In patients where the proximal femur shows gross deformity due
to degenerative changes or fracture, the contralateral femur is
often used to perform preoperative templating for hip arthroplasty.
However, femurs may not be symmetrical: the aim of this study was
to determine the degree of variation between hips in healthy individuals and
to determine whether it is affected by demographic parameters. CT-scan based modelling was used to examine the pelvis and bilateral
femurs of 345 patients (211 males, 134 women; mean age 62 years
(standard deviation (Aims
Materials and Methods
The pathogenesis of intraneural ganglion cysts is controversial.
Recent reports in the literature described medial plantar intraneural
ganglion cysts (mIGC) with articular branches to subtalar joints.
The aim of the current study was to provide further support for
the principles underlying the articular theory, and to explain the
successes and failures of treatment of mICGs. Between 2006 and 2017, five patients with five mICGs were retrospectively
reviewed. There were five men with a mean age of 50.2 years (33
to 68) and a mean follow-up of 3.8 years (0.8 to 6). Case history,
physical examination, imaging, and intraoperative findings were
reviewed. The outcomes of interest were ultrasound and/or MRI features
of mICG, as well as the clinical outcomes.Aims
Patients and Methods
The contralateral femur is frequently used for preoperative templating of total hip arthroplasty assuming femoral symmetry. We aimed to define the degree of asymmetry between left and right proximal femurs and whether if affected by demographics parameters. A CT-scan based modeling and analytics system of 346 CT-scans was used for this study, including pelvis and bilateral femora from 211 men and 135 women (mean age 61 ±16 years, mean BMI 26± 5 kg/m2). The femoral neck shaft angle (NSA), femoral offset (FO), femoral neck version (FNV), femoral length (FL), canal flare index (CFI) and femoral head diameter (FHD) were calculated for each patient. We then, analyzed symmetry based on absolute differences(AD) and percentage of asymmetry(%AS). An asymmetry >2% was found for NSA (mean AD=2.9°; mean %AS=2.3; p=0.03), FO (AD=3.8mm; %AS=9.1; p=0.01), FNV (AD=5.1°; %AS=46.7; p=0.001) and CFI (AD=0.2mm; %AS=5.4; p=0.7). Percentage of asymmetry was <2% for FL (AD=3.6mm; %AS=0.8; p=0.7) and FHD (AD=0.3mm; %AS=1.2; p=0.8). No correlation and predictive value was found between either AD or %AS and age, ethnicity, gender, height, weight or BMI. Our data support assumptions of substantial asymmetry of the proximal femur which is not affected by demographics or proximal femoral size. Clinical relevance: Upper femurs are not symmetric. Preoperative planning on contralateral femur might be affected this geometrical bias.
The primary aim of this study was to define the standard minimum
follow-up required to produce a reliable estimate of the rate of
re-operation after radial head arthroplasty (RHA). The secondary
objective was to define the leading reasons for re-operation. Four electronic databases, between January 2000 and March 2017
were searched. Articles reporting reasons for re-operation (Group
I) and results (Group II) after RHA were included. In Group I, a
meta-analysis was performed to obtain the standard minimum follow-up,
the mean time to re-operation and the reason for failure. In Group
II, the minimum follow-up for each study was compared with the standard
minimum follow-up.Aims
Materials and Methods
Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) may be used in the treatment of
non-reconstructable radial head fractures. The aim of this study
was to evaluate the mid-term clinical and radiographic results of
RHA. Between 2002 and 2014, 77 RHAs were implanted in 54 men and 23
women with either acute injuries (54) or with traumatic sequelae
(23) of a fracture of the radial head. Four designs of RHA were
used, including the Guepar (Small Bone Innovations (SBi)/Stryker;
36), Evolutive (Aston Medical; 24), rHead RECON (SBi/Stryker; ten)
or rHead STANDARD (SBi/Stryker; 7) prostheses. The mean follow-up
was 74.0 months (standard deviation (Aims
Patients and Methods