Aims. The primary aim of this study was to present the mid-term follow-up of a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) which compared the functional outcome following routine removal (RR) to the outcome following on-demand removal (ODR) of the syndesmotic screw (SS). Methods. All patients included in the ‘ROutine vs on DEmand removal Of the syndesmotic screw’ (RODEO) trial received the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Hindfoot Score (AOFAS), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D). Out of the 152 patients, 109 (71.7%) completed the mid-term follow-up questionnaire and were included in this study (53 treated with RR and 56 with ODR). Median follow-up was 50 months (interquartile range 43.0 to 56.0) since the initial surgical treatment of the acute syndesmotic injury. The primary outcome of this study consisted of the OMAS scores of the two groups. Results. The median OMAS score was 85.0 for patients treated with RR, and 90.0 for patients treated with ODR (p = 0.384), indicating no significant difference between ODR and RR. The secondary outcome measures included the AOFAS (88.0 in the RR group and 90.0 for ODR; p = 0.722),
Aims. Osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT) are a common cause of disability and chronic ankle pain. Many operative treatment strategies have been introduced; however, they have their own disadvantages. Recently lesion repair using autologous cartilage chip has emerged therefore we investigated the efficacy of particulated autologous cartilage transplantation (PACT) in OLT. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed 32 consecutive symptomatic patients with OLT who underwent PACT with minimum one-year follow-up. Standard preoperative radiography and MRI were performed for all patients. Follow-up second-look arthroscopy or MRI was performed with patient consent approximately one-year postoperatively. Magnetic resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) score and International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grades were used to evaluate the quality of the regenerated cartilage. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the pain visual analogue scale (VAS), Foot Function Index (FFI), and Foot Ankle Outcome Scale (FAOS). Results. All patients had ICRS grade IV cartilage lesions, except for one (ICRS grade III). The paired MOCART scores significantly improved from 42.5 (SD 1.53) to 63.5 (SD 22.60) (p = 0.025) in ten patients. Seven patients agreed to undergo second-look arthroscopy; 5 patients had grade I (normal) ICRS scores and two patients had grade II (nearly normal) ICRS scores. VAS, FFI, and all subscales of
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with primary arthrodesis (PA) in the treatment of Lisfranc injuries, regarding patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and risk of secondary surgery. The aim was to conclusively determine the best available treatment based on the most complete and recent evidence available. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus. Additionally, ongoing trial registers and reference lists of included articles were screened. Risk of bias (RoB) and level of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. The random and fixed-effect models were used for the statistical analysis.Aims
Methods
Bone demonstrates good healing capacity, with a variety of strategies being utilized to enhance this healing. One potential strategy that has been suggested is the use of stem cells to accelerate healing. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, WHO-ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as reference checking of included studies. The inclusion criteria for the study were: population (any adults who have sustained a fracture, not including those with pre-existing bone defects); intervention (use of stem cells from any source in the fracture site by any mechanism); and control (fracture healing without the use of stem cells). Studies without a comparator were also included. The outcome was any reported outcomes. The study design was randomized controlled trials, non-randomized or observational studies, and case series.Aims
Methods