寰枢椎后路柔性固定的生物力学研究

目的分析细棒、PEEK棒固定对寰枢关节稳定性的影响。方法采用6具新鲜成人枕骨(occipital bone,Oc)~颈椎C4节段进行测试,模拟以下手术及固定状态:①完整状态;②损伤状态:枢椎齿状突II型骨折;③坚强固定:寰枢椎均采用普通椎弓根螺钉固定,直径3.5 mm钛棒连接;④PEEK棒:直径3.5 mm的PEEK棒连接;⑤细棒:直径2.0 mm钛棒连接。采用重复测量实验设计,在完整、损伤和不同的固定状态下,通过脊柱试验机对标本分别施加1.5 N·m的前屈/后伸、左/右侧弯和左/右轴向旋转的纯力偶矩。采用Optotrak三维运动测量系统连续采集标本运动,分析寰枢椎之间角度运动范围和中性区。结果采用直径3.5 mm的钛棒,2.0 mm的细棒以及3.5 mm的PEEK棒固定后,在前屈、后伸、侧弯和旋转方向上均显著减小了固定节段的运动范围(P<0.05)。直径3.5 mm和2.0 mm的棒固定后的运动范围,在各个方向上无显著性差异。PEEK棒固定的运动范围仅在侧弯方向上大于坚强固定(P=0.005),其他方向无显著性差异。3种固定方式在屈伸、侧弯和旋转方向上均显著减小了固定节段的中性区(P<0.05)。各种固定方式之间相比较,无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论在寰枢关节采用直径2.0 mm的细棒固定,与坚强固定的稳定性相当。采用直径3.5 mm的PEEK棒固定,在前屈、后伸、旋转方向上与坚强固定的稳定性相当,在侧弯方向上弱于坚强固定。     

Biomechanical comparison of stemless humeral components in total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare initial fixation strength between various stemless and stemmed humeral components and to correlate implant fixation strength with bone mineral density (BMD).MethodsFive humeral stem designs were investigated: Stemless-A (four hollow fins), Stemless-B (central body, three solid fins), Stemless-C (central screw, peripheral rim-fit), Short stem (50 mm), and Standard stem (130 mm). Fifty cadaveric human humerii were obtained and divided into five groups. BMD within the humeral head was determined for all samples. The mean BMD was similar between groups. The 25 samples with the lowest and highest BMDs were categorized as “Low” and “High,” respectively, with a BMD threshold of 0.35 g/cm², creating BMD subgroups. After implantation, each sample underwent a standardized biomechanical testing protocol, with axial loading followed by torsional loading. Sensors attached to the specimen recorded micromotion throughout testing. Axial loading consisted of cyclic loading for 100 cycles at 3 peak forces (220, 520, and 820 N). Torsional loading consisted of 100 cycles of internal/external rotation at 0.1 Hz at 6 peak torques, or until failure (±2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, and 15 Nm). Failure was defined as the torque at which any bone fracture, implant detachment from anchor/stem, or an excess of 50° internal/external rotation occurred. Groups and BMD subgroups were compared.ResultsAt maximal axial loading, Stemless-B demonstrated greater micromotion (540 μm) than Stemless-C (192 μm) (P = .003). Stemless-B and Stemless-A (387 μm) also had greater micromotion than Short stem (118 μm, P < .001, P = .03) and Standard stem (85 μm, P < .001, P = .01). When comparing low-BMD samples at maximal axial loading, these differences were accentuated, but comparison of high-BMD samples showed no significant differences between groups. Torsional testing demonstrated that Standard stem failed at greater torque (7.2 Nm) than Stemless-B (2.3 Nm, P < .001), Stemless-A (1.9 Nm, P < .001), and Stemless-C (3.9 Nm, P = .01). When comparing torsional testing results of low-BMD samples, both Standard stem and Short stem failed at greater torque than Stemless-B (P = .02, P = .003) and Stemless-A (P = .03, P = .004) but failed at a similar torque to Stemless-C. Torsional testing of high-BMD samples showed that Standard stem failed at a greater torque than all stemless designs.ConclusionStemless humeral implants should be used with caution in low-BMD settings (<0.35 g/cm²). A central screw and peripheral rim-fit stemless anchor design demonstrated greater fixation strength at low BMD when compared with other designs, while all stemless designs performed similarly at high BMD.Level of evidenceBasic Science Study; Cadaveric Study     

微创Chevron-Akin截骨术治疗轻中度拇外翻的早期疗效分析

目的:探讨微创Chevron-Akin(minimally invasive Chevron-Akin,MICA)截骨术治疗轻中度拇外翻的早期临床疗效。方法:自2019年6月至2021年4月,采用MICA截骨术治疗26例(29足)轻中度拇外翻患者,其中男1例,女25例;年龄19~78(38.3±19.5)岁。观察并比较手术前后拇外翻角(hallux valgus angle,HVA),第1、2跖骨间角(intermetatarsal angle,IMA),第1跖骨短缩。末次随访时采用美国骨科足踝外科协会(American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society,AOFAS)前足评分系统及视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)评价治疗效果,并记录相关并发症。结果:26例(29足)均获得随访,时间12~33(19.6±5.1)个月。HVA、IMA分别由术前的(32.3±6.6)°、(11.7±3.2)°矫正为术后的(13.0±5.3)°、(6.1±3.2)°,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);第1跖骨短缩(2.7±1.1) mm。AOFAS评分由术前的(55.7±7.4)分提高到术后的(88.5±7.9)分(P<0.01),其中优15足,良11足,可3足。VAS由术前的(6.5±1.5)分改善为术后的(0.7±0.4)分(P<0.01)。结论:MICA截骨术创伤小,术后恢复快,并发症率低,并且能有效改善拇外翻畸形,是治疗轻中度拇外翻的安全可靠手术方法。     

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.