BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESOsteoporosis is common in Saudi Arabia and the burden of management in an aging population will increase in coming decades. There is still no national policy nor consensus on screening for this silent disease. The objective of this analysis was to determine from the published data the prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis in Saudi Arabians, the prevalence of secondary osteoporosis, and the prevalence of osteoporosis-related fractures (ORF). We also sought to determine the best age to begin and best modality for screening.METHODSData Sources were MEDLINE (1966 to May 2011), EMBASE (1991 to May 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1952 to May 2011), and the Science Citation Index (1966 to May 2011), published data from the Saudi Medical Journal (1985–2011) and Annals of Saudi Medicine (1985–2011). We selected English-language articles with at least 100 Saudi individuals. Two authors independently reviewed articles and abstracted data.RESULTSThe authors identified 36 potentially relevant articles, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria. Of 5160 healthy women 50 to 79 years of age (mean, SD: 56.8 [2.7]), 36.6% (6.6%) were osteopenic and 34.0% (8.5%) were osteoporotic. In three studies on males (n=822), the prevalence of osteopenia was 46.3% and osteoporosis 30.7%. Males had a significantly higher frequency of osteopenia in comparison to females (P=<.001 95% CI<−0.0333), The mean age of the patients with secondary osteoporosis was 37.4 (13.5, 18–57) years, with the osteoporosis in 46.4% and osteopenia in 34.1%. In 5 studies of ORF, the incidence of vertebral fractures was between 20%–24%.CONCLUSIONThe currently available literature on Saudi Arabian population suggests that the ideal age for screening for low bone mass among the Saudi population should be earlier (55 years) than the ≥65 years in Western countries. Both quatitative ultrasound and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry could be used for screening. The relatively small number of studies on Saudi Arabians and the different machines used for diagnosis limited the authors ability make conclusions with surety.

No abstract

Plantar fasciitis is one of the most common causes of heel pain. Despite extensive efforts foot surgeons continue to debate the best modality of treatment. Analgesics, shoe inserts, stretching exercises, steroid injection, night splints, and extracorporeal shock wave therapy have proved effective in one group but fail in others. This study evaluated the efficacy of EZStep, a new foot brace for the management of plantar fasciitis. A total of 198 patients were randomized in 2 groups; group 1 (study group) received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs; 4-6 weeks) and EZStep whereas group 2 (control group) received either NSAID and physiotherapy alone (2A) or NSAID, physiotherapy, and local steroid injection (2B). None of the patients received over-the-counter insoles or strapping of plantar arch to avoid any bias in randomization. Evaluations included measurement of weight and height, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SFMPQ). After 8 weeks, patients were reevaluated, and assessment for the VAS and SFMPQ with treatment outcome was performed. Patients with VAS scores ≤3 were considered as excellent, ≥4 as good, and ≥7 as poor. The posttreatment evaluation showed that VAS scores were in the range from 2.97 ± 1.06 to 7.64 ± 2.9 (2A), P = .001, 95% confidence interval (CI) <-4.104; for 2B P = .001, CI <-2.44, and SFMPQ was 21.7 ± 4.5 and 69.2 ± 5.8 (group 2A; P = .001, 95% CI <-46.44). Compared with group 2B the SFMPQ was 66.5 ± 4.3 (P = .001, 95% CI <-30.720). In group 1 as per VAS, 86 (73.5%) were evaluated as excellent, 15 (12.8%) as good, and 16 (13.6%) as poor. Our study shows that the regular use of EZStep with short course of NSAIDs (4-6 weeks) was effective in ameliorating symptoms in more than 85% of patients suffering from plantar fasciitis.

It is recommended that neonates with fractures must have quicker appointments in the outpatient clinics to prevent deformities and secondly those with fracture clavicles should be thoroughly evaluated to rule out damage to brachial plexas as well.

A prospective study was conducted to assess the glove perforation rate during 100 consecutive pediatric orthopedic operations. Eight hundred fifty-four gloves were tested for perforations. The overall glove perforation rate was 8.43%. Assistant surgeons had a rate of 45.8%, surgeons 33.4%, and scrub nurses 20.8%. More perforations were noticed on the left glove; the thumb and index finger were the most common sites of perforation. The duration of surgery was significantly related to the perforation rate. Two patients had postoperative wound infections and the gloves of surgeons and assistant surgeons were found to be perforated. Every attempt needs to be made to reduce the risk of glove perforation.

No abstract

No abstract

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is quite common among Saudi Arabian babies. With an objective to assess the presence of SNP rs143383 and the alleles in the GDF5 gene among patients with DDH, parents, and unaffected siblings, we undertook this case-controlled study. We collected and analyzed for a functional single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the 5'-untranslated region of the GDF5 gene (rs143383), 473 blood samples, (100 patients, 200 parents, 73 siblings and 100 healthy controls. We determined the association between the patients' genotype and their fathers', mothers' and siblings' genotype through Chi-square analysis. The majority of those screened possessed the TC genotype, and 61.8% of patients and their fathers had the TT genotype. There was no association between patients' and fathers' genotype, P value < 0.332, 95% CI (0.328-0.346), and between patients' and mothers', P < 0.006, 95% CI (0.004-0.007). When considering DDH patients' and the control group's genotypes, the odds ratios of TT versus other combined (0.641 > 1) and CC versus other combined (0.474 < 1) revealed that the TT genotype has higher risk of developing DDH compared with the CC genotype. The 95 percent confidence interval of TT versus other combined and CC versus other combined is 0.932-2.891 and 0.208-1.078, respectively. For patients' and fathers' genotypes, the odds ratios of TT versus other combined (1.275 > 1) and CC versus other combined (0.815 < 1) indicate that the TT genotype has higher risk of exhibiting DDH compared to the CC genotype. For patients' and siblings' genotypes, the odds ratios of TT versus other combined (1.669) and CC versus other combined (1.048) specify that the TT genotype possesses higher risk of developing DDH compared with the CC genotype. Our study shows that there exists a relationship between GDF5 (SNP rs143383) and DDH in our population. Second, we found for the first time that the genotype TT and the T allele were overly expressed in the patients and the fathers. More studies on the confirmation of this genetic marker for DDH are called for.