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:
To assess the extent of osteointegration in two designs of shoulder
resurfacing implants. Bony integration to the Copeland cylindrical
central stem design and the Epoca RH conical-crown design were compared. Implants retrieved from six patients in each group were pair-matched.
Mean time to revision surgery of Copeland implants was 37 months
(standard deviation (Aims
Patients and Methods