenever the pattern is not a simple transverse fracture.

Randomised trial — non-operative vs operative management in the elderly

Level I
Duckworth AD, Clement ND, McEachan JE, et al.Bone Joint J (2017)
Clinical Implication: In low-demand elderly patients, non-operative management of a displaced olecranon fracture gives equivalent one-year function with far fewer complications. Surgery in this group should be reserved for the active or highly symptomatic patient.

TBW vs precontoured locking plate in Mayo type IIA fractures

Level II
Schliemann B, Raschke MJ, Groene P, et al.Acta Orthop Belg (2014)
Clinical Implication: For simple isolated Mayo IIA fractures, TBW remains a reasonable, cost-effective choice with outcomes equivalent to a locking plate — provided the patient is counselled that implant removal is likely after union.

Biomechanical cyclic-loading of olecranon fixation constructs

Level V
Hutchinson DT, Horwitz DS, Ha G, Thomas CW, Bachus KNJ Bone Joint Surg Am (2003)
Clinical Implication: The tension-band 'compression' principle is a useful conceptual model rather than a guaranteed mechanical reality; where construct stiffness is critical (proximal or osteoporotic fractures), an intramedullary screw or plate construct is biomechanically superior.

References

  1. Wolfgang G, Burke F, Bush D, et al. Surgical treatment of displaced olecranon fractures by tension band wiring technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;(224):192-204. PMID: 3665240

  2. Hume MC, Wiss DA. Olecranon fractures. A clinical and radiographic comparison of tension band wiring and plate fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992;(285):229-235. PMID: 1446443

  3. Karlsson MK, Hasserius R, Karlsson C, Besjakov J, Josefsson PO. Fractures of the olecranon: a 15- to 25-year follow-up of 73 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(403):205-212. PMID: 12360028

  4. Duckworth AD, Bugler KE, Clement ND, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM. Nonoperative management of displaced olecranon fractures in low-demand elderly patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(1):67-72. PMID: 24382727. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01137

  5. Duckworth AD, Clement ND, McEachan JE, White TO, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM. Prospective randomised trial of non-operative versus operative management of olecranon fractures in the elderly. Bone Joint J. 2017;99-B(7):964-972. PMID: 28663405. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B7.BJJ-2016-1112.R2

  6. Carter TH, Molyneux SG, Reid JT, White TO, Duckworth AD. Tension-Band Wire Fixation of Olecranon Fractures. JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2018;8(3):e22. PMID: 30588367. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.17.00071

  7. Schliemann B, Raschke MJ, Groene P, Weimann A, Wähnert D, Lenschow S, Kösters C. Comparison of tension band wiring and precontoured locking compression plate fixation in Mayo type IIA olecranon fractures. Acta Orthop Belg. 2014;80(1):106-111. PMID: 24873093

  8. Rommens PM, Küchle R, Schneider RU, Reuter M. Olecranon fractures in adults: factors influencing outcome. Injury. 2004;35(11):1149-1157. PMID: 15488508. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2003.12.002

  9. Hutchinson DT, Horwitz DS, Ha G, Thomas CW, Bachus KN. Cyclic loading of olecranon fracture fixation constructs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85(5):831-837. PMID: 12728033. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200305000-00010