Introduction. Latissimus dorsi transfer is a procedure used in massive
INTRODUCTION. The purpose of this study is to report results from a prospective multicenter study of a bioresorbable type I collagen scaffold used to replace tissue loss following
Management of
Purpouse. We hypothesized that patients receiving a medial collagen meniscus implant (MCMI) would show better clinical, radiograpich and Magnetic Resonanace Imaging (MRI) outcomes than patients treated with partial medial meniscectomy (PMM) at minimum 10 year FU. Material and Methods. Thirty-three non-randomized patients (males, mean age 40 years) were enrolled in the study to receive a MCMI (17 patients) or as control treated with a PMM (16 patients). All of them were clinically evaluated at time zero, 5 and minimum 10 years after surgery (mean FU 133 months, range 120–145) by Lysholm, VAS for pain, objective IKDC knee form and Tegner activity level. SF-36 score was performed pre-operatively and at final FU. Bilateral weight-bearing XRays were executed at time zero and at final FU. Minimum 10 years FU MRI images were compared with collected pre-operative MRI images by means of Yulish score. Genovese score was also used to evalute MCMI MRI survivorship. Results. MCMI group showed significantly lower VAS for pain (p = 0.0091), higher objective IKDC (p = 0.0026), Teger index (p = 0.0259) and SF-36 (p = 0.0259 for PHI and p = 0.0036 for MHI) scores compared with PMM group at minimum 10 year FU. Radiographic evaluation showed a significantly lower medial joint line height (p = 0.0002) and side-to-side difference (p = 0.0003) narrowing in MCMI group respect to PMM group at final FU. Discussion. Improvements in pain relief, activity level, objective IKDC score and joint-line preservation are detectable with the use of MCMI at a minimum 10 year FU. On the authors knowledge this is the first long-term controlled trial regarding this device, and our findings confirmed the mid-term good results achieved by Rodkey et al (1). Conclusions. This data support the use of meniscal scaffolds to treat
Introduction. Insufficient arthroscopic cuff tear reconstruction leading to massive osteoarthritis and
Limb-injury severity scores are designed to assess orthopaedic and vascular injuries. In Gustilo type-IIIA and type-IIIB injuries they have poor sensitivity and specificity to predict salvage or outcome. We have designed a trauma score to grade the severity of injury to the covering tissues, the bones and the functional tissues, grading the three components from one to five. Seven comorbid conditions known to influence the management and prognosis have been given a score of two each. The score was validated in 109 consecutive open injuries of the tibia, 42 type-IIIA and 67 type-IIIB. The total score was used to assess the possibilities of salvage and the outcome was measured by dividing the injuries into four groups according to their scores as follows: group I scored less than 5, group II 6 to 10, group III 11 to 15 and group IV 16 or more. A score of 14 to indicate amputation had the highest sensitivity and specificity. Our trauma score compared favourably with the Mangled Extremity Severity score in sensitivity (98% and 99%), specificity (100% and 17%), positive predictive value (100% and 97.5%) and negative predictive value (70% and 50%), respectively. A receiver-operating characteristic curve constructed for 67 type-IIIB injuries to assess the efficiency of the scores to predict salvage, showed that the area under the curve for this score was better (0.988 (± 0.013 The scoring system was found to be simple in application and reliable in prognosis for both limb-salvage and outcome measures in type-IIIA and type-IIIB open injuries of the tibia.
Gunshot injuries to the shoulder are rare and
difficult to manage. We present a case series of seven patients
who sustained a severe shoulder injury to the non-dominant side
as a result of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. We describe the injury
as ‘suicide shoulder’ caused by upward and outward movement of the
gun barrel as the trigger is pulled. All patients were male, with
a mean age of 32 years (21 to 48). All were treated at the time
of injury with initial repeated debridement, and within four weeks
either by hemiarthroplasty (four patients) or arthrodesis (three patients).
The hemiarthroplasty failed in one patient after 20 years due to
infection and an arthrodesis was attempted, which also failed due
to infection. Overall follow-up was for a mean of 26 months (12
to 44). All four hemiarthroplasty implants were removed with no
feasible reconstruction ultimately possible, resulting in a poor functional
outcome and no return to work. In contrast, all three primary arthrodeses
eventually united, with two patients requiring revision plating
and grafting. These patients returned to work with a good functional
outcome. We recommend arthrodesis rather than replacement as the
treatment of choice for this challenging injury. Cite this article:
Most fractures of the radial head are stable
undisplaced or minimally displaced partial fractures without an associated
fracture of the elbow or forearm or ligament injury, where stiffness
following non-operative management is the primary concern. Displaced
unstable fractures of the radial head are usually associated with other
fractures or ligament injuries, and restoration of radiocapitellar
contact by reconstruction or prosthetic replacement of the fractured
head is necessary to prevent subluxation or dislocation of the elbow
and forearm. In fractures with three or fewer fragments (two articular
fragments and the neck) and little or no metaphyseal comminution,
open reduction and internal fixation may give good results. However,
fragmented unstable fractures of the radial head are prone to early
failure of fixation and nonunion when fixed. Excision of the radial
head is associated with good long-term results, but in patients
with instability of the elbow or forearm, prosthetic replacement
is preferred. This review considers the characteristics of stable and unstable
fractures of the radial head, as well as discussing the debatable
aspects of management, in light of the current best evidence. Cite this article: