Aims

Significant correction of an adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the coronal plane through a posterior approach is associated with hypokyphosis. Factors such as the magnitude of the preoperative coronal curve, the use of hooks, number of levels fused, preoperative kyphosis, screw density, and rod type have all been implicated. Maintaining the normal thoracic kyphosis is important as hypokyphosis is associated with proximal junctional failure (PJF) and early onset degeneration of the spine. The aim of this study was to determine if coronal correction per se was the most relevant factor in generating hypokyphosis.

Background

Established hip and knee arthroplasty registers exist in many countries but this is not the case with spinal implants. Moreover, in the case of a rod intended to guide spinal growth in a child and then be removed, the definition of ‘failure’ (revision) used for hip or knee arthroplasty is inappropriate. How can the performance of such spinal implants be judged?

The MAGnetic Expansion Control (MAGEC) system is used increasingly in the management of early-onset scoliosis. Good results have been published, but there have been recent reports identifying implant failures that may be associated with significant metallosis surrounding the implants. This article aims to present the current knowledge regarding the performance of this implant, and the potential implications and strategies that may be employed to identify and limit any problems.

We urge surgeons to apply caution to patient and construct selection; engage in prospective patient registration using a spine registry; ensure close clinical monitoring until growth has ceased; and send all explanted MAGEC rods for independent analysis.

The MAGEC system may be a good instrumentation system for the treatment of early-onset scoliosis. However, it is innovative and like all new technology, especially when deployed in a paediatric population, robust systems to assess long-term outcome are required to ensure that patient safety is maintained.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:708–13.

Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is a relatively common injury and a number of surgical interventions have been described for its treatment. Recently, a synthetic ligament device has become available and been successfully used, however, like other non-native solutions, a compromise must be reached when choosing non-anatomical locations for their placement. This cadaveric study aimed to assess the effect of different clavicular anchorage points for the Lockdown device on the reduction of acromioclavicular joint dislocations, and suggest an optimal location. We also assessed whether further stability is provided using a coracoacromial ligament transfer (a modified Neviaser technique). The acromioclavicular joint was exposed on seven fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders. The joint was reconstructed using the Lockdown implant using four different clavicular anchorage points and reduction was measured. The coracoacromial ligament was then transferred to the lateral end of the clavicle, and the joint re-assessed. If the Lockdown ligament was secured at the level of the conoid tubercle, the acromioclavicular joint could be reduced anatomically in all cases. If placed medial or 2 cm lateral, the joint was irreducible. If the Lockdown was placed 1 cm lateral to the conoid tubercle, the joint could be reduced with difficulty in four cases. Correct placement of the Lockdown device is crucial to allow anatomical joint reduction. Even when the Lockdown was placed over the conoid tubercle, anterior clavicle displacement remained but this could be controlled using a coracoacromial ligament transfer.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1657–61.

The Nottingham Hip Fracture Score (NHFS) was developed to assess the risk of death following a fracture of the hip, based on pre-operative patient characteristics. We performed an independent validation of the NHFS, assessed the degree of geographical variation that exists between different units within the United Kingdom and attempted to define a NHFS level that is associated with high risk of mortality.

The NHFS was calculated retrospectively for consecutive patients presenting with a fracture of the hip to two hospitals in England. The observed 30-day mortality for each NHFS cohort was compared with that predicted by the NHFS using the Hosmer–Lemeshow test. The distribution of NHFS in the observed group was compared with data from other hospitals in the United Kingdom. The proportion of patients identified as high risk and the mortality within the high risk group were assessed for groups defined using different thresholds for the NHFS.

In all 1079 hip fractures were included in the analysis, with a mean age of 83 years (60 to 105), 284 (26%) male. Overall 30-day mortality was 7.3%. The NHFS was a significant predictor of 30-day mortality. Statistically significant differences in the distribution of the NHFS were present between different units in England (p < 0.001). A NHFS ≥ 6 appears to be an appropriate cut-point to identify patients at high risk of mortality following a fracture of the hip.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;96-B:100–3.