Clinical and radiographic outcomes of an all-polyethylene fluted central peg glenoid component, implanted utilizing an off-label, uncemented technique, at a minimum 5-year follow-up

A

Clinical and sonographic evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis with a dual suture anchor technique demonstrates improved outcomes and a low failure rate at a minimum 2-year follow-up

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and integrity of an open subpectoral biceps tenodesis using a dual suture anchor construct. Patients with at least 2 years of follow-up were retrospectively evaluated for simple shoulder test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and visual analog scales (VAS) for pain, function and satisfaction. A physical exam assessed shoulder range of motion and elbow strength. Ultrasonography visualized construct integrity. Of 43 eligible patients, 36 completed questionnaire evaluation and 22 completed an additional physical examination. Indications included superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions (4), partial thickness tears (6), instability (6), and tenosynovitis of the biceps tendon (20). Eighteen patients (50%) had an associated rotator cuff tear. Patient-reported outcomes improved pre- vs postoperatively: ASES score (45.4 vs 78.6, P 0.427). None of the physical exam measures were lower on the operative side compared to the healthy side (P ae 0.516). Sonographic evaluation revealed preserved integrity of the tenodesis construct in all cases. No complications were noted. Subpectoral biceps tenodesis utilizing a dual suture anchor technique is a treatment option for SLAP lesions, partial thickness tears, subluxation, and tenosynovitis of the long head of the biceps with high rates of postoperative patient satisfaction, a low failure rate, and improved outcome scores. The presence of a concomitant rotator cuff tear did not influence clinical outcomes

Temporizing cast immobilization is a safe alternative to external fixation in ankle fracture-dislocation while posterior malleolar fragment size predicts loss of reduction: a case control study

Abstract Background To determine if temporizing cast immobilization is a safe alternative to external fixator (ex-fix) in ankle fracture-dislocations with delayed surgery or moderate soft-tissue injury, we analysed the early complications and re-dislocation rates of cast immobilization in relation to ex-fix in patients sustaining these injuries. Methods All skeletally mature patients with a closed ankle fracture-dislocation and a minimum 6-months follow-up treated between 2007 and 2017 were included. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, injury description, treatment history and complications were assessed. Results In 160 patients (94 female; mean age 50 years) with 162 ankle fracture-dislocations, 35 underwent primary ex-fix and 127 temporizing cast immobilizations. Loss of reduction (LOR) was observed in 25 cases (19.7%) and 19 (15.0%) were converted to ex-fix. The rate of surgical site infections (ex-fix: 11.1% vs cast: 4.6%) and skin necrosis (ex-fix: 7.4% vs cast: 6.5%) did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.122 and p = 0.825). Temporizing cast immobilization led to an on average 2.7 days earlier definite surgery and 5.0 days shorter hospitalization when compared to ex-fix (p < 0.001). Posterior malleolus fragment (PMF) size predicted LOR with ≥ 22.5% being the threshold for critical PMF-size (p < 0.001). Conclusion Temporizing cast immobilization was a safe option for those ankle fracture-dislocations in which immediate definite treatment was not possible. Those temporized in a cast underwent definite fixation earlier than those with a fix-ex and had a complication rate no worse than the ex-fix patients. PMF-size was an important predictor for LOR. Primary ex-fix seems appropriate for those with ≥ 22.5% PMF-size. Trial registration The study does not meet the criteria of a prospective, clinical trial. There was no registration

Aseptische Lockerung einer OSG‑Endoprothese : einzeitiger Prothesenwechsel

To revise one or both loosened prosthesis components, to achieve postoperative pain relief, and preserve ankle range of motion. Aseptic loosening of the tibial and/or talar ankle prosthesis components without substantial bone defect of the tibial or talar bone stock. General surgical or anesthesiological risks, infections, critical soft tissue conditions, nonmanageable hindfoot instability, neurovascular impairment of the lower extremity, neuroarthropathy (e. g. Charcot arthropathy), substantial nonreconstructable osseous defects with or without cysts on the tibial and/or talar side, non-compliance, patients with primary total ankle replacement (TAR) using intramedullary fixation (stem fixation), patients with severely reduced bone quality, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, smoking, unrealistic patient expectations, patients with high activity in sports. Exposure of the ankle joint using the previous incision (anterior or lateral transfibular approach). Mobilization and removal of loosened prosthesis component. Careful debridement of bone stock at bone-prosthesis interface. Determination of prosthesis component size. Implantation of definitive prosthesis components. Wound closure in layers. A soft wound dressing is used. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended. Patient mobilization starts at postoperative day 1 with 15 kg partial weight bearing using a stabilizing walking boot or cast for 6 weeks. Following clinical and radiographic follow-up at 6 weeks, full weight bearing is initiated gradually. Between January 2007 and December 2012 a one-stage revision TAR was performed in 14 patients with a mean age of 52.7 +/- 12.0 years (29.8-70.5 years). The indication for revision surgery was aseptic loosening of one or both prosthesis components. The mean time between the initial TAR and revision surgery was 5.9 +/- 2.9 years (2.0-11.5 years). In 2 patients a tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis was performed due to painful aseptic loosening of revision TAR. In all patients a significant pain relief was observed

Is serial radiological evaluation of one-part proximal humeral fractures necessary?

Aims : In order to determine whether and for whom serial radiological evaluation is necessary in one-part proximal humerus fractures, we set out to describe the clinical history and predictors of secondary displacement in patients sustaining these injuries. Patients and Methods : Between January 2014 and April 2016, all patients with an isolated, nonoperatively treated one-part proximal humerus fracture were prospectively followed up. Clinical and radiological evaluation took place at less than two, six, 12, and 52 weeks. Fracture configuration, bone quality, and comminution were determined on the initial radiographs. Fracture healing, secondary displacement, and treatment changes were recorded during follow-up. Results : In 100 patients (59 female, 41 male; mean age 57 years), 91 of the fractures (91%) remained stable. In five of nine patients (55%) with secondary displacement, surgery was recommended. Comminution, present in 23 patients (23%), was identified as a predictor of secondary displacement (p = 0.438). Nonoperative treatment resulted in a mean absolute Constant score (CS) of 80 (49 to 98), relative CS of 101% (63% to 138%), median subjective shoulder value of 95% (interquartile range (IQR) 90% to 100%), and median EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire score of 0.89 (IQR 0.80 to 1.00) with bone union in all cases at one-year follow-up. Conclusion : Radiological re-evaluation was only necessary in patients presenting with comminution and may be redundant for 77% of patients with one-part proximal humerus fractures. Nonoperative treatment of one-part proximal humerus fractures remains the mainstay of treatment with a low rate of secondary surgery, a high union rate, and good clinical results