Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:

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 FAOS were significantly improved postoperatively (p ≤ 0.003). Conclusion. PACT significantly improved the clinical, radiological, and morphological outcomes of OLT. We consider this to be a safe and effective surgical method based on the short-term clinical results of this study. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(12):942–947


Aims

Arthroscopic microfracture is a conventional form of treatment for patients with osteochondritis of the talus, involving an area of < 1.5 cm2. However, some patients have persistent pain and limitation of movement in the early postoperative period. No studies have investigated the combined treatment of microfracture and shortwave treatment in these patients. The aim of this prospective single-centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was to compare the outcome in patients treated with arthroscopic microfracture combined with radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy (rESWT) and arthroscopic microfracture alone, in patients with ostechondritis of the talus.

Methods

Patients were randomly enrolled into two groups. At three weeks postoperatively, the rESWT group was given shockwave treatment, once every other day, for five treatments. In the control group the head of the device which delivered the treatment had no energy output. The two groups were evaluated before surgery and at six weeks and three, six and 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale. Secondary outcome measures included a visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain and the area of bone marrow oedema of the talus as identified on sagittal fat suppression sequence MRI scans.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 6 | Pages 455 - 462
6 Jun 2022
Nwankwo H Mason J Costa ML Parsons N Redmond A Parsons H Haque A Kearney RS

Aims

To compare the cost-utility of removable brace compared with cast in the management of adult patients with ankle fracture.

Methods

A within-trial economic evaluation conducted from the UK NHS and personnel social services (PSS) perspective. Health resources and quality-of-life data were collected as part of the Ankle Injury Rehabilitation (AIR) multicentre, randomized controlled trial over a 12-month period using trial case report forms and patient-completed questionnaires. Cost-utility analysis was estimated in terms of the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Estimate uncertainty was explored by bootstrapping, visualized on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio plane. Net monetary benefit and probability of cost-effectiveness were evaluated at a range of willingness-to-pay thresholds and visualized graphically.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 3 | Pages 174 - 180
17 Mar 2021
Wu DY Lam EKF

Aims. The purpose of this study is to examine the adductus impact on the second metatarsal by the nonosteotomy nonarthrodesis syndesmosis procedure for the hallux valgus deformity correction, and how it would affect the mechanical function of the forefoot in walking. For correcting the metatarsus primus varus deformity of hallux valgus feet, the syndesmosis procedure binds first metatarsal to the second metatarsal with intermetatarsal cerclage sutures. Methods. We reviewed clinical records of a single surgical practice from its entire 2014 calendar year. In total, 71 patients (121 surgical feet) qualified for the study with a mean follow-up of 20.3 months (SD 6.2). We measured their metatarsus adductus angle with the Sgarlato’s method (SMAA), and the intermetatarsal angle (IMA) and metatarsophalangeal angle (MPA) with Hardy’s mid axial method. We also assessed their American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) clinical scale score, and photographic and pedobarographic images for clinical function results. Results. SMAA increased from preoperative 15.9° (SD 4.9°) to 17.2° (5.0°) (p < 0.001). IMA and MPA corrected from 14.6° (SD 3.3°) and 31.9° (SD 8.0°) to 7.2° (SD 2.2°) and 18.8° (SD 6.4°) (p < 0.001), respectively. AOFAS score improved from 66.8 (SD 12.0) to 96.1 (SD 8.0) points (p < 0.001). Overall, 98% (119/121) of feet with preoperative plantar calluses had them disappeared or noticeably subsided, and 93% (113/121) of feet demonstrated pedobarographic medialization of forefoot force in walking. We reported all complications. Conclusion. This study, for the first time, reported the previously unknown metatarsus adductus side-effect of the syndesmosis procedure. However, it did not compromise function restoration of the forefoot by evidence of our patients' plantar callus and pedobarographic findings. Level of Clinical Evidence: III. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(3):174–180