Age, gender, functional KSS, reason for revision and type of bone defect predict functional outcome 5years after revision total knee arthroplasty: a multivariable prediction model

Contains fulltext : 206034.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naive Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study

Item does not contain fulltex

Bone impaction grafting. Under reconstruction.

Contains fulltext : 70354.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)RU Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, 5 juni 2008Promotor : Buma, P Co-promotor : Schreurs, B.W.143 p

Bioresorbability, porosity and mechanical strength of bone substitutes: what is optimal for bone regeneration?

Item does not contain fulltex

Comparison of Registered and Published Primary Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials of Orthopaedic Surgical Interventions

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: The selective reporting of a subset of the outcomes that had been originally reported to a registry is a potential threat to the validity of evidence-based medicine. The extent of selective reporting has not been described for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of orthopaedic surgical interventions. The objective of this study was (1) to determine the percentage of orthopaedic surgical RCTs published in high-impact orthopaedic journals that were reported to have been registered, (2) to evaluate the consistency between the primary outcome measures recorded in the registry and those reported in the article, and (3) to evaluate whether selective reporting favored statistically significant outcomes. METHODS: We searched PubMed for articles on RCTs assessing orthopaedic surgical interventions indexed from January 2010 through December 2014 and published in the ten orthopaedic journals with the highest impact factors. For every article in which the authors reported registration of the RCT, we extracted the number and nature of the outcome measures from the article and the corresponding information from the registry. We then evaluated the consistency between the primary outcome measures reported in the registry and those reported in the published article. Moreover, we evaluated whether selective reporting favored statistically significant outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 362 articles on orthopaedic surgical RCTs, ninety (24.9%) reported that the RCT had been registered and thirty-four (37.8%) of the ninety had been registered adequately (registered before the study end with a clear description of the primary outcome measure and its time frame, with no substantial change after the study end). Twenty-six reports were eligible for our evaluation of the consistency between the registered primary outcome measures and those reported in the published article. This analysis identified one or multiple major discrepancies for fourteen articles, eight of which favored statistically significant results. CONCLUSIONS: Few articles on orthopaedic surgical RCTs reported registration of the trial, and even fewer of these trials were registered adequately. Inconsistencies between registered primary outcome measures and those reported in the published articles, as well as selective outcome reporting favoring statistically significant outcomes, were prevalent. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although trial registration is now the rule, it is currently far from optimal for orthopaedic surgical RCTs, and selective outcome reporting is prevalent. Full involvement of authors, editors, and reviewers is necessary to ensure publication of quality, unbiased results

The trouble with apples and oranges

Item does not contain fulltex

Total joint arthroplasty in younger patients: heading for trouble?

Contains fulltext : 173939.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

Injectable bone-graft substitutes: current products, their characteristics and indications, and new developments.

Item does not contain fulltex

A systematic review of individual patient data meta-analyses on surgical interventions

Contains fulltext : 128498.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Compared to subgroup analyses in a single study or in a traditional meta-analysis, an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) offers important potential advantages. We studied how many IPDMAs report on surgical interventions, how many of those surgical IPDMAs perform subgroup analyses, and whether these subgroup analyses have changed decision-making in clinical practice. METHODS: Surgical IPDMAs were identified using a comprehensive literature search. The last search was conducted on 24 April 2012. For each IPDMA included, we obtained information using a standardized data extraction form, and the quality of reporting was assessed. We also checked whether results were implemented in clinical guidelines. RESULTS: Of all 583 identified IPDMAs, 22 (4%) reported on a surgical intervention. Eighteen (82%) of these IPDMAs presented subgroup analyses. Subgroups were mainly based on patient and disease characteristics. The median number of reported subgroup analyses was 3.5 (IQR 1.25-6.5). Statistical methods for subgroup analyses were mentioned in 11 (61%) surgical IPDMAs.Eleven (61%) of the 18 IPDMAs performing subgroup analyses reported a significant overall effect estimate, whereas six (33%) reported a non-significant one. Of the IPDMAs that reported non-significant overall results, three IPDMAs (50%) reported significant results in one or more subgroup analyses. Results remained significant in one or more subgroups in eight of the IPDMAs (73%) that reported a significant overall result.Eight (44%) of the 18 significant subgroups appeared to be implemented in clinical guidelines. The quality of reporting among surgical IPDMAs varied from low to high quality. CONCLUSION: Many of the surgical IPDMAs performed subgroup analyses, but overall treatment effects were more often emphasized than subgroup effects. Although, most surgical IPDMAs included in the present study have only recently been published, about half of the significant subgroups were already implemented in treatment guidelines

A 21 % conversion rate to total knee arthroplasty of a first-generation patellofemoral prosthesis at a mean follow-up of 9.7 years

Contains fulltext : 154601.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)PURPOSE: To evaluate the mid- to long-term results of the Richards' type II patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) in terms of functional scores, number and type of complications, patient satisfaction and survival. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients that received a Richards' type II PFA at our institution between 1998 and 2007. Patients with a functioning PFA at the time of this study were evaluated. Outcomes included survival rates with endpoint loss of prosthesis, number and type of complications, Knee Society Scores (KSS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain. In addition, patients were asked how surgery influenced their original symptoms. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (33 prostheses) were included. Follow-up ranged from 2.2 to 18.8 years with a mean of 9.7 years. Survival at 10 years was 73 % (95 % CI, 57-93 %). Median KSS score was 163 (range, 110-200). Median VAS Pain was 30 (range, 0-80) and VAS Satisfaction median was 90 (range, 50-100). Thirteen (62 %) PFAs were rated excellent, six (28 %) as good and two (10 %) as fair. Twelve (36 %) of the cases required further surgery within 4 years after implantation. Seven of these (21 %) were converted to TKA after a mean time of 5.5 years, five out of seven were converted because of ongoing tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (TFOA). CONCLUSIONS: We found a rate of 21 % (7/33) conversion of the Richards' II PFA to TKA after a mean of 5.5 years; 71 % (5/7) of cases were because of TFOA. We strongly advise not to use PFA if there is any sign of joint disease in other compartments than patellofemoral