Effects of teriparatide on fusion rates in patients undergoing complex foot and ankle arthrodesis

BackgroundHere, we determined whether teriparatide treatment would increase fusion rates after foot and ankle arthrodesis by comparing treatment results between patients with high-risk factors for nonunion who received teriparatide against those who did not.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 66 consecutive patients who underwent foot and ankle arthrodesis. The inclusion criterion was the presence of at least one of the following risk factors for nonunion after previous foot and ankle arthrodesis: deformity, bone defects, avascular necrosis, and nonunion. Sixteen patients were finally enrolled and divided into 2 groups: 8 patients received teriparatide treatment after fusion surgery (PTH group), and 8 patients did not (control group).ResultsThe fusion rate was significantly greater in the PTH group than in the control group (100% vs 50%). Four patients in the control group developed nonunion, 3 of whom underwent revision fusion; however, all patients received the teriparatide treatment after revision surgery and subsequently achieved union. No significant differences in demographics, fusion sites, and complication rates were found.ConclusionThough the sample size was small, the current study suggests that teriparatide administration may improve fusion rates in patients with high-risk factors for nonunion after foot and ankle arthrodesis.     

The use of regional anaesthesia for surgical intervention has minimal effect on functional outcomes following fracture nonunion repair

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of regional anaesthesia as compared to general anaesthesia on clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes following long bone fracture nonunion repair.

髋臼骨折骨不连的治疗

目的 探讨髋臼骨折骨不连的发生原因及治疗方法。方法 1995年5月-2005年8月收治髋臼骨折骨不连患者10例，8例为手术后发生骨不连，第一次手术至第二次手术时间为10～24个月，平均15个月。术前仔细分析髋臼骨折损伤类型及发生骨不连的原因，根据发生骨不连部位分别采取Kocher-Langenbeck切口、髂腹股沟切口或前后联合切口手术，彻底清理骨折端，均行植骨内固定治疗。结果 9例患者获得15～27个月（平均19个月）随访，经二次手术，骨折骨不连均达到骨性愈合。髋关节功能按照Matta的评分标准：优3例，良5例，可1例。结论 髋臼骨折骨不连多由于治疗者缺乏髋臼骨折治疗经验、治疗措施不当引起。准确掌握手术适应证、术前明确骨折分类、把握手术时机、正确选择切口、满意的复位和正确的内固定方式是预防术后骨不连的关键。     

球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体骨折骨不愈合

目的探讨球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体骨折骨不愈合的疗效。方法自2004年2月～2007年1月，对13例15个椎体发生骨不愈合的骨质疏松性椎体骨折患者行球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术治疗。术中采用经双侧椎弓根穿刺，置入2枚可扩张球囊使骨折塌陷椎体复位，灌注骨水泥充填由球囊扩张所形成的椎体内空腔。通过观察术后症状改善及骨折复位情况来评估其疗效。结果所有患者随访4～35个月，平均24．7个月。全部患者均顺利完成手术，无症状性并发症发生。术后疼痛即刻明显减轻或消失，l～2d后下地活动。术后椎体高度平均恢复率61．5％，后凸畸形Cobb角平均矫正8．5^o，术前与术后比较差异有统计学意义（t=8．987，P〈0．05）。疼痛视觉模拟评分由术前8．4分降至2．1分。结论球囊扩张椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体骨折骨不愈合可有效缓解疼痛、改善功能及恢复脊柱序列，是治疗椎体骨不愈合的较好微刨方法之一。     

Treatment of humeral shaft nonunion by external fixation: a valuable option

We report the treatment of six patients with nonunion of the humerus, using a unilateral fixator and bone grafting. Union was obtained in all patients, with an average time to union of 4.5 months. Superficial pin tract infection was seen in five patients, but resolved uneventfully. One patient had transient radial nerve palsy. The results, according to the Stewart and Hundley criteria, were excellent in one patient, good in three, fair in one, and poor in one. The main cause of the fair and poor results was marked limitation of shoulder and elbow motion. This method, however, seems to be therapeutically effective. Received: August 21, 2000 / Accepted: December 22, 2000     

Which surgical approach is optimal for joint preparation in talonavicular fusion — A cadaver study

BackgroundFusion of the talonavicular joint has proven challenging in literature. The optimal surgical approach for talonavicular arthrodesis is still uncertain. This study compares the amount of physical joint preparation between dorsal and medial approaches to the talonavicular joint.MethodsTwenty fresh frozen cadaver specimens were randomly assigned to receive either a dorsal or medial operative approach to the talonavicular joint. The joint surface was prepared, and the joint was disarticulated. Image analysis, using ImageJ, was performed by two blinded reviewers to assess the joint surface preparation and this was compared by surgical approach.ResultsThe dorsal approach had a higher median percentage of talar and total talonavicular joint surface area prepared (75% vs. 59% (p = .007) and 82% vs. 70% (p = .005)). Irrespective of approach, the talus was significantly more difficult to prepare than the navicular (62% vs 88% (p = .001)).ConclusionThe dorsal approach provides superior talonavicular joint preparation. The lateral ¼th of the talar head was the most difficult surface to prepare, and surgeons performing double or triple arthrodesis may prepare the lateral talar head from the lateral approach.Level of evidenceLevel V.     

Outcome of limb reconstruction system in tibial infected non-union and open tibial diaphysial fracture with bone loss

IntroductionIncidence of open fractures of the long bones is increasing due to the increase in road traffic accidents (RTA) which leads to an increased incidence of complex non-unions of long bones. Patients are usually operated many times for fracture fixation (and healing) or to eradicate infection, which causes soft tissue scarring and devitalization of any surviving bone.ObjectiveIn this study, we assess the outcome of the Limb reconstruction system in tibial infected non-union and open tibial diaphyseal fracture with bone loss.MethodIt is a prospective study conducted on 15 patients and patients included in this study having compound fractures of shaft tibia with bone loss classified by Gustilo-Anderson open fracture classification. With the defect in the distal tibia, proximal corticotomy 1.5 cm distal to the last screw in the proximal clamp and proximal to distal transports were done and vice versa. All patients were evaluated with the ASAMI scoring system into bone results and functional results.ResultsIn the majority of patients, the injury was caused by road traffic accidents 80% of cases. Out of 15 cases, 2 belong to the upper 3rd, 9 cases belong to the middle 3rd and 4 cases belong to the lower 3rd of shaft tibia. The union time ranges from 4 to 11 months but the maximum union was achieved in 7–9 months in 8 (53.33%). Pin tract infection was reported in two (13.33%) patients who became better with regular dressing. Ankle stiffness was present in one case (6.67%), most probably due to improper physiotherapy.According to ASAMI Criteria excellent radiological results were present in 11 (73.33%) cases, good results were found in 4 (26.67) cases and excellent functional results were observed in 7 cases (46.67%) and good results were found in 8 (53.33%) cases. Infection was cured in all patients and did not recur till the last follow-up.ConclusionsAdvantages of rail fixator include less invasive surgery, early weight-bearing, less infection, less blood loss, prevention of diffuse osteoporosis and atrophy, preservation of limb function, no need for bone grafting, correction of deformity during the process of healing, thus no need for a second surgery. Non-union, bone defect, and deformity can be corrected simultaneously. Hence, we recommend the use of this system (rail fixator) especially for infected non-union of long bones and compound fractures with bone loss.