Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) denotes a wide spectrum of conditions ranging from subtle acetabular dysplasia to irreducible hip dislocations. Clinical diagnostic tests complement ultrasound imaging in allowing diagnosis, classification and monitoring of this condition. Classification systems relate to the alpha and beta angles in addition to the dynamic coverage index (DCI). Screening programmes for DDH show considerable geographic variation; certain risk factors have been identified which necessitate ultrasound assessment of the newborn. The treatment of DDH has undergone significant evolution, but the current gold standard is still the Pavlik harness. Duration of Pavlik harness treatment has been reported to range from 3 to 9.3 mo. The beta angle, DCI and the superior/lateral femoral head displacement can be assessed via ultrasound to estimate the likelihood of success. Success rates of between 7% and 99% have been reported when using the harness to treat DDH. Avascular necrosis remains the most devastating complication of harness usage with a reported rate of between 0% and 28%. Alternative non-surgical treatment methods used for DDH include devices proposed by LeDamany, Frejka, Lorenz and Ortolani. The Rosen splint and Wagner stocking have also been used for DDH treatment. Surgical treatment for DDH comprises open reduction alongside a combination of femoral or pelvic osteotomies. Femoral osteotomies are carried out in cases of excessive anteversion or valgus deformity of the femoral neck. The two principal pelvic osteotomies most commonly performed are the Salter osteotomy and Pemberton acetabuloplasty. Serious surgical complications include epiphyseal damage, sciatic nerve damage and femoral neck fracture.
Background: There remains no gold standard management for deep shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This case series aims to present our experience of two-stage revision arthroplasty, including eradication of infection and reoperation rates. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing revision arthroplasty for shoulder PJI between 2006 and 2015. Cases were confirmed using Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) and American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) guidelines. TSA removal, debridement and irrigation preceded antibiotic-loaded cement spacer insertion and a minimum of six weeks intravenous antibiotics. Reimplantation was performed as a second stage following a negative aspirate. Results: Twenty-eight patients underwent a first stage procedure (mean age 69 years; 16 male, 12 female). Propionibacterium acnes, Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus and Staphylococcus epidermidis were the commonest microorganisms cultured. Five cases had mixed growths and six cases provided no growth. Three patients did not proceed to a second stage. Twenty-five patients underwent reimplantation (mean interval 6.7 months), with 80% remaining infection-free (mean follow-up 38.3 months). Discussion: Managing complex and late presentation shoulder PJI with two-stage revision is associated with high rates of infection eradication (80%). In the absence of a management consensus, our experience supports two-stage revision arthroplasty for eradicating infection in this complex patient group.
Background: Meniscus root tears (MRTs) are defined as radial tears within 1 cm of the meniscus root insertion or an avulsion of the meniscus root itself. They lead to altered joint loading because of the failure to convert axial (compressive) loads into hoop stresses. Untreated MRTs can result in altered joint biomechanics and accelerated articular cartilage degeneration and the development of osteoarthritis (OA), yet optimal management remains unclear. Purpose: To review treatment outcomes after acute MRTs by surgical repair, debridement, meniscectomy, or nonoperative treatment. Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of the evidence from human clinical studies was conducted with electronic searches of the PUBMED, Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases. One reviewer extracted the data and 2 reviewers assessed the risk of bias and performed synthesis of the evidence. Results: Eleven studies of low to moderate methodological quality were identified. All treatment options improved functional scores after >12 months. Arthroscopic repair may be associated with better functional outcomes when compared with partial meniscectomy and nonoperative management at 12-month follow-up. Radiographic progression of OA occurred in all treatment groups; there was some evidence that this was delayed after repair when compared with other treatments. Baseline severity of meniscal extrusion, varus malalignment, and pretreatment degeneration were predictors of poor functional outcomes. Age was not found to be an independent predictor of functional outcome. Conclusion: The current level 3 and 4 evidence suggests that arthroscopic repair may result in slower progression of radiological deterioration compared with meniscectomy and nonoperative management. The current literature does not support the exclusion of patients from MRT repair on the basis of age. Patients undergoing acute MRT treatments (repair, debridement, or nonoperative) can be expected to experience improvement in functional outcomes after >12 months. The strength of conclusions are limited because of the paucity of high-quality studies on this subject. Further studies, preferably randomized sham controlled trials with function-oriented rehabilitation programs, are needed to compare treatment strategies and stratification of care based on the risk of meniscal extrusion. Registration: CRD42018085092 (PROSPERO).
BackgroundSince its isolation, Methicillin-resistant Staphlococcus aureus (MRSA) has become a major cause of hospital acquired infection (HAI), adverse patient outcome and overall resource utilisation. It is endemic in Scotland and widespread in Western hospitals. MRSA has been the subject of widespread media interest- a manifestation of concerns about sterile surgical techniques and hospital cleanliness. This study aimed to investigate patient outcome of MRSA infections over the last decade at a major orthopaedic trauma centre. The objective was to establish the association of variables, such as patient age and inpatient residence, against patient outcome, in order to quantify significant relationships; facilitating the evaluation of management strategies with an aim to improving patient outcomes and targeting high-risk procedures.MethodsThis is a retrospective study of the rates and outcomes of MRSA infection in orthopaedic trauma at the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh. Data was collated using SPSS 14.0 for Windows(R). Shapiro-Wilkes testing was performed to investigate the normality of continuous data sets (e.g: age). Data was analysed using both Chi-Squared and Fisher's exact tests (in cases of expected values under 5)ResultsThis study found significant associations between adverse patient outcome (persistent deep infection, osteomyelitis, the necessity for revision surgery, amputation and mortality) and the following patient variables: Length of inpatient stay, immuno-compromise, pre-admission residence in an institutional setting (such as a residential nursing home) and the number of antibiotics used in patient care. Despite 63% of all infections sampled resulting from proximal femoral fractures, no association between patient outcome and site of infection or diagnosis was found. Somewhat surprisingly, the relationship between age and outcome of infection was not proved to be significant, contradicting previous studies suggesting a statistical association. Antibiotic prophylaxis, previously identified as a factor in reducing overall incidence of MRSA infection, was not found to be significantly associated with outcome.ConclusionsEarly identification of high-risk patients as identified by this study could lead to more judicious use of therapeutic antibiotics and reductions in adverse outcome, as well as socioeconomic cost. These results could assist in more accurate risk stratification based on evidence based evaluation of the significance of the risk factors investigated.
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.