Differences at motor control strategies to provide dynamic balance in various tasks in diabetic polyneuropatic (DPN) patients due to losing the lower extremity somatosensory information were reported in the literature. It has been stated that dynamics of center of mass (CoM) is controlled by center of pressure (CoP) during human upright standing and active daily movements. Indeed analyzing kinematic trajectories of joints unveil motor control strategies stabilizing CoM. Nevertheless, we hypothesized that imbalance disorders/CoM destabilization observed at DPN patients due to lack of tactile information about the base of support cannot be explained only by looking at joint kinematics, rather functional foot usage is proposed to be an important counterpart at controlling CoM. In this study, we included 14 DPN patients, who are diagnosed through clinical examination and electroneuromyography, and age matched 14 healthy subjects (HS) to identify control strategies in functional reach test (FRT). After measuring participants’ foot arch index (FAI) by a custom-made archmeter, they were tested by using a force plate, motion analysis system, surface electromyography and pressure pad, all working in synchronous during FRT. We analyzed data to determine effect of structural and functional foot pathologies due to neuropathy on patient performance and postural control estimating FAI, reach length (FR), FR to height (H) ratio (FR/H; normalized FR with respect to height), displacement of CoM and CoP in anteroposterior direction only, moment arm (MA, defined as the difference between CoP and CoM at the end of FRT), ankle, knee and hip joint angles computed at the sagittal plane for both extremities. Kinematic metrics included initial and final joint angles, defined with respect to start and end of reaching respectively. Further difference in the final and initial joint angles was defined as Δ. FAI was founded significantly lower in DPN patients (DPN: 0.3404; HS: 0.3643, p= <0.05). The patients’ FR, FR/H and absolute MA and displacement of CoM were significantly shorter than the control group (p= <0.05). Displacement of CoP between the two groups were not significant. Further we observed that CoM was lacking CoP in DPN patients (mean MA: +0.88 cm), while leading CoP in HS (mean MA: −1.59 cm) at the end of FRT. All initial angles were similar in two groups, however in DPN patients final right and left hip flexion angle (p=0.016 and p=0.028 respectively) and left ankle plantar flexion angle (p=0.04) were smaller than HS significantly. DPN patients had significantly less (p=0.029) hip flexion (mean at right hip angle, Δ=25.0°) compared to HS (Δ=33.53°) and ankle plantar flexion (DPN mean at right ankle angle, Δ=6.42°, HS mean Δ=9.07°; p=0.05). The results suggest that movement of both hip and ankle joints was limited simultaneously in DPN patients causing lack of CoM with respect to CoP at the end of reaching with significantly lower FAI. These results lead to the fact that cutaneous and joint somatosensory information from foot and ankle along with the structure of foot arch may play an important role in maintaining dynamic balance and performance of environmental context. In further studies, we expect to show that difference at control strategies in DPN patients due to restricted functional foot usage might be a good predictor of how neuropathy evolves to change biomechanical aspects of biped erect posture

To evaluate the clinical outcome of arthroscopic treatment of ACL with an Achilles tendon allograft in patient with acute rupture. 22 patients, between 2003 and 2006, with acute rupture of ACL, were treated with an Achilles tendon allograft. The mean age was 26 years. Patients were evaluated before and after surgery and at the latest follow-up with Noulis-Lahmann test and Pivot shift test. We also used IKDC score, Lysholm score and one leg stance test and functional reach test. Patients were also evaluated with Cybex II + and with plain radiographies. The mean follow-up time was 3.5 years. 90% of the patients had a negative pivot shift test and 95% of the patients had a score at Noulis-Lahmann test +1. The mean value of IKDC score was 88 (62–100) and the mean time of Lysholm score was 91 (75–100). Until the latest follow-up there were no clinical sighs of inflammation or graft rejection. Radiologic evaluation revealed no sign of tunnel enlargement. We believe that the use of a fresh-frozen allograft in the treatment of acute ACL ruptures is an effective procedure for the restoration of ligamentous stability of the knee

Purpose: Better clinical outcome is generally reported after hip resurfacing when compared to conventional 28mmTHA. This may simply be the consequences of biased patient selection, patient perception or the advantageous use of larger diameter femoral heads in HR. The true clinical benefits of HR can only be assessed by comparison with LDH-THA in a blinded randomized study to eliminate/reduce those biases. This was the aim of the study. Method: Charnley class A patients were randomized between HR or LDH-THA and kept blinded for one year. Clinical data, gait analysis, postural balance evaluations and functional tests were performed pre-operatively at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Fourteen normal patients served as controls. Results: Twenty-four patients were assigned to each group. There was no significant difference in WOMAC, SF-36, activity scores, and patient satisfaction. A slight advantage was observed for HR during the functional reach test (postural balance) and for LDH-THA during the step test (speed, strength and balance), all other tests showing no differences. Both groups quickly reached controls value for all tests by 3 months. Conclusion: We have failed to demonstrate a clear difference in outcome between HR and LDH-THA. Both groups fully recovered quickly. The postulated clinical advantages of HR over 28mmTHA most likely result from using a larger head in highly motivated patients. The only clear advantage of HR over LDH-THA remains proximal femoral bone conservation, although with the excellent durability of currently used femoral stems, HR has to demonstrate comparable survivorship before bone conservation is considered a true benefit

Introduction: Better clinical outcome is generally reported after hip resurfacing when compared to conventional 28mmTHA. This may simply be the consequences of biased patient selection, patient perception or the advantageous use of larger diameter femoral heads in HR. The true clinical benefits of HR can only be assessed by comparison with LDH-THA in a blinded randomized study to eliminate/reduce those biases. This was the aim of the study. Materials and Methods: Charnley class A patients were randomized between HR or LDH-THA and kept blinded for one year. Clinical data, gait analysis, postural balance evaluations and functional tests were performed preoperatively, at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. 14 normal patients served as controls. Results: 24 patients were assigned to each group. There was no significant difference in WOMAC, SF-36, activity scores, and patient satisfaction. A slight advantage was observed for HR during the functional reach test (postural balance) and for LDH-THA during the step test (speed, strength and balance), all other tests showing no differences. Both groups quickly reached controls value for all tests by 3 months. Discussion: We have failed to demonstrate a clear difference in outcome between HR and LDH-THA. Both groups fully recovered quickly. The postulated clinical advantages of HR over 28mmTHA most likely result from using a larger head in highly motivated patients. The only clear advantage of HR over LDH-THA remains proximal femoral bone conservation, although with the excellent durability of currently used femoral stems, HR has to demonstrate comparable survivorship before bone conservation is considered a true benefit