International orthopaedics
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Subsartorial adductor canal vs femoral nerve block for analgesia after total knee replacement.
Providing effective analgesia for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients remains challenging. Femoral nerve block (FNB) offers targeted pain control; however, its effect on motor function, related fall risk and impact on rehabilitation has been the source of controversy. Adductor canal block (ACB) potentially spares motor fibres of the femoral nerve, but the comparative effect of the two approaches has not yet been well defined due to considerable variability in pain perception. Our study compares both single-shot FNB and ACB, side to side, in the same patients undergoing bilateral TKA. ⋯ Although we could not confirm a benefit in motor function between ACB and FNB, given the equivalent analgesic potency combined with its potentially lower overall impact if neuropraxia should occur, ACB may represent an attractive alternative to FNB.
-
Biography Historical Article
Bone transplantation and tissue engineering, part IV. Mesenchymal stem cells: history in orthopedic surgery from Cohnheim and Goujon to the Nobel Prize of Yamanaka.
In 1867 the German pathologist Cohnheim hypothesized that non-hematopoietic, bone marrow-derived cells could migrate through the blood stream to distant sites of injury and participate in tissue regeneration. In 1868, the French physiologist Goujon studied the osteogenic potential of bone marrow on rabbits. Friedenstein demonstrated the existence of a nonhematopoietic stem cell within bone marrow more than a hundred years later. ⋯ Recently, Japanese scientist (first orthopaedist) Shinya Yamanaka proved that introduction of a small set of transcription factors into a differentiated cell was sufficient to revert the cell to a pluripotent state. Yamanaka shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine and opened a new door for potential applications of MSCs. This manuscript describes the concept of MSCs from the period when it was relegated to the imagination to the beginning of the twenty-first century and their application in orthopaedic surgery.
-
Meniscus injuries are the most commonly reported in athletes. Meniscectomy is the most common treatment. Stable peripheral tears may heal, while degenerative tears do well with physical therapy. However, the exact role of physical therapy in treating symptomatic unstable meniscal tears is not known. We aimed to identify the role of physical therapy in treating such patients and clarify the role of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in treating unstable meniscal tears. ⋯ Pain and swelling improved after physical therapy. However, patients were not satisfied as limited range of knee motion persisted. APM was superior to physical therapy in treating symptomatic unstable meniscal tears, with high patient satisfaction and restored knee function.
-
Long, cementless, femoral stem revisions are being used with increasing frequency. There is a relative lack of studies of late fractures after cementless implants, particularly in those patients who had a previous stem revision and are at higher risk for periprosthetic fracture after revision. In this paper, we review risk factors for periprosthetic fracture and revisions of long, cementless, locked stems and report implant survival compared with conventional, cemented, long-stem hip revision arthroplasties in such a group of patients. ⋯ The long, cementless, locked stem showed more early complications compared with recementing of long-stem prosthesis. We therefore recommend the use of cemented long stems in patients with severe bone loss and previous revision.
-
Comparative Study
Arthroplasty compared to internal fixation by locking plate osteosynthesis in comminuted fractures of the distal humerus.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the results after double locking plate osteosynthesis (ORIF) and total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) in AO type C fractures of the distal humerus. ⋯ TEA and ORIF lead to comparable functional results, but major complications are more common after ORIF. Despite this, ORIF remains the gold standard for younger and older patients because of the lifelong loading limitation after TEA, unknown implant survival and problematic revision surgery. For patients older than 60 years a primary TEA can be recommended in exceptional cases, if the loading limitation is acceptable for the individual or the fracture is not reconstructable.