Tendon Graft—Ulna Fixation in Distal Radio-Ulnar Joint Stabilisation; Biomechanical Comparison of Three Graft-Bone Fixation Methods

A common distal radio-ulnar joint (DRUJ) stabilisation procedure uses a tendon graft running from the lip of the radial sigmoid notch to the ulnar fovea and through a bony tunnel to the ulnar shaft, before being wrapped round the distal ulna and sutured to itself. Such graft fixation can be challenging and requires a considerable tendon length. The graft length could be reduced by fixing the graft to the ulna using a bone anchor or interference screw. The aim of this study was to compare the strength of three distal ulna graft fixation methods (tendon wrapping and suturing, bone anchor and interference screw). Four human cadaveric ulnae were used. A tendon strip was run through a tunnel in the distal ulna and secured by: (1) wrapping round the shaft and suturing it to itself, (2) a bone anchor and (3) an interference screw in the bone tunnel. Load to failure was determined using a custom-made apparatus and an Instron machine. Maximum failure load was highest for the bone anchor fixation (99.3 ± 23.7 N) followed by the suturing (96.2 ± 12.1 N), and the interference screw fixation (46.9 ± 5.6 N). There was no significant difference between the tendon suturing and bone anchor methods, but the tendon suturing was statistically significantly higher compared to the interference screw (P = 0.028). In performing anatomical stabilisation of the DRUJ fixation of the tendon graft to the distal ulna with a bone anchor provides the most secure fixation. This may make the stabilisation technique less demanding and require a smaller tendon graft.     

Time and cost involved in the care of newly registered patients with diabetes mellitus and other lifestyle diseases at diabetes clinics in Japan (JDDM 4).

AIMS: To study the time and cost involved in the care of newly registered outpatients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), compared with patients with hypertension and/or hyperlipidaemia (HTL). METHODS: A total of 313 patients with DM and 58 patients with HTL without diabetes were registered on their first visits to 11 diabetes clinics across Japan. The time and cost involved in their care was recorded over the following 5 months. RESULTS: In the first 3 months, there was an extensive time commitment to both groups. The time spent by physicians was 1.5 times longer for DM than for HTL. The total care time spent by all the care providers for DM was twice that for HTL. The cost of DM care was twice that for HTL, with the cost of medicines excluded. However, half of the cost for DM was for laboratory tests. When these were excluded, and the remaining cost divided by the time spent, the amount for DM was half of that for HTL. Over the 5 months, mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) in DM patients improved from 8.0% to 6.5%, and 72% of DM patients achieved the glycaemic target of HbA(1c) < or = 6.5%. CONCLUSIONS: DM care in a diabetes clinic requires a great deal more time and resources than HTL to achieve the best outcome. An educational system for self care, presently lacking in the primary care setting in Japan, would improve glycaemic control for DM patients in the community.