Comparing bone resorption after anatomical shoulder arthroplasty between various surgical procedures using a single-stem model

BackgroundIn shoulder arthroplasty, bone resorption around the stem can lead to stem loosening and makes surgery difficult at the time of revision. Proximal bone resorption after reverse shoulder arthroplasty can cause instability because of a decrease of deltoid wrapping effect. As factors of the stem itself, such as stem coating, shape, length, and use of bone cement, may also affect bone resorption, a single-stem model should be used to compare bone resorptions between different pathologies and surgical procedures. However, to date, a few reports have compared these differences in detail using a single-stem model. Therefore, we investigated the prevalence and location of humeral bone resorption in a single-stem model.MethodsThe study included 100 shoulders that underwent anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or humeral head replacement (HHR) with a single uncemented humeral stem from 2008 to 2018. The patients were 31 men and 69 women. The mean age at surgery was 72.9 years (range, 41-86 years). The patients were divided into three groups: especially, 25, 61, and 14 shoulders received TSA for primary osteoarthritis without rotator cuff tears (TSA group), HHR using an anatomical head with rotator cuff repair for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) (HHR group), and HHR using a CTA head without rotator cuff repair (CTA group), respectively. Patients were monitored for a mean of 56 months (range, 12-98 months). The location of bone resorption was divided into seven zones as follows: zone 1, greater tuberosity; zone 2, lateral diaphysis; zone 3, lateral diaphysis beyond the deltoid tuberosity; zone 4, tip of the stem; zone 5, medial diaphysis beyond the deltoid tuberosity; zone 6, medial diaphysis; and zone 7, calcar region. The degree of bone resorption was classified from grade 0 to 4.ResultsBone resorption of grade 3 or higher was significantly more frequent at the greater tuberosity in the HHR and CTA groups (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively) than that in the TSA group. Grade 4 bone resorption was significantly more frequent in the CTA than that in the TSA and HHR groups in zone 1 (P = .016 and P = .041, respectively).ConclusionThe state of attachment of the rotator cuff to the greater tuberosity might affect bone resorption at the greater tuberosity, such as the greater tuberosity after shoulder arthroplasty. In cases of shoulder arthroplasty for arthropathy with rotator cuff tear, performing rotator cuff repair might prevent bone resorption.Level of evidenceLevel IV; Prognosis Study     

Targeting an RNA-Binding Protein Network in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

1. Download high-res image (232KB)
2. Download full-size image

     

Association of the time to first epinephrine administration and outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: SOS-KANTO 2012 study

Objective

This study assessed the association between the timing of first epinephrine administration (EA) and the neurological outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) with both initial shockable and non-shockable rhythms.

Cytotoxic T‐lymphocyte‐associated protein 4 expressed by melanoma cells does not affect melanoma‐specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in the effector phase

Cytotoxic T‐lymphocyte‐associated protein 4 (CTLA‐4) is one of the important molecules that regulate the anti‐melanoma T‐cell response. Currently, there are some reports showing that CTLA‐4 is expressed not only by T cells but also by various kinds of tumor cells, including melanoma cells. However, there is no report that shows the role of CTLA‐4 expressed by melanoma cells in melanoma‐specific cytotoxic T‐lymphocyte (CTL) response. In this report, we confirmed substantial CTLA‐4 expression and the localization of CTLA‐4 in melanoma cell lines and tissues. Also, we examined its impact on melanoma‐specific CTL in vitro, and found that CTLA‐4 expressed by melanoma cells does not affect melanoma‐specific CTL in the effector phase. Our findings suggest the importance of elucidating the role of CTLA‐4 expressed by melanoma cells, particularly in anti‐CTLA‐4 antibody therapy.