header advert
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 1 | Pages 83 - 88
1 Jan 2015
Kocsis G McCulloch TA Thyagarajan D Wallace WA

The LockDown device (previously called Surgilig) is a braided polyester mesh which is mostly used to reconstruct the dislocated acromioclavicular joint. More than 11 000 have been implanted worldwide. Little is known about the tissue reaction to the device nor to its wear products when implanted in an extra-articular site in humans. This is of importance as an adverse immunological reaction could result in osteolysis or damage to the local tissues, thereby affecting the longevity of the implant. We analysed the histology of five LockDown implants retrieved from five patients over the last seven years by one of the senior authors. Routine analysis was carried out in all five cases and immunohistochemistry in one. The LockDown device acts as a scaffold for connective tissue which forms an investing fibrous pseudoligament. The immunological response at the histological level seems favourable with a limited histiocytic and giant cell response to micron-sized wear particles. The connective tissue envelope around the implant is less organised than a native ligament. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:83–8


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 7 | Pages 1292 - 1300
1 Jul 2021
Märtens N Heinze M Awiszus F Bertrand J Lohmann CH Berth A

Aims

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical results, long-term survival, and complication rates of stemless shoulder prosthesis with stemmed anatomical shoulder prostheses for treatment of osteoarthritis and to analyze radiological bone changes around the implants during follow-up.

Methods

A total of 161 patients treated with either a stemmed or a stemless shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 118 months (102 to 158). The Constant score (CS), the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, and active range of motion (ROM) were recorded. Radiological analysis for bone adaptations was performed by plain radiographs. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was calculated and complications were noted.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 2 | Pages 160 - 165
1 Feb 2016
Farrier AJ C. Sanchez Franco L Shoaib A Gulati V Johnson N Uzoigwe CE Choudhury MZ

The ageing population and an increase in both the incidence and prevalence of cancer pose a healthcare challenge, some of which is borne by the orthopaedic community in the form of osteoporotic fractures and metastatic bone disease. In recent years there has been an increasing understanding of the pathways involved in bone metabolism relevant to osteoporosis and metastases in bone. Newer therapies may aid the management of these problems. One group of drugs, the antibody mediated anti-resorptive therapies (AMARTs) use antibodies to block bone resorption pathways. This review seeks to present a synopsis of the guidelines, pharmacology and potential pathophysiology of AMARTs and other new anti-resorptive drugs.

We evaluate the literature relating to AMARTs and new anti-resorptives with special attention on those approved for use in clinical practice.

Denosumab, a monoclonal antibody against Receptor Activator for Nuclear Factor Kappa-B Ligand. It is the first AMART approved by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the US Food and Drug Administration. Other novel anti-resorptives awaiting approval for clinical use include Odanacatib.

Denosumab is indicated for the treatment of osteoporosis and prevention of the complications of bone metastases. Recent evidence suggests, however, that denosumab may have an adverse event profile similar to bisphosphonates, including atypical femoral fractures. It is, therefore, essential that orthopaedic surgeons are conversant with these medications and their safe usage.

Take home message: Denosumab has important orthopaedic indications and has been shown to significantly reduce patient morbidity in osteoporosis and metastatic bone disease.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:160–5.