Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 8, Issue 9 | Pages 414 - 424
2 Sep 2019
Schmalzl J Plumhoff P Gilbert F Gohlke F Konrads C Brunner U Jakob F Ebert R Steinert AF

Objectives

The long head of the biceps (LHB) is often resected in shoulder surgery and could therefore serve as a cell source for tissue engineering approaches in the shoulder. However, whether it represents a suitable cell source for regenerative approaches, both in the inflamed and non-inflamed states, remains unclear. In the present study, inflamed and native human LHBs were comparatively characterized for features of regeneration.

Methods

In total, 22 resected LHB tendons were classified into inflamed samples (n = 11) and non-inflamed samples (n = 11). Proliferation potential and specific marker gene expression of primary LHB-derived cell cultures were analyzed. Multipotentiality, including osteogenic, adipogenic, chondrogenic, and tenogenic differentiation potential of both groups were compared under respective lineage-specific culture conditions.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 93-B, Issue 2 | Pages 210 - 216
1 Feb 2011
Young A Walch G Boileau P Favard L Gohlke F Loew M Molé D

We report the long-term clinical and radiological outcomes of the Aequalis total shoulder replacement with a cemented all-polyethylene flat-back keeled glenoid component implanted for primary osteoarthritis between 1991 and 2003 in nine European centres. A total of 226 shoulders in 210 patients were retrospectively reviewed at a mean of 122.7 months (61 to 219) or at revision. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Constant score, patient satisfaction score and range of movement. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed with glenoid revision for loosening and radiological glenoid loosening (sd) as endpoints. The Constant score was found to improve from a mean of 26.8 (sd 10.3) pre-operatively to 57.6 (sd 20.0) post-operatively (p < 0.001). Active forward flexion improved from a mean of 85.3° (sd 27.4) pre-operatively to 125° (sd 37.3) postoperatively (p < 0.001). External rotation improved from a mean of 7° (sd 6.5) pre-operatively to 30.3° (sd 21.8°) post-operatively (p < 0.001). Survivorship with revision of the glenoid component as the endpoint was 99.1% at five years, 94.5% at ten years and 79.4% at 15 years. Survivorship with radiological loosening as the endpoint was 99.1% at five years, 80.3% at ten years and 33.6% at 15 years.

Younger patient age and the curettage technique for glenoid preparation correlated with loosening. The rate of glenoid revision and radiological loosening increased with duration of follow-up, but not until a follow-up of five years. Therefore, we recommend that future studies reporting radiological outcomes of new glenoid designs should report follow-up of at least five to ten years.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 6 | Pages 819 - 823
1 Jun 2005
Boehm TD Werner A Radtke S Mueller T Kirschner S Gohlke F

In a prospective, randomised study on the repair of tears of the rotator cuff we compared the clinical results of two suture techniques for which different suture materials were used.

We prospectively randomised 100 patients with tears of the rotator cuff into two groups. Group 1 had transosseous repair with No. 3 Ethibond using modified Mason-Allen sutures and group 2 had transosseous repair with 1.0 mm polydioxanone cord using modified Kessler sutures. After 24 to 30 months the patients were evaluated clinically using the Constant score and by ultrasonography.

Of the 100 patients, 92 completed the study. No significant statistical difference was seen between the two groups: Constant score, 91% vs 92%; rate of further tear, 18% vs 22%; and revision, 4% vs 4%. In cases of further tear the outcome in group 2 did not differ from that for the intact repairs (91% vs 91%), but in group 1 it was significantly worse (94% vs 77%, p = 0.005).

Overall, seven patients had complications which required revision surgery, in four for pain (two in each group) and in three for infection (two in group 1 and one in group 2).