后外侧结构重建在新鲜股骨颈骨折人工股骨头置换术中的应用

目的探讨后外侧结构重建对后外侧入路人工股骨头置换术术后早期关节脱位的影响。方法选取2016年9月至2017年8月于我院行后外侧入路初次人工股骨头置换术的股骨颈骨折患者60例,根据术中是否修补关节囊及外旋肌群分为重建组(33例:舌形切开关节囊,术中将关节囊及外旋肌群原位缝合在大转子后方及臀中肌肌腱附着处)和对照组(27例:切除关节囊后,术中未进行外旋肌群修复重建)。比较两组的手术情况及术后近期关节功能情况。结果重建组的手术时间为(45.0±15.3) min,长于对照组的(35.0±12.4) min (P <0.05)。重建组术腔引流量为(200.0±80.0) m L,少于对照组的(420.0±120.6) m L (P <0.05)。重建组的早期脱位率为0.000%(0例),与对照组的7.407%(2例)比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。重建组术后Harris评分为(92.0±3.4)分,高于对照组的(88.2±5.0)分(P <0.05)。结论在后外侧入路人工股骨头置换过程中行后外侧结构重建能够有效减少术腔引流量,提高髋关节Harris评分,对维持髋关节软组织平衡具有重要意义。     

Accuracy and Precision of Acetabular Component Placement With Imageless Navigation in Obese Patients

Background

Obesity is a risk factor for acetabular component malposition when total hip arthroplasty is performed with manual techniques. The utility of imageless navigation in obese patients remains unknown. This study compared the accuracy and precision of imageless navigation for component orientation between obese and nonobese patients.

Anatomic vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis with intact rotator cuff: a retrospective comparison of patient-reported outcomes using the systems outcomes database with up to 5-year follow-up

BackgroundThe growing enthusiasm for the use of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) with an intact rotator cuff is based on data derived from single-center studies with limited generalizability and follow-up. This study compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between RSA and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for the treatment of primary GHOA with up to 5-year follow-up and examined temporal trends in the treatment of GHOA between 2012 and 2021.MethodsA retrospective review was performed on patients with primary GHOA undergoing primary arthroplasty surgery from the Surgical Outcomes System global registry between 2012 and 2021. PROs including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were compared between RSA and TSA at 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively.ResultsA total of 4451 patients were included, with 2693 (60.5%) undergoing TSA and 1758 (39.5%) undergoing RSA. Both RSA and TSA provided clinically excellent outcomes at 1 year postoperatively (ASES: 80.8 ± 17.9 vs. 85.9 ± 15.2, respectively; SANE: 74.8 ± 24.7 vs. 79.5 ± 22.9; VAS pain: 1.3 ± 2.0 vs. 1.1 ± 1.7; all P < .05) that were maintained at 2 years (ASES: 81.3 ± 19.3 vs. 87.3 ± 14.9; SANE: 74.8 ± 26.2 vs. 79.7 ± 24.7; VAS pain: 1.3 ± 2.1 vs. 1.0 ± 1.6; all P < .05) and 5 years (ASES: 81.7 ± 16.5 vs. 86.9 ± 15.3; SANE: 71.6 ± 28.5 vs. 78.2 ± 25.9; VAS pain: 1.0 ± 1.7 vs. 1.0 ± 1.7; all P < .05), with statistical significance favoring TSA. After controlling for age and sex, there was an adjusted difference of 4.5 units in the ASES score favoring TSA (P = .005) at 5 years postoperatively but no differences in adjusted SANE (P = .745) and VAS pain (P = .332) scores. The use of RSA for GHOA grew considerably over time, from representing only 17% of all replacements performed for GHOA in 2012 to nearly half (47%) in 2021 (P < .001).ConclusionRSA as a treatment for GHOA with an intact rotator cuff seems to yield PROs that are largely clinically equivalent to TSA extending to 5 years postoperatively. The observed statistical significance favoring TSA appears to be of marginal clinical benefit based on established minimal clinically important differences and may be a result of the large sample size. Further research using more granular clinical data and examining differences in range of motion and complications is warranted as it may change the value analysis.     

全国著名骨伤专家梁铁民教授学术思想和正骨经验

总结了全国著名骨伤专家梁铁民教授的学术思想和正骨经验,简述了梁老生平。梁老学术思想表现在突出整体观念,主张辨证施术;注重调理气血,强调药物接续;重视望问切触量法五诊结合等三个方面。对于梁老正骨经验先进行了综合论述,进一步佐证其学术思想;后分别从小儿桡骨头半脱位、颈椎错位、胸腰椎小关节错位、肋骨骨折等梁老研究较深入和比较擅长的几个方面进行了阐述。特别是颈椎错位这种高难度高风险的手法操作,体现出梁老高超的手法技艺。     

International Hand Function Study Following Distal Radial Access: The RATATOUILLE Study

BackgroundDistal radial access (DRA) has been proposed to improve procedure ergonomics and favor radial artery patency. Although promising data, nothing is known on evolving hand function after DRA.ObjectivesThis study sought to comprehensively evaluate hand function in patients undergoing DRA.MethodsReal-world patients undergoing DRA undertook a thorough multimodality assessment of hand function implementing multidomain questionnaires (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Levine-Katz), and motor (pinch grip test) and sensory (Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments test) examinations of both hands. All assessments were performed at preprocedural baseline and planned at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up (FU). Adverse clinical and procedural events were documented too.ResultsData of 313 patients (220 men, age 66 ± 10 years) from 9 international centers were analyzed. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and the Levine-Katz scores slightly improved from baseline to FU (P = 0.008 and P = 0.029, respectively). Pinch strength mildly improved from baseline to FU (P < 0.001 for both the left and right hands). Similarly, touch pressure threshold appeared to faintly improve in both the left and right hands (P < 0.012 for all the sites). For both motor and sensory function tests, comparable findings were found for the DRA hand and the contralateral one, with no significant differences between them. Repeated assessment of all tests over all FU time points similarly showed lack of worsening hand function. Access-related adverse events included 19 harmless bleedings and 3 forearm radial artery and 3 distal radial artery occlusions. None affected hand function at FU.ConclusionsIn a systematic multidimensional assessment, DRA was not associated with hand function impairment. Moreover, DRA emerges as a safe alternative vascular access.