Arthroscopic Shoulder Stabilization: Is There Ever a Need to Open?

Recent studies show comparable results of arthroscopic shoulder stabilization techniques compared with the gold standard open Bankart reconstruction. Great technical advances and ever-increasing surgeon experience have rendered pathology once deemed an indication for open surgery as treatable by arthroscopic means. With this movement toward a more universal application of all-arthroscopic techniques, we might consider the following question: Is there ever a need to open? To answer this question, we must first consider normal anatomy and then appreciate the contribution of deranged pathoanatomy to recurrent instability in each individual case. The surgeon must then determine whether this is best addressed via an arthroscopic or open technique. Arthroscopy, as compared with open stabilization procedures, holds the potential benefits of decreased morbidity rates, early functional rehabilitation, and improved range of motion. Despite potential advantages, arthroscopic stabilization is clearly contraindicated when a significant pathologic lesion contributing to recurrent instability cannot be adequately addressed as a result of the limitations of current techniques or instrumentation. On the basis of this principle, we believe that sizable glenohumeral bone defects remain the only absolute contraindication to an all-arthroscopic approach. Many complicating issues, such as attenuated capsule, humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament lesions, cases of revision surgery, and collision or contact athletes, exist and warrant close attention. We prefer to think of these situations as “challenges” for which both arthroscopic and open surgery should be considered, rather than as true contraindications to arthroscopic shoulder stabilization. We are, by no means, advocating arthroscopic treatment in all cases of shoulder instability, because this would represent a gross oversimplification of the issues at hand. However, we do acknowledge that the steadfast contraindications to arthroscopic shoulder stabilization are decreasing every day.     

Comparative study of complications after primary and revision transsphenoidal endoscopic surgeries

Neurosurgical Review - A preferred treatment for residual/recurrent pituitary adenomas has not been established. The existence of higher complication rates for revision surgeries remains under...     

Sex-Dependent Mediation of Leptin in the Association of Perilipin Polymorphisms with BMI and Plasma Lipid Levels in Children

Variations in the perilipin (PLIN) gene have been suggested to be associated with obesity and its related alterations, but a different nutritional status seems to contribute to differences in these associations. In our study, we examined the association of several polymorphisms at the PLIN locus with obesity and lipid profile in children, and then analyzed the mediation of plasma leptin levels on these associations. The single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) rs894160, rs1052700, and rs2304795 in PLIN1, and rs35568725 in PLIN2, were analyzed by RT-PCR in 1264 children aged 6–8 years. Our results showed a contrasting association of PLIN1 rs1052700 with apolipoprotein (Apo) A-I levels in boys and girls, with genotype TT carriers showing significantly higher Apo A-I levels in boys and significantly lower Apo A-I levels in girls. Significant associations of the SNP PLIN2 rs35568725 with high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-cholesterol), Apo A-I, and non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) were observed in boys but not in girls. The associations of the SNPs studied with body mass index (BMI), NEFA, and Apo A-I in boys and girls were different depending on leptin concentration. In conclusion, we describe the mediation of plasma leptin levels in the association of SNPs in PLIN1 and PLIN2 with BMI, Apo A-I, and NEFA. Different leptin levels by sex may contribute to explain the sex-dependent association of the PLIN SNPs with these variables.     

Nutritional Status after Roux-En-Y (Rygb) and One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (Oagb) at 6-Month Follow-Up: A Comparative Study

Introduction: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) are two effective bariatric surgical procedures with positive outcomes in terms of weight loss, comorbidities remission, and adverse events profiles. OAGB seems to carry a higher risk of malnutrition, but existing data are controversial. The aim of this study is to objectively evaluate and compare malnutrition in patients undergoing RYGB and OAGB. Methods: Retrospective monocentric study of obese patients undergoing RYGB or OAGB between the 15 September 2020 and the 31 May 2021. Nutritional status was assessed using the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score and compared between groups. The primary outcome was the mean CONUT score at 6 months. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of malnutrition, comorbidities, including hypertension, insulin resistance and type II diabetes mellitus, and weight loss. Results: 78 patients were included: 30 underwent RYGB and 48 underwent OAGB. At 6-Month Follow-Up there was no difference between groups in the mean CONUT score nor in incidence of malnutrition. In both groups, the nutritional status significantly worsened 6 months after surgery (preoperative and postoperative score of 0.48 ± 0.9 and 1.38 ± 1.5; p = 0.0066 for RYGB and of 0.86 ± 1.5 and 1.45 ± 1.3; p = 0.0422 for OAGB). Type II Diabetes mellitus (DMII) and hypertension remission were significant in the OAGB group with a 100% relative remission in the DMII-OAGB group (p = 0.0265), and a 67% relative remission in the hypertension-OAGB group (p = 0.0031). Conclusions: No difference in nutritional status has been detected between patients undergoing RYGB or OAGB at the 6-Month Follow-Up. Both procedures may have significant mal-absorptive effects leading to decline in nutritional status. OAGB may be more efficacious in inducing DMII and hypertension remission. Larger prospective studies dedicated specifically to nutritional status after gastric bypass are needed to confirm the impact of different bypass procedures on nutritional status.