Background: The present study evaluated the functional and radiographic outcomes of acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint reconstruction performed using the mini-open technique and a knotless suspensory loop device Methods: A total of 25 patients (20 male and 5 female patients; mean age, 30.7 years; standard deviation, 10 years; range, 17–57 years) who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were included in the study. A functional assessment was performed using the Constant and University of California Los Angeles score. The radiologic assessment included standard anterior-posterior views of the AC and coracoclavicular (CC) distances. Results: The mean follow-up period was 18.6 months (range, 12–23 months). The mean Constant score was 87.2 ± 3.2, and the mean University of California Los Angeles score was 30.1 ± 2.4 at the final follow-up. Radiological evaluation at the last follow-up of the patients: Although there was no statistically significant increase in the AC and CC values of the patients (Fig. 2 ) at the last follow-up, the average CC value in 6 (24%) of the 25 patients was greater than 50% compared with the unaffected side CC and early postoperative CC values. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the Constant and UCLA scores between the 6 patients with reduction loss and the 19 patients with reduction maintenance ( P = .86). Conclusions: Clinical results of fixation of acute AC joint dislocations using the ZipTight TM knotless suspensory loop device system and mini-open technique were favorable in terms of functional recovery and pain relief. However, the major disadvantage of this method was radiological loss of AC joint reduction when compared to the contralateral shoulder.
Different methods have been used throughout the years for syndesmotic injury but there is no consensus on the ideal treatment. Some methods are expensive and some have more complications. The aim of this study is to compare single suture endobutton with double suture endobutton and screw fixation for syndesmotic injury. Sixty nine patients with syndesmotic injury with fibular fractures whom were treated with a single interosseous suture endobutton system (ZipTight TM , Zimmer Biomet), a double interosseous suture endobutton system (ZipTight TM , Zimmer Biomet) and 1 syndesmotic screw (TST, Istanbul, Turkey) were included in this study. Functional and radiological results from patient records between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. Twenty patients were treated with the double interosseous suture endobutton, 23 were treated with the single interosseous suture endobutton, and 26 were treated with traditional AO screw fixation. Three patients from the screw fixation group (11.5%) required revision surgery ( P < .05). All the radiologic and clinical outcomes were statistical similar in all 3 groups. Our findings showed that the interosseous suture endobutton system is at least as safe as the screw fixation technique for treatment of syndesmosis joint injuries and can be used as an alternative to the screw method. The interosseous suture endobutton system eliminates the need for a second surgery to remove the hardware, which minimizes the probability of re-diastasis. Since our results showed no statistical difference between single and double interosseous suture endobutton systems, the less costly single endobutton system may be the better alternative.
Background A small autograft diameter negatively affects functional outcomes, knee stability, and the risk of rerupture after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, whereas the strength of allograft decreases over time. Therefore, it is not clear whether the use of smaller autografts or the use of larger allografts in ACL yields better results. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of smaller autografts and larger allografts for ACL reconstruction. Methods Fifty-one patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts (size ≤ 8 mm) and 21 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with allografts (size ≥ 10 mm) were included in our study. All patients underwent the same aggressive early postoperative rehabilitation program. There were no significant differences between the autograft and allograft groups regarding the preoperative patient age, sex, time from injury to surgery, and average follow-up time. Results The mean diameter of the 4-stranded hamstring tendon grafts used as autografts was 7.48 ± 0.33 mm and the mean diameter of the allografts was 10.76 ± 0.67 mm. According to specific tests for the ACL (anterior drawer, Lachman, and pivot shift) and clinical evaluation tests (Lysholm knee scoring scale and International Knee Documentation Committee questionnaire), the final follow-up results were significantly better than the preoperative status in both autograft and allograft ACL reconstruction groups. Therefore, there were no significant differences between the autograft and allograft groups preoperatively and at the final follow-up. Conclusions The large size of the graft in ACL reconstruction has been reported to affect results positively. However, in our study, we could not find any significant differences between the smaller size autografts and larger size allografts in terms of inadequacy, rerupture, and final follow-up functional results. Although allografts were significantly larger than autografts, we did not have the positive effect of larger size grafts. Smaller size autografts were as effective as the larger size allografts.
Plantar fasciitis is the most common cause of heel pain. Pain can be persistent in some patients and interrupt daily activities and sportive activities. There are a lot of treatment options available for plantar fasciitis. We hypothesized that patients with chronic persistent plantar fasciitis can be successfully treated with radiofrequency nerve ablation (RFNA).Two hundred sixty-one patients with plantar fasciitis (378 feet) treated with RFNA from February 2017 to January 2019 were retrospectively assessed. All the patients had plantar heel pain for at least 6 months. Based on their body mass index (BMI), the enrolled patients were divided into obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ) and non-obese (BMI < 30 kg/m 2 ) groups. The patients were asked to complete a questionnaire just before and after the procedure and during the final follow-up. The BNS Radiofrequency Lesion Generator was used during a single session. The patients' information, including their visual analogue scale (VAS) score and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, was assessed. During their final follow-up, the patients were asked to rate the success of their treatment by choosing one of the following options: completely successful, very successful, moderately successful, marginally successful, or not successful.The VAS and AOFAS scores of all the patients were evaluated pre-procedure, in the first month after procedure, and during the final follow-up (8-24 months). There was a statistically significant difference between the pre-procedure and postprocedure VAS scores (P < .001), there was no statistically significant difference between the VAS scores in the first month postprocedure and during the final follow-up.There was a statistically significant difference between the pre-procedure and postprocedure AOFAS scores (P < .001), there was no statistically significant difference between the AOFAS scores in the first month postprocedure and during the final follow-up.RFNA can be used as an alternative method to surgical procedures for treating plantar fasciitis because it is safe and effective. The advantages of RFNA are that patients can quickly return to their work and resume weight-bearing activities.
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.