-
Foot and Ankle Surgery : Official... Dec 2022This study aimed to evaluate the use of distraction arthroplasty for ankle osteoarthritis, with respect to patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to evaluate the use of distraction arthroplasty for ankle osteoarthritis, with respect to patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, range of motion and radiographic outcomes.
METHODS
A computer-based search was performed in PubMed, Cinahl, Embase, Scopus and ISI Web of Science. Two reviewers independently performed title/abstract and full-text screening. Quality assessment was performed using The Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS) and Joanna Briggs Institute criteria.
RESULTS
Whilst all studies evaluating PROMs reported significant (P < 0.05) improvement, these were either below or only slightly above the minimally clinically important difference. The rate of conversion to arthrodesis or total ankle arthroplasty was high, with failure rates of up to 52% reported.
CONCLUSION
Due to the inconsistent improvements in PROMs, which are likely overestimated due to substantial bias, and the high failure rate, this review suggests that distraction arthroplasty is not currently an effective treatment option for ankle arthritis.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV, systematic review of level I to IV studies.
Topics: Humans; Ankle Joint; Osteoarthritis; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Ankle; Arthrodesis; Range of Motion, Articular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35853785
DOI: 10.1016/j.fas.2022.07.005 -
Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online Jul 2023To report the functional and radiological outcomes of scaphocapitate (SC) arthrodesis in the treatment of Kienböck disease.
PURPOSE
To report the functional and radiological outcomes of scaphocapitate (SC) arthrodesis in the treatment of Kienböck disease.
METHODS
This meta-analysis was conducted with adherence to PRISMA guidelines. Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane and Virtual Health Library were searched from inception until November 2022. All original studies that investigated the outcomes of scaphocapitate fusion in Kienböck disease were included. Exclusion criteria were arthroscopically performed fusions, concomitant radial shortening, traumatic or other etiologies of lunate avascular necrosis, and studies published in languages other than English. Outcomes of interest were pre- and post-operative wrist range of motion, VAS score, functional scores, radiological outcomes, surgical technique, complication rate and reoperation rate.
RESULTS
The total number of included participants was 203 from 11 articles. The results showed no significant differences pre- and post-operatively in terms of wrist flexion, extension and ulnar deviation. However, there was a significant reduction in radial deviation after the surgery (WMD -2.30; 95% CI, -4.26 to -0.33). Moreover, a significant increase was noticed in grip strength in Kg (WMD 13.29; 95% CI, 3.21-23.37) and mmHg post-operatively (WMD 23.75; 95% CI, 17.56-29.94). In addition, the models demonstrated significant decrease in carpal height (WMD -0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.00), scapholunate angle (WMD -12.11; 95% CI, -20.46 to -3.77) and radioscaphoid angle after the surgery (WMD -12.09; 95% CI, -15.51 to -8.67). The pooled overall rate of complication and reoperation rates were 24% (95% CI, 6%-47%) and 14% (95% CI, 3%-31%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Scaphocapitate arthrodesis is an effective procedure for treatment of Kienböck disease. This procedure is associated with satisfactory functional outcomes and significant improvement in pain scores and grip strength. Further studies with larger sample sizes and reduced heterogeneity are needed for a better evaluation of the results.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Scaphocapitate arthrodesis is a recommended surgery for Kienböck disease with satisfactory functional and radiological outcomes. However, patients should be counseled on the possible complications and reoperation rate.
PubMed: 37521555
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsg.2023.03.014 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Mar 2021Although studies are available on high-energy Lisfranc injuries, the evidence for increasingly reported low-energy Lisfranc injuries in active individuals, including... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although studies are available on high-energy Lisfranc injuries, the evidence for increasingly reported low-energy Lisfranc injuries in active individuals, including athletes and military personnel, remains scarce and mostly retrospective.
PURPOSE
This meta-analysis aimed to review the return-to-play (RTP) and return-to-duty (RTD) rates with regard to the anatomic type and the management of low-energy Lisfranc injuries in a high-demand, active population.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we searched the MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases through June 2019 to identify studies on low-energy Lisfranc injuries in athletes and military personnel. The primary outcomes were RTP/RTD rates and time to RTP/RTD, and the secondary outcomes were time missed from practice, games missed, time to full recovery, midfoot arthritis rate, and reoperation rate.
RESULTS
Overall, 15 studies (N = 441 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Of these, 6 studies were of level 3 evidence, 8 studies were level 4 (case series), and 1 study was level 5. Of the 441 subjects, 380 (86.17%) were able to RTP and RTD. There was no statistically significant difference in RTP rates for operative versus nonoperative treatment, ORIF versus PA, or bony versus ligamentous injuries. The mean time missed from practice/duty for operative versus nonoperative treatment was 58.02 days (95% CI, 13.6-102.4 days; = 98.03%) and 116.4 days (95% CI, 62.4-170.4 days; = 99.45%), respectively. The mean time missed from practice/duty for bony versus ligamentous injury was 98.9 days (95% CI, 6.1-191.7 days; = 99.82%) and 76.5 days (95% CI, 37.9-115.02 days; = 99.83%), respectively, with no statistically significant differences (standardized mean difference = 3.62 days [95% CI: -5.7 to 13 days]; = 83.17%).
CONCLUSION
This review indicated an overall excellent RTP/RTD rate for low-energy Lisfranc injuries in high-demand individuals. The time missed from athletic participation/military duty was not affected by injury treatment type, the bony versus ligamentous nature of the injury, or athlete player position. However, the low evidence levels and significant heterogeneity of the included studies precludes making conclusions regarding length of time missed or optimal management. Higher-quality studies on low-energy Lisfranc injuries are needed.
PubMed: 33763497
DOI: 10.1177/2325967120988158 -
Spine Mar 2017Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
The goal of this study was to (i) assess the risk of neurological injury after anterior cervical spine surgery (ACSS) with and without intraoperative neuromonitoring (ION) and (ii) evaluate differences in the sensitivity and specificity of ION for ACSS.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
Although ION is used to detect impending neurological injuries in deformity surgery, it's utility in ACSS remains controversial.
METHODS
A systematic search of multiple medical reference databases was conducted for studies on ION use for ACSS. Studies that included posterior cervical surgery were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model for heterogeneity. Outcome measure was postoperative neurological injury.
RESULTS
The search yielded 10 studies totaling 26,357 patients. The weighted risk of neurological injury after ACSS was 0.64% (0.23-1.25). The weighted risk of neurological injury was 0.20% (0.05-0.47) for ACDFs compared with 1.02% (0.10-2.88) for corpectomies. For ACDFs, there was no difference in the risk of neurological injury with or without ION (odds ratio, 0.726; confidence interval, CI, 0.287-1.833; P = 0.498). The pooled sensitivities and specificities of ION for ACSS are 71% (CI: 48%-87%) and 98% (CI: 92%-100%), respectively. Unimodal ION has a higher specificity than multimodal ION [unimodal: 99% (CI: 97%-100%), multimodal: 92% (CI: 81%-96%), P = 0.0218]. There was no statistically significant difference in sensitivities between unimodal and multimodal [68% vs. 88%, respectively, P = 0.949].
CONCLUSION
The risk of neurological injury after ACSS is low although procedures involving a corpectomy may carry a higher risk. For ACDFs, there is no difference in the risk of neurological injury with or without ION use. Unimodal ION has a higher specificity than multimodal ION and may minimize "subclinical" intraoperative alerts in ACSS.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
3.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Diskectomy; Humans; Monitoring, Intraoperative; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Fusion
PubMed: 27390917
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001767 -
BMC Surgery Nov 2023To comprehensively compare and assess the effects of different lumbar fusion techniques in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To comprehensively compare and assess the effects of different lumbar fusion techniques in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to December 24, 2022 in this network meta-analysis. Outcomes were pain (pain, low back pain, and leg pain), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), complications, reoperation, and fusion. Network plots illustrated the direct and indirect comparisons of different fusion techniques for the outcomes. League tables showed the comparisons of any two fusion techniques, based on both direct and indirect evidence. The efficacy of each fusion technique for LSS was ranked by rank probabilities.
RESULTS
Totally 29 studies involving 2,379 patients were eligible. For pain, percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) was most likely to be the best technique, followed by minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF), extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-PLIF) had the greatest likelihood to be the optimal technique for low back pain, followed sequentially by MIS-TLIF, minimally invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-PLIF), XLIF, Endo-TLIF, TLIF, oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF). MIS-PLIF was ranked the most effective technique concerning leg pain, followed by Endo-TLIF, MIS-TLIF, TLIF, Endo-PLIF, PLIF, OLIF, PLF, and XLIF. As regards JOA scores, Endo-TLIF had the maximum probability to be the best technique, followed by MIS-TLIF and TLIF. Endo-PLIF had the greatest likelihood to be the optimum technique for complications, followed by TLIF, MIS-TLIF, Endo-TLIF, OLIF, and XLIF.
CONCLUSION
Minimally invasive fusion techniques may be effective in the treatment of LSS, compared with traditional techniques. Minimally invasive techniques were likely non-inferior with regards to postoperative complications.
Topics: Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spinal Stenosis; Bayes Theorem; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Spinal Fusion; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37968633
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-023-02242-w -
Orthopedic Reviews Jun 2020The Charcot foot is a condition characterized by a progressive derangement of the foot. The type of deformity and patient clinical conditions will lead to the proper...
The Charcot foot is a condition characterized by a progressive derangement of the foot. The type of deformity and patient clinical conditions will lead to the proper surgical approach among exostectomy, arthrodesis (through external and/or internal fixation) and amputation. Many authors report good clinical outcomes performing the arthrodesis in Charcot foot; however, the choice of the most appropriate hardware is still an issue. The aim of this study is to analyze the outcomes of different hardware in midfoot and hindfoot Charcot arthrodesis.
PubMed: 32913602
DOI: 10.4081/or.2020.8670 -
Neurosurgical Review Apr 2023This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. A computer search for the published literature on OLIF and MIS-TLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and other databases was performed, from which 522 related articles were retrieved and 13 were finally included. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies and analyzed them using RevMan 5.4. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane systematic analysis and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis showed that the blood loss [95% confidence intervals (CI) (- 121.01, - 54.56), [Formula: see text]], hospital stay [95% CI (- 1.98, - 0.85), [Formula: see text]], postoperative fusion rate [95%CI (1.04, 3.60), [Formula: see text]], postoperative disc height [95% CI (0.50, 3.63), [Formula: see text]], and postoperative foraminal height [95% CI (0.96, 4.13), [Formula: see text]] were all better in the OLIF group; however, the complication rates were significantly lower in the MIS-TLIF group [95% CI (1.01, 2.06), [Formula: see text]]. However, there were no significant differences between the two in terms of surgery time, patient satisfaction, or postoperative functional scores. The OLIF group had the advantages of lower blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, a higher postoperative fusion rate, and better recovery of the disc and foraminal heights, whereas MIS-TLIF had a relatively lower complication rate.
Topics: Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Spinal Fusion; Patient Satisfaction; Lumbosacral Region; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37119422
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-023-02009-0 -
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Mar 2023Tuberculosis of the hip joint is a debilitating disease that can result in severe joint destruction, eventually leading to painful arthritis of the hip. Total hip... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Tuberculosis of the hip joint is a debilitating disease that can result in severe joint destruction, eventually leading to painful arthritis of the hip. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with advanced arthritis offers a painless and mobile joint with good functional outcome but some aspects of THA in TB hip have been controversial in the past due to the concerns of disease reactivation, especially when disease activity is factored in. Various factors like timing of surgery, Antitubercular therapy (ATT) initiation timing, reactivation, complications etc needs to be evaluated very carefully before planning for such cases.
METHODS
Electronic databases like MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Clinicaltrials gov and OpenGrey were searched. The key words used were "Tuberculosis", "Tuberculosis of hip", Hip tuberculosis, "TB", "THR", "total hip replacement", "total hip arthroplasty","THA", "ankylosed hip", "fused hip", "arthrodesis" along with boolean operators "AND" and "OR". Out of a total of 1634 articles, 38 were selected for full text review and 22 articles were finally included in the study.
RESULTS
For the timing of surgery most authors relied on the inflammatory markers to settle down with ATT before performing THA. 15 authors advocated use of pre-operative ATT with 6 studies recommending at least 2 weeks and 3 studies advocating atleast 3 months of ATT pre surgery.Single stage THA was performed in most studies(214 hips vs 18 hips) as opposed to 2 or 3 stage surgery. In the active disease 72.8% of the hips had uncemented prosthesis, 25.6% hips underwent cemented and 1.5% hips had hybrid THA fixation. Overall reactivation of the infection was seen in 2.47% cases. All authors reported excellent clinical improvement (mean HHS improvement 37.17 to 88.62).
PubMed: 36825271
DOI: 10.1007/s43465-023-00817-6 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2023Although open surgery is the conventional option for ankle arthritis, there are some reports in the literature regarding the use of the arthroscopy procedure with... (Review)
Review
Although open surgery is the conventional option for ankle arthritis, there are some reports in the literature regarding the use of the arthroscopy procedure with outstanding results. The primary purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the effect of the surgery technique (open-ankle arthrodesis vs. arthroscopy) in patients with ankle osteoarthritis. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched until 10 April 2023. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias and grading of the recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation system for each outcome. The between-study variance was estimated using a random-effects model. A total of 13 studies (including = 994 participants) met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis results revealed a nom-significant ( = 0.072) odds ratio (OR) of 0.54 (0.28-1.07) for the fusion rate. Regarding operation time, a non-significant difference ( = 0.573) among both surgical techniques was found (mean differences (MD) = 3.40 min [-11.08 to 17.88]). However, hospital length stay and overall complications revealed significant differences (MD = 2.29 days [0.63 to 3.95], = 0.017 and OR = 0.47 [0.26 to 0.83], = 0.016), respectively. Our findings showed a non-statistically significant fusion rate. On the other hand, operation time was similar among both surgical techniques, without significant differences. Nevertheless, lower hospital stay was found in patients that were operated on with arthroscopy. Finally, for the outcome of overall complications, the ankle arthroscopy technique was a protective factor in comparison with open surgery.
PubMed: 37240680
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12103574 -
Journal of Hand and Microsurgery Dec 2014Arthrodesis of the distal interphalangeal joint of the hand is a reliable procedure for creating a painless stable joint. Numerous techniques are described within the... (Review)
Review
Arthrodesis of the distal interphalangeal joint of the hand is a reliable procedure for creating a painless stable joint. Numerous techniques are described within the literature for varying indications. We undertook a systematic review of all studies published within the English literature to provide a comparison of the different techniques. The published studies were predominantly of Level IV evidence. The most commonly employed techniques were Kirschner wire, headless compression screw and cerclage wires. There was no difference in infection rates. Headless compression screws appear to have increased union rates but are associated with complications not seen with other well-established and cheaper techniques. The screw diameter is often similar to or larger than the joint itself, which can result in penetration. Furthermore, they limit the available angle for achieving fusion. Other than in terms of union, there is insufficient evidence to show the headless compression screw is superior to other techniques.
PubMed: 25414555
DOI: 10.1007/s12593-014-0163-1