基于苗药五藤膏外敷对CIA大鼠炎性骨破坏的影响探讨苗医外治就近驱邪的作用＊

目的 通过研究明确苗药五藤膏外敷缓解胶原诱导性关节炎（CIA）大鼠关节局部炎症和骨破坏的机制，证实苗医外治就近驱邪的作用。方法 将70只Wistar大鼠随机分为空白组、模型组、苗药五藤膏高、中、低剂量组、扶他林组及IL-17阻断组，每组10只。除空白组外，其余6组均构建CIA模型，并给予相应的外敷治疗。观察大鼠一般情况，HE染色进行病理学分析，TRAP染色检测OC生成，ELISA检测各炎症因子的含量，RT-PCR和WB分别检测RANKL的基因及蛋白表达。结果 苗药五藤膏能改善CIA大鼠破骨细胞浸润及关节病理性结构，并降低RANKL蛋白、基因表达以及TNF-α、IL-1、IL-6、IL-17含量。结论 苗药五藤膏外敷剂对CIA大鼠的治疗机制可能与降低致炎因子的分泌，抑制RANKL及OC的表达相关。     

F形空心钉与传统3枚平行钉治疗Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折的疗效比较

目的:分析比较"F"形空心钉与传统倒三角3枚平行螺钉内固定治疗青壮年Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折的临床疗效。方法：2017年1月至2020年1月收治Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折患者38例，根据置入钉方式的不同将其分为两组，其中A组18例，采用"F"形空心钉固定，男12例，女6例，年龄37~55岁，受伤至手术时间1~3 d。B组20例，采用传统倒三角3枚平行拉力螺钉固定，男12例，女8例，年龄35~55岁，受伤至手术时间为1~3 d。比较两组患者骨折不愈合，股骨头坏死，股骨颈短缩，空心螺钉退出情况，髋关节功能Harris评分，疼痛视觉模拟评分（visual analogue scale，VAS）。结果：所有患者获得随访，时间为15~31个月。两组患者在骨折不愈合，股骨颈短缩，股骨头坏死方面差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；两组患者在螺钉退出方面差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。两组患者术后12个月时髋关节Harris评分及VAS评分差异均无统计学差异（P>0.05）。结论："F"形与传统倒三角3枚平行空心钉内固定治疗青壮年Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折中短期疗效相似，但"F"形空心钉退钉率较低。     

基于正交试验的肾造瘘管固定方案研究

目的 探讨基于正交试验的肾造瘘管不同固定方案的比较效果。方法 将14Fr硅胶肾造瘘管固定在聚乙烯展板和拉力显示器上，以固定材料、固定方法、面积为3个影响因素，每个因素3个水平，每组进行3次试验再求平均值作为最后拉力值F，共进行9个固定方案共27次试验。利用L9（33）正交试验矩阵研究不同材料（医用橡皮膏、医用透气胶带、医用无纺布胶带）、固定方法（交叉固定法、“工”字固定法和改良“工”字固定法）及面积(16 cm2、24 cm2、32 cm2）对肾造瘘管固定强度的影响。结果 正交试验所选的3种影响因素中，对拉力值影响显著性排序为：材料＞方法＞面积；3种固定材料中，医用橡皮膏固定强度最大。结论 肾造瘘管固定方案中，最佳固定组合为以医用橡皮膏结合改良“工”字法固定，可为临床管道固定方案的选择提供参考。     

Prior surgical fixation of proximal humerus fractures is associated with increased complications following subsequent reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to compare complication rates between patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) after a prior open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for proximal humerus fracture (PHF) to those undergoing RSA as a primary treatment for PHFs, glenohumeral osteoarthritis, or rotator cuff tear arthropathy (CTA).MethodsPatients who underwent RSA between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the Mariner database. Patients were separated into 3 mutually exclusive groups: (1) RSA for osteoarthritis, rotator cuff tear, or CTA (Control-RSA); (2) RSA as a primary treatment for PHF (PHF-RSA); and (3) RSA for patients with prior ORIF of PHFs (ORIF-RSA). Ninety-day medical and 2-year postoperative surgical complications were identified. In addition, patients in the PHF-RSA group were subdivided into those undergoing RSA for PHF within 3 months of the fracture (acute) vs. those treated greater than 3 months from diagnosis (delayed). Multivariate regression was performed to control for differences in comorbidities and demographics.ResultsA total of 30,824 patients underwent primary RSA for arthritis or CTA, 5389 patients underwent RSA as a primary treatment for a PHF, and 361 patients underwent RSA after ORIF of a PHF. ORIF before RSA was associated with an increased risk of overall revision (odds ratio [OR] 2.45, P = .002), infection (OR 2.40, P < .001), instability (OR 2.43, P < .001), fracture (OR 3.24, P = .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.59, P = .008), and readmission (OR 2.55, P = .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. RSA as a primary treatment for PHF was associated with an increased risk of 2-year revision (OR 1.60, P < .001), infection (OR 1.51, P < .001), instability (OR 2.84, P < .001), and fracture (OR 2.54, P < .001) in addition to major medical complications (OR 2.02, P < .001), minor medical complications (OR 1.92, P < .001), 90-day emergency department visits (OR 1.26, P < .001) and 90-day readmission (OR 2.03, P < .001) compared with the Control-RSA cohort. The ORIF-RSA group had an increased risk of periprosthetic infection (OR 1.94, P = .002) when compared with the PHF-RSA cohort. There were no differences in medical or surgical complications in the RSA-PHF cohort between patients treated in an acute or delayed fashion.ConclusionRSA following ORIF of a PHF is associated with increased complications compared with patients undergoing RSA for nonfracture indications. Prior ORIF of a PHF is also an independent risk factor for postoperative infection after RSA compared with patients who undergo RSA as a primary operation for fracture. The timing of RSA as a primary operation for PHF does not appear to impact the rates of postoperative medical and surgical complications.     

腰椎棘突间记忆合金动态稳定装置理论验证

为了在腰椎退变性疾病保守治疗和融合手术中间地带寻找一种有效的预防与辅助相结合的微创治疗方式,通过对比目前常用的几种腰椎棘突间动态稳定系统的临床疗效观察和优缺点,以及对腰椎棘突间的生理结构、生物力学和相关数据的分析,在充分了解记忆合金材质的基础上,自行设计研究一种记忆合金材料的新型腰椎棘突间动态固定装置,既能重建腰椎的正常生物力学特性,满足人体脊柱的正常活动,又避免对原有结构的破坏,减少术后并发症的发生,同时也可以优化目前的治疗方法。通过研究,腰椎棘突间记忆合金动态稳定装置在理论上效果满意,可以解决现有技术的不足,优于目前的几种腰椎棘突间动态稳定系统。     

Tibial periprosthetic fractures in Total Knee Arthroplasty – A scoping review

BackgroundPeriprosthetic tibial fractures in Total Knee Arthroplasty are much less commonly seen than femoral fractures, and there is a paucity of available literature and management recommendation for these fractures. We aimed to identify the relevant and up-to-date literature on this subject to analyse the incidence, risk factors, and management recommendations.MethodsA literature search was done on the databases of PubMed and SCOPUS using appropriate keywords. All the published literature in the English language was included for this review.ResultsWe included 21 studies comprising 260 tibial periprosthetic fractures (91 intra-operative (35%) and 169 (65%) post-operative or delayed fractures). Only 5.9% of these fractures were managed conservatively. Whereas 98 cases (58%) were managed with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with plating, 19 (11.2%) were managed with revision TKA. Seventeen cases (10%) were managed with minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO), and 8 (4.7%) were managed with intramedullary nailing. Less than 6% of cases were managed with other means, viz. megaprosthesis (n = 4), arthrodesis (n = 5), amputation (n = 1), and external fixator (n = 1).ConclusionIntraoperative fractures accounted for one-third of the fractures in our review. A majority of the delayed periprosthetic fractures were treated with surgical intervention. The most preferred surgical treatment method was ORIF of fractures using locking plates (either open or MIPPO). Revision TKA or megaprosthesis was used in cases with the loosened implants in association with the fracture.Level of evidenceIV     

Clinical implications of additional posterior fractures in combined anterior-posterior pelvic ring fractures in elderly patients

ObjectivesHistorically, pelvic ring fractures (PRF) are considered to occur predominantly in the anterior ring and therfore to be mechanically stable. Combined anterior and posterior (A + P) PRF are expected to be less mechanically stable and therefore to be associated with higher levels of pain and reduced mobility compared to isolated anterior fractures. The current study investigates the clinical relevance of combined A + P PRF in elderly patients.MethodsA prospective multicentre cohort study was conducted in patients >70 years of age with anterior PRF after low-energy trauma diagnosed on conventional radiographs. All patients underwent an additional CT-scan. Patients were divided into two groups; isolated anterior or combined A + P fractures. Patients were treated conservatively with adequate analgesia for at least one week. If patients could not be mobilised after conservative treatment, surgical fixation was performed. Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores, dependence on walking aids and Activities of Daily Living scores (ADL) were measured at 2–4 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months after fracture.Results102 patients (age 81.1 ± 7.6 years) were included. Isolated anterior fractures were diagnosed in 25 (24.5%) and A + P fractures in 77 (75.5%) patients. Baseline characteristics did not differ between the two groups. Most patients were successfully treated conservatively and 5 (4.9%) underwent percutaneous trans-iliac, trans-sacral screw fixation after failure of conservative treatment. At 2–4 weeks post trauma, patients with A + P fractures had similar median pain scores (3 (range 0–8) vs. 5 (0–10), p = 0.19) and ADL scores (85 (25–100) vs. 78.6 (5–100), p = 0.67), but were more dependent on walking aids (92.8% vs. 72.2%; p = 0.02) compared to patients with isolated anterior fractures. There were no significant differences at 3 months. At one year follow-up the median NRS pain and ADL scores for both fracture groups were 0 and 100, respectively. Mortality was 10.8%, and additional loss to follow-up was 17.6%.ConclusionsThe vast majority of elderly patients with PRF have combined A + P fractures. The clinical implications of additional posterior pelvic ring fractures in elderly patients appears to be limited.