39 research outputs found

    Intraosseous foreign body granuloma in rotator cuff repair with bioabsorbable suture anchor

    Get PDF
    Biodegradable implants lead to problems such as cyst formation, soft-tissue inflammation, loose implant fragments or local osteolysis. This report represents the first published case of an intraosseous foreign body granuloma in the humeral head after arthroscopic rotator cuff tear fixation with a poly-l-lactide (PLLA) suture anchor. A 48-year-old female patient presented with pain in her right shoulder. A refixation of her right supraspinatus tendon with a biodegradable suture anchor was performed 11 months ago at an external hospital. Laboratory tests showed normal values for C-reactive protein, leukocytes and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate. No signs of infection or instability were noted. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was 8, the simple shoulder test (SST) was 4 and the American shoulder and elbow surgeons score (ASES) was 44. Plain radiographs showed high lucency in the area of the tuberculum majus. MRI showed an intra- and extraosseous mass surrounded by fluid in this area. Surgical care involved arthroscopic debridement and removal of the suture anchor. Histological examination revealed a foreign body granuloma. At the 18-month follow-up the patient was nearly pain-free. The VAS was 2, SST was 10 and ASES was 88. Foreign body granulomas are a well known but rarely described complication that arises after the use of biodegradable suture anchors in shoulder surgery. Every patient presenting with shoulder pain after usage of a biodegradable fixation material should be evaluated closely. Orthopaedic surgeons should be aware of the possibility of delayed foreign body reactions, especially after using PLLA anchors

    Interference Screw vs. Suture Anchor Fixation for Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis: Does it Matter?

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Bioabsorbable interference screw fixation has superior biomechanical properties compared to suture anchor fixation for biceps tenodesis. However, it is unknown whether fixation technique influences clinical results.</p> <p>Hypothesis</p> <p>We hypothesize that subpectoral interference screw fixation offers relevant clinical advantages over suture anchor fixation for biceps tenodesis.</p> <p>Study Design</p> <p>Case Series.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a retrospective review of a consecutive series of 88 patients receiving open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with either interference screw fixation (34 patients) or suture anchor fixation (54 patients). Average follow up was 13 months. Outcomes included Visual Analogue Pain Scale (0–10), ASES score, modified Constant score, pain at the tenodesis site, failure of fixation, cosmesis, deformity (popeye) and complications.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no failures of fixation in this study. All patients showed significant improvement between their preoperative and postoperative status with regard to pain, ASES score, and abbreviated modified Constant scores. When comparing IF screw versus anchor outcomes, there was no statistical significance difference for VAS (p = 0.4), ASES score (p = 0.2), and modified Constant score (P = 0.09). One patient (3%) treated with IF screw complained of persistent bicipital groove tenderness, versus four patients (7%) in the SA group (nonsignificant).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Subpectoral biceps tenodesis reliably relieves pain and improves function. There was no statistically significant difference in the outcomes studied between the two fixation techniques. Residual pain at the site of tenodesis may be an issue when suture anchors are used in the subpectoral location.</p

    Research On and Activities For Mathematically Gifted Students

    Get PDF
    This Topical Survey offers a brief overview of the current state of research on and activities for mathematically gifted students around the world. This is of interest to a broad readership, including educational researchers, research mathematicians, mathematics teachers, teacher educators, curriculum designers, doctoral students, and other stakeholders. It first discusses research concerning the nature of mathematical giftedness, including theoretical frameworks and methodologies that are helpful in identifying and/or creating mathematically gifted students, which is described in this section. It also focuses on research on and the development of mathematical talent and innovation in students, including connections between cognitive, social and affective aspects of mathematically gifted students. Exemplary teaching and learning practices, curricula and a variety of programs that contribute to the development of mathematical talent, gifts, and passion are described as well as the pedagogy and mathematics content suitable for educating pre-service and in-service teachers of mathematically gifted students. The final section provides a brief summary of the paper along with suggestions for the research, activities, and resources that should be available to support mathematically gifted students and their teachers, parents, and other stakeholders

    Bioresorbable Plates and Screws for Clinical Applications: A Review

    Full text link

    Reliability of College Freshmen Judgments of Their Own Scholastic Promise

    No full text

    Using Sensors for Player Development: Assessing Biomechanical Factors Related to Pitch Command and Velocity

    No full text
    Pitching biomechanical research is highly focused on injury prevention with little attention to how biomechanical data can facilitate skill development. The overall purpose of this study was to explore how sensor-derived segment kinematics and timing relate to command and ball velocity during baseball pitching. We used a cross-sectional design to analyze a series of pitches thrown from 10 collegiate baseball pitchers. We collected biomechanical data from six inertial sensors, subjective command from the pitchers, and ball velocity from a radar device. Stepwise regression analyses were used to explore biomechanical variables associated with command for all pitches and ball velocity for fastballs only. We found that only peak forearm linear acceleration was significantly associated with command, whereas several segment kinematic measures were significantly associated with ball velocity. Our results suggest that different biomechanical variables are linked to specific pithing skills. Our findings suggest that end-effector (forearm) movement is more important for pitch command, whereas proximal-to-distal (pelvis, trunk, upper arm, forearm) segmental movement is important for ball velocity

    Revision Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in Major League Baseball Pitchers: Effects of Fastball Velocity and Usage

    No full text
    Background: Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tears are prevalent in Major League Baseball (MLB) pitchers and can cause significant loss of time with varying reports of impact on performance. Revision UCL reconstruction (UCLR) is becoming increasingly ocmmon, with little known about the effects on fastball (FB) velocity and usage (FB%) in this setting. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose was to evaluate the effect of revision UCLR on MLB pitchers with respect to postoperative FB velocity and FB% at 1 and 2 years after return to play. The hypothesis was postoperative FB velocity and FB% would significantly decrease vs. prerevision, and that revision UCLRs would result in significantly decreased FB velocity and FB% in comparison to a matched group of MLB pitchers after primary UCLR. Methods: Twenty-one pitchers who underwent revision UCLR and returned to MLB play were indentified from public records from 2008-2021. The PITCHf(x) system collection FB velocity for 4-seam (4FB) and 2-seam (2FB) fastballs and total FB% for pitchers in the prerevision year as well as the 2 years after return. A matched control group of pitchers who underwent primary UCLR was used for comparison. Results: There were no significant differences in FB velocity between prerevision levels (4FB 92.9 mph, 2FB 91.4 mph) and years 1 (4FB 92.5 mph, 2FB 91.2 mph) and 2 (4FB 93.4 mph, 2FB 91.1 mph) after revision UCLR. FB% decreased from the prerevision season (60.1) and the first (56.2, P=.036) and second years (52.5, P=.002) after return. There were no significant differences between FB velocity and FB% or between the revision and primary UCLR groups. Conclusion: Pitchers returning to the MLB level after revision UCLR can expect similar FB velocity to their prerevision FB velocity and to pitchers undergoing primary UCLR; however, they do demonstrate a decrease in FB%, which may suggest less confidence in their FB after RTP
    corecore