Introduction: Intertrochanteric fractures are predominantly treated by dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation. However, recent evidence has found acceptable clinical results following hemiarthroplasty for these fractures. Thus, a systematic review was conducted to compare hemiarthroplasty with DHS fixation for intertrochanteric fractures. Methods: A computerised search was performed, using the databases Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, with supplementation from Google Scholar and appropriate reference lists. Studies with comparative data comparing clinical outcomes of hemiarthroplasty versus DHS fixation were included. Data were extracted and quality assessment of the papers performed by 2 reviewers. Results: 320 articles were independently reviewed by the investigators. A total of 10 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 2 randomised controlled trials and 8 cohort designs. 7 of the studies assessed unstable fracture patterns. There was no difference in operating time (SMD −1.169 min; 95% CI, −0.657 to 0.689) or blood transfusion volume (SMD−0.110 units; 95% CI, −0.520 to 0.891) between modalities. There was also no difference in length of stay (SMD −0.778 days; 95% CI, −0.606 to 0.336), mortality (RR 0.942; 95% CI, 0.749–1.183) or major complications. Hemiarthroplasty conferred significantly better Harris Hip Scores at 12 months (SMD 12.3; 95% CI, 0.0135–2.789) and allowed earlier weight-bearing than DHS fixation. Discussion: Qualitative and quantitative compilation of the included studies demonstrates hemiarthroplasty to result in better functional scores and a quicker time to weight-bearing than DHS fixation for intertrochanteric fractures. Results are comparable for other major parameters, including operative time, length of stay and mortality. Thus, hemiarthroplasty is a suitable alternative to DHS fixation for unstable intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients.
Background: Diagnostic needle arthroscopy offers an alternative imaging modality to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of intra-articular pathology. Purpose: To compare the accuracy of a needle arthroscopy device (Mi-eye2) versus MRI in identifying intra-articular anatomic abnormalities in the glenohumeral joint, with formal arthroscopy as the gold standard. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 22 patients underwent diagnostic needle arthroscopy of the shoulder, of whom 20 had preoperative MRI scans. A standardized 12-point noninstrumented diagnostic arthroscopy was performed on each patient using the 0° needle arthroscope, followed by a 30°, 4 mm–diameter conventional arthroscope. Intraoperative images were randomized and reviewed by 2 independent blinded fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons for identification of key pathology and anatomic structures. The MRI scans were reviewed by a single musculoskeletal radiologist to identify pathology in the same key areas. Results: For the identification of rotator cuff pathology, needle arthroscopy (sensitivity, 0.75; specificity, 1.00) was superior to MRI (sensitivity, 0.75; specificity, 0.75) with an interobserver reliability (κ) of 0.703. For long head of the biceps pathology, needle arthroscopy (sensitivity, 0.67; specificity, 0.95) was superior to MRI (sensitivity, 0.00; specificity, 0.83). It was less accurate for labral (sensitivity, 0.33; specificity, 0.50; κ = 0.522) and articular cartilage pathology (sensitivity, 0.00; specificity, 0.94; κ = 0.353). The number of anatomic structures that could be clearly identified was 8.35 of 12 (69.58%) for needle arthroscopy versus 10.35 of 12 (86.25%) for standard arthroscopy. Conclusion: Diagnostic needle arthroscopy was found to be more accurate than MRI for the diagnosis of rotator cuff and long head of the biceps pathology but was less accurate for diagnosing labral and cartilage pathology. Although the field of view of a 0° needle arthroscope is not equivalent to a 30° conventional arthroscope, it presents an alternative with potential for use in an outpatient setting.
Background Anecdotally, upper truncal obesity and large breasts have often been associated with inferior outcomes from non-operative management of diaphyseal humerus fractures. However, this assertion is without basis in the literature. Aims To produce radiographic measurements of chest wall soft tissue thickness (STT) and determine association with non-union in diaphyseal humerus fractures. Methods Two hundred and seventeen consecutive non-operative humeral shaft fractures were included. Radiographic STT measurements were taken at three standardised points (upper, middle and lower) using a simple reproducible method, with ratios derived (dividing these figures by the mid-humerus diameter). Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to assess association with non-union. Results There were 58 (26.7%) cases of non-union. On multivariable analysis, the middle (odds ratio (OR) 1.39, p < 0.001) and lower (OR 1.23, p = 0.009) STT measurements were independently associated with non-union. Additionally, the middle (OR 1.85, p < 0.001) and lower (OR 1.47, p < 0.001) STT ratios were independently associated with non-union. A receiver operating characteristic curve determined a threshold value of a middle STT ratio of ≥ 3 (OR 3.73, p < 0.001, sensitivity 69.0%, specificity 62.3%), which was independently associated with non-union. Conclusion Chest wall STT is independently associated with humeral shaft non-union. Threshold values can assist in decision making for these fractures.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.