Glenohumeral Joint Preservation: A Review of Management Options for Young, Active Patients with Osteoarthritis

The management of osteoarthritis of the shoulder in young, active patients is a challenge, and the optimal treatment has yet to be completely established. Many of these patients wish to maintain a high level of activity, and arthroplasty may not be a practical treatment option. It is these patients who may be excellent candidates for joint-preservation procedures in an effort to avoid or delay joint replacement. Several palliative and restorative techniques are currently optional. Joint debridement has shown good results and a combination of arthroscopic debridement with a capsular release, humeral osteoplasty, and transcapsular axillary nerve decompression seems promising when humeral osteophytes are present. Currently, microfracture seems the most studied reparative treatment modality available. Other techniques, such as autologous chondrocyte implantation and osteochondral transfers, have reportedly shown potential but are currently mainly still investigational procedures. This paper gives an overview of the currently available joint preserving surgical techniques for glenohumeral osteoarthritis

Plate fixation or intramedullary fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies

Background The last decade has shown a shift toward operative treatment of a subset of midshaft clavicle fractures. However, it is unclear whether there are differences between plate fixation and intramedullary fixation regarding complications and functional outcome. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare plate fixation and intramedullary fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures. Methods The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for both randomized controlled trials and observational studies. The methodologic quality of all included studies was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. Results Twenty studies were included. Ten of the 20 included studies used a fracture classification. Seven of these studies reported exclusion of patients with comminuted fractures. No difference in the total re-intervention rate was found (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 2.04). Major re-interventions occurred more often after plate fixation (OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.02 to 3.46). The mean implant removal rates were 38% after plate fixation and 73% after intramedullary fixation. Re-fracture after implant removal occurred more often after plate fixation (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 1.12 to 10.42). The Constant-Murley scores showed no differences at both short term (mean difference, −1.18; 95% CI, −13.41 to 11.05) and long term (mean difference, 0.15; 95% CI, −1.57 to 1.87). No differences were observed regarding nonunion (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.82 to 2.75). The rate of infections showed no differences when outlier studies were excluded (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.88 to 2.69). Conclusion Major re-intervention and re-fracture after implant removal occurred more frequently after plate fixation of non-comminuted, displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. No differences in terms of function and nonunion between plate fixation and intramedullary fixation were observed. Level of evidence Level III; Meta-Analysi

Comparing fracture healing disorders and long-term functional outcome of polytrauma patients and patients with an isolated displaced midshaft clavicle fracture

Background Although clavicle fractures are a common injury in polytrauma patients, the functional outcome of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (DMCFs) in this population is unknown. Our hypothesis was that there would be no differences in fracture healing disorders or functional outcome in polytrauma patients with a DMCF compared with patients with an isolated DMCF, regardless of the treatment modality. Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients (treated at our level I trauma center) with a DMCF was performed and a follow-up questionnaire was administered. Polytrauma patients, defined as an Injury Severity Score ≥16, and those with an isolated clavicle fracture were compared. Fracture healing disorders (nonunion and delayed union) and delayed fixation rates were determined. Functional outcome was assessed by the Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire. Results A total of 152 patients were analyzed, 71 polytrauma patients and 81 patients with an isolated DMCF. Questionnaire response of 121 patients (80%) was available (mean, 53 months; standard deviation, 22 months). No differences were found between polytrauma patients and those with an isolated DMCF with regard to nonunion (7% vs. 5%, respectively), delayed union (4% vs. 4%), and delayed fixation rate (13% vs. 13%). Polytrauma patients had an overall worse functional outcome, regardless of initial nonoperative treatment or delayed operative fixation. Conclusion Polytrauma patients had a similar nonunion and delayed fixation rate but had an overall worse functional outcome compared with patients with an isolated DMCF. For polytrauma patients, a wait and see approach can be advocated without the risk of decreased upper extremity function after delayed fixation

Surgical fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures : A systematic review of biomechanical studies

Purpose: Surgical treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures requires a decision between plate fixation and intramedullary (IM) fixation. Numerous studies report on the biomechanical properties of various repair constructs. The goal of this systematic review was to provide an overview of studies describing the biomechanical properties of the most commonly used surgical fixations of midshaft clavicle fractures. Additionally, we aimed to translate these biomechanical results into clinically relevant conclusions. Methods: A computer-aided search of the EMBASE and PudMed/MEDLINE databases was conducted. Studies included for review compared biomechanical properties of plate fixation with IM fixation and superiorly positioned plates with anteroinferiorly positioned plates for midshaft clavicle fractures. Results: Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Plate fixation seemed to form a more robust construct than IM fixation in terms of stiffness and failure loading. The remaining clavicle was stronger after removal of the IM device than after removal of the plate. Superior plating of transverse fractures generally seemed to provide greater stiffness and strength during bending loads than anteroinferior plating did. The absence of cortical alignment in wedge and comminuted fractures directly influenced the fixation stability for both IM fixation and plate fixation, regardless of location. Conclusion: Each type of fracture fixation has biomechanical advantages and disadvantages. However, exact thresholds of stiffness for inducing healing and failure strength to withstand refractures are unknown. The clinical relevance of the biomechanical studies may be arguable. Since none of the studies investigate the effect of tissue adaptation over time they should be interpreted with caution

Surgical fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review of biomechanical studies

Purpose: Surgical treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures requires a decision between plate fixation and intramedullary (IM) fixation. Numerous studies report on the biomechanical properties of various repair constructs. The goal of this systematic review was to provide an overview of studies describing the biomechanical properties of the most commonly used surgical fixations of midshaft clavicle fractures. Additionally, we aimed to translate these biomechanical results into clinically relevant conclusions. Methods: A computer-aided search of the EMBASE and PudMed/MEDLINE databases was conducted. Studies included for review compared biomechanical properties of plate fixation with IM fixation and superiorly positioned plates with anteroinferiorly positioned plates for midshaft clavicle fractures. Results: Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Plate fixation seemed to form a more robust construct than IM fixation in terms of stiffness and failure loading. The remaining clavicle was stronger after removal of the IM device than after removal of the plate. Superior plating of transverse fractures generally seemed to provide greater stiffness and strength during bending loads than anteroinferior plating did. The absence of cortical alignment in wedge and comminuted fractures directly influenced the fixation stability for both IM fixation and plate fixation, regardless of location. Conclusion: Each type of fracture fixation has biomechanical advantages and disadvantages. However, exact thresholds of stiffness for inducing healing and failure strength to withstand refractures are unknown. The clinical relevance of the biomechanical studies may be arguable. Since none of the studies investigate the effect of tissue adaptation over time they should be interpreted with caution

About the Distribution of Prime Numbers

<div>In this article, a prime number distribution formula is given. The formula is based on the periodic property of the sine function and an important trigonometric limit.</div

Introducing the Surgical Therapeutic Index in trauma surgery : an assessment tool for the benefits and risks of operative fracture treatment strategies

BACKGROUND: The Surgical Therapeutic Index (STI) has been described as an indicator of the benefits and risks of surgical treatment. The index is calculated by dividing the cure rate of an operative treatment by the complication rate. This study introduces the STI in trauma surgery by comparing the indices for surgical plate fixation (PF) and intramedullary fixation (IMF) of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. METHODS: In a previously reported, randomized controlled fashion, 120 patients were assigned to PF or IMF. Cure was defined by a Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score of 8 or less. Complications were noted as present or not present for each follow-up assessment, and a panel of experts provided weights to the severity of complications. STIs were reported along with their 95% confidence intervals. The higher a procedure's STI, the higher the benefit/risk balance of that procedure. RESULTS: The nonweighted STI after 6 weeks was significantly higher in the PF group. During further follow- up, the differences leveled out and became nonsignificant. When weighting the STI for severity, the indices decrease but are significantly in favor of the PF group at 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. At 1 year postoperatively, differences are not significant. CONCLUSION: The STI may be a reliable tool to assess the benefits and risks of operative fracture treatment. Further studies with consistent results of this new scoring system are needed before conclusions can be generalized. When determining the indices of PF and IMF, a significant difference in favor of PF was observed during the early phase of recovery