Meniscal Allograft Transplantation: Indications,Techniques, Outcomes

Meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) has become an acceptable surgical treatment for select symptomatic and relatively young (<50 years of age) patients with a meniscal deficiency. MAT may also be considered in meniscal-deficient patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and/or articular cartilage repair procedure in the ipsilateral compartment. Contraindications to MAT include asymptomatic patients, severe osteoarthritis, uncorrectable malalignment or instability, irreparable chondral damage, active infection, or inflammatory arthropathy. Most institutions prefer the use of fresh-frozen allografts, whereas the use of fresh-viable grafts is limited by their availability, and the use of cryopreserved and lyophilized grafts has gone out of favor. Donor allografts are size-matched to the recipient using x-rays or magnetic resonance imaging measurements. To date, no particular surgical technique has demonstrated superiority. Therefore, there are several used approaches (mini-open or arthroscopic), horns-fixation techniques (soft-tissue, bone-plugs, or bone-bridge), and peripheral suture techniques (inside-out or all-inside). Ipsilateral malalignment, instability, and/or chondral defects should be corrected or repaired if MAT is being performed. MAT survival rates are estimated at 73.5% at 10 years and 60.3% at 15 years. Mean time-to-failure is ∼8.2 and ∼7.6 years for a medial and lateral meniscus transplant, respectively. Significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes is expected following MAT, and 90% of patients will attest they will undergo the procedure again. Reoperation rates are estimated at 32%, with the most common complication being a tear of the meniscal allograft. Many studies reporting on outcomes of MAT are flawed because of low-quality, the use of non-fresh-frozen preservation techniques, and heterogeneity of patients and concomitant procedures. As our knowledge regarding patient selection, graft preparation, and techniques continue to develop, we expect MAT outcomes to improve much further.     

Autologous Fat Grafting: Comparison of Techniques

BACKGROUND: Despite more than a century of reporting in the medical literature, controversy still surrounds both the efficacy and longevity of autologous fat transplantation in subcutaneous soft tissue augmentation. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the existing literature relating to the effectiveness of this procedure and to highlight differences in technique that may play a role in reported treatment successes and failures. METHODS: Review of the literature and reporting of authors' observations and results. CONCLUSION: Autologous fat transplantation can be a gratifyingly effective treatment for subcutaneous augmentation that may produce permanent results in some cases. This article aims to clarify some of the differences in technique employed by doctors in this field and aims to enable the reader to better see the subtle, but sometimes important differences in methods used.     

Anterior Shoulder Instability Management: Indications,Techniques, and Outcomes

Anterior shoulder instability is common in young athletes. Male individuals younger than 20 years who are involved in contact sports are at particular risk of injury and recurrence. Essential imaging includes radiography and magnetic resonance imaging in all patients, with 3-dimensional computed tomography being helpful to evaluate glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesions. Evaluation of the glenoid track is essential to help determine appropriate treatment because off-track scenarios in which the Hill-Sachs width is greater than the glenoid width impart a risk of failure with isolated arthroscopic treatment. Associated injuries also must be evaluated, including bone loss, Hill-Sachs lesions, humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGL), glenolabral articular disruption (GLAD), anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA), rotator cuff injury, other fractures, and axillary nerve injury. Optimal treatment continues to be debated. Conservative management with physical therapy for rotator cuff and periscapular strengthening can be attempted, with the addition of bracing if continued play is desired until the season’s conclusion. Surgical intervention is considered in patients with recurrent dislocations, glenoid bone loss, or large Hill-Sachs lesions or in young athletes involved in contact or high-risk sports. Treatment options include arthroscopic capsulolabral repair with at least 4 anchors if good tissue quality and no bone loss exist. Remplissage has been recommended by some surgeons if a large Hill-Sachs exists. Open repair is suggested in patients with a high number of recurrent dislocations without bone loss or in those who participate in high-risk sports. Coracoid transfer or the Latarjet procedure is suggested in patients with bone loss greater than 20%. Bone grafting for glenoid bone loss using autograft or allograft, such as distal tibial allograft, is recommended in patients with a failed Latarjet procedure or those with significant bone loss. Hill-Sachs lesion grafting may also be beneficial in those with large lesions that engage.     

Vagus Nerve Stimulation Therapy: Indications,Programing, and Outcomes

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) provides palliation of seizure reduction for patients with medically refractory epilepsy. VNS is indicated for symptomatic localization-related epilepsy with multiple and bilateral independent foci, symptomatic generalized epilepsy with diffuse epileptogenic abnormalities, refractory idiopathic generalized epilepsy, failed intracranial epilepsy surgery, and other several reasons of contraindications to epilepsy surgery. Programing of the parameters is a principal part in VNS. Output current and duty cycle should be adjusted to higher settings particularly when a patient does not respond to the initial setting, since the pivotal randomized trials performed in the United States demonstrated high stimulation made better responses in seizure frequency. These trials revealed that a ≥ 50% seizure reduction occurred in 36.8% of patients at 1 year, in 43.2% at 2 years, and in 42.7% at 3 years in 440 patients. Safety of VNS was also confirmed because side effects including hoarseness, throat discomfort, cough, paresthesia, and headache improved progressively during the period of 3 years. The largest retrospective study with 436 patients demonstrated the mean seizure reduction of 55.8% in nearly 5 years, and also found 75.5% at 10 years in 65 consecutive patients. The intermediate analysis report of the Japan VNS Registry showed that 60% of 164 cases got a ≥ 50% seizure reduction in 12 months. In addition to seizure reduction, VNS has positive effects in mood and improves energy level, memory difficulties, social aspects, and fear of seizures. VNS is an effective and safe option for patients who are not suitable candidates for intracranial epilepsy surgery.     

一项面部脂肪移植的临床研究:脂肪的过滤清洗与离心的对比

背景尽管利用自体脂肪移植技术进行面部脂肪容量重塑有日趋增加的趋势,但就回植前处理获取脂肪的最佳方式,目前仍无共识的标准可依.依据新近报道的脂肪移植类文献.笔者对脂肪移植术后临床效果,通过对简单的过滤、冲洗方式与通过分离纯化获取的脂肪进行对比.方法 本研究对2006年1～6月收治的25例健康患者行有关面部脂肪移植的前瞻性双盲研究.对照手术在同期进行,同一患者的一侧面部注射简单过滤、冲洗的脂肪,而另一侧面部注射分离纯化获取的脂肪.对术后效果分别进行主观、客观评价.主观评价包括一份面向所有患者的调查问卷表,以及一份相对应的解释说明书.客观评价由3个评委共同对术前、术后对比照片进行评价得来.术后平均随访12个月.结果 本研究结果显示,两种脂肪提纯方式无显著差别.长期随访效果显示,两侧面部移植区域效果相当.结论 经长期临床验证,结合文献报道的相关信息,笔者在脂肪移植时会选择简单过滤处理的脂肪,而不是离心处理的脂肪.