No abstract

Aims The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate differences in functional outcomes and complications between single- (SI) and double-incision (DI) techniques for the treatment of distal biceps tendon rupture. Methods A comprehensive search on PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central databases was conducted to identify studies reporting comparative results of the SI versus the DI approach. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was used for search strategy. Of 606 titles, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria; methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Random- and fixed-effects models were used to find differences in outcomes between the two surgical approaches. The range of motion (ROM) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores, as well as neurological and non-neurological complications, were assessed. Results A total of 2,622 patients were identified. No significant differences in DASH score were detected between the techniques. The SI approach showed significantly greater ROM in flexion (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.508; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.904 to -0.112) and pronation (SMD -0.325, 95% CI -0.637 to -0.012). The DI technique was associated with significantly less risk of lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve damage (odds ratio (OR) 4.239, 95% CI 2.171 to 8.278), but no differences were found for other nerves evaluated. The SI group showed significantly fewer events of heterotopic ossification (OR 0.430, 95% CI 0.226 to 0.816) and a lower reoperation rate (OR 0.503, 95% CI 0.317 to 0.798). Conclusion No significant differences in functional scores can be expected between the SI and DI approaches after distal biceps tendon repair. The SI approach showed greater flexion and pronation ROM and a lower risk of heterotopic ossification and reoperation. The DI approach was favourable in terms of lower risk of neurological complications. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1608–1617.

This systematic review investigates factors associated with outcomes after meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT). The PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register databases were used to search relevant articles in April 2018. Studies that evaluated at least one association between a factor and outcomes were extracted. Of 3,381 titles, 52 studies were finally analyzed. Data about predictors, patient-reported outcome scores (PROMs), and failure rates were extracted for quantitative and qualitative analysis. A total of 3,382 patients and 3,460 transplants were identified. Thirty different predictors were reported in the current MAT literature, 18 of which by at least two studies. Subgroup analysis showed that lateral MAT had higher postoperative values than medial MAT in Lysholm's (p = 0.0102) and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC; p = 0.0056) scores. Soft tissue fixation showed higher postoperative IKDC scores than bone fixation (p = 0.0008). Fresh frozen allografts had higher Lysholm's scores (p < 0.0001) and showed significantly lower failure rates (p < 0.0001) than cryopreserved allografts. Age (p < 0.015, β = 0.80), sex (p < 0.034, β  =  − 8.52), and body mass index (BMI; p < 0.014, β = −4.87) demonstrated an association with PROMs in the regression model. Qualitative analysis found moderate evidence that a higher number of previous procedures in the same knee are an independent predictor of transplant failure. Conflicting evidence was found with regard to chondral damage, time from meniscectomy, smoke, sport level, worker's compensation status, and preoperative Lysholm's score as predictors of outcomes. Our review suggests that the ideal candidate to undergo MAT may be a young male of normal weight with no previous knee surgeries, treated with a lateral isolated procedure. However, MAT is associated with good outcomes in the majority of patients with many of the PROMs requiring further study to determine their direct effects on long-term outcomes. This study is a systematic review and reflects level of evidence IV.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has been an unprecedented time for healthcare and has substantially changed resource availability in surgeons’ work practices and routines. Many orthopaedic departments suspended elective surgery, and some re-deployed orthopaedic residents to stressful nonorthopaedic tasks; long hours were commonplace. Stress-reaction symptoms such as anxiety and depression have been reported in about 10% of healthcare workers during previous infectious-diseases outbreaks (including the Ebola virus), but little is known about the psychological needs of residents faced with this global disaster. Questions/purposes (1) Have anxiety and depression symptoms among orthopaedic residents worsened from the period before to the period after the lockdown in Italy? (2) Are there differences in anxiety and depression symptoms between residents who worked in a COVID-19 department and those who did not? Methods The Italian Association of Orthopaedic and Traumatology Residents is comprised of 365 members who were recruited through the organization’s mailing list; they were asked to respond to a survey about their health and well-being at the beginning and end of the first COVID-19 Italian lockdown (March 9, 2020 to May 3, 2020). For the survey’s development, 10 orthopaedic surgery residents at the Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro were preliminarily asked to answer the surveys, and both face validity and content validity were tested. The test-retest reliability was 0.9. Impact on and future concerns about family life and daily work practice, as well as sleep disorders, were investigated. Anxiety and depression were assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), which includes 14 questions (seven for anxiety, HADS-A; and seven for depression, HADS-D) on a Likert scale (0-3); thus, a patient can have a score between 0 and 21 for either the HADS-A or HADS-D, with higher scores indicating a greater likelihood of anxiety or depression. Previously reported minimum clinically important differences ranged from 1.5 to 1.7. For each scale, total scores of ≤ 7 , 8 to 10, and ≥ 11 were taken to represent normal, borderline, or abnormal level of anxiety or depression, respectively. Overall, 75% (272 of 365) of residents completed the survey at both the beginning and end of the lockdown; 72% (196 of 272) were men, the mean ± SD age was 30 ± 3 years, 72% (197 of 272) worked in a hospital setting with patients who were COVID-19-positive, 20% (55 of 272) served in a COVID-19 department, and 5% (7 of 139) tested positive for COVID-19 by nasal-pharyngeal swab. Overall, 9% (24 of 272) of residents had family members who contracted COVID-19, and 3% (8 of 272) had a relative who died. Because of the risk of possible COVID-19 exposure, 18% (48 of 272) of residents needed to temporarily change their household given that social distancing was considered the best way to slow the spread of COVID-19. Results At the end of the lockdown, orthopaedic residents exhibited signs of worsening anxiety and depression as measured by the overall HADS score (median 9 [IQR 5 to 14] versus median 11 [IQR 6 to 17.8], respectively; median difference -1 [95% CI -1.5 to -0.5]; effect size [r] = -0.24; p < 0.001) as well as in the depression subscale (median 4 [IQR 2 to 7] versus median 5.5 [IQR 3 to 8], respectively; median difference -1 [95% CI -1.5 to -0.5]; r = -0.36; p < 0.001). We found no difference in the development of anxiety or depression between residents who worked in a COVID-19 department and those who did not, as demonstrated by comparing the change in HADS scores between these groups (median 1 [IQR -3 to 4] versus median 1 [IQR -2 to 4] in HADS change score over time; median difference 0 [95% CI -1 to 2]; r = -0.03; p = 0.61). Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the daily practice of orthopaedic residents and has had important, far-reaching consequences on their health and well-being, including social implications. Residents showed higher anxiety and depression symptoms at the end of the lockdown. No differences were found in changes of anxiety and depression, over time, for residents who worked in a COVID-19 department compared with those who did not. The evaluation of anxiety and depression through standardized questionnaires could help to identify residents at risk of higher psychological distress who could be referred to regular psychological counseling as a possible prevention strategy during stressful times. Future studies should confirm the long-term effects of these findings. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study.

Background Controversy surrounds the indication for treatment of type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation, and the optimal reconstructive technique has not yet been defined. Since the first description of the Weaver-Dunn procedure, several studies have described the clinical and radiological results that can be expected postoperatively; however, few studies have evaluated the outcomes of this technique for chronic type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Purpose/Hypothesis The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional and radiographic mid- to long-term outcomes of a modified Weaver-Dunn procedure for chronic Rockwood type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation. We hypothesized that (1) functional outcomes comparable with sex- and age-matched healthy individuals could be achieved with the modified Weaver-Dunn procedure and (2) joint stability could be restored after surgery. Study Design Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods Out of 30 patients who sustained a chronic type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation, 27 had a minimum 12-month follow-up and were included in the study. All patients underwent a modified Weaver-Dunn procedure. The Constant-Murley score was used to assess patient postoperative function. Subjective evaluation of patient satisfaction with surgery was also recorded. Radiological assessment was performed postoperatively to evaluate superoinferior and anteroposterior joint stability. Results After a mean follow-up period of 51.6 months, the mean Constant-Murley score was 90.1, which was 97.2% that of a group of sex- and age-matched healthy individuals. In the multivariate analysis, higher Constant-Murley score was associated with male sex (β = 0.385; P = .043) and higher subjective satisfaction scale (β = 0.528; P = .003). All patients returned to their previous work and sport activity levels having high satisfaction with surgery. Successful vertical acromioclavicular joint reduction was obtained in all but 1 patient; however, horizontal joint stability was not completely restored with the modified Weaver-Dunn procedure. No intraoperative complications occurred, and the postoperative complication rate was 7.4%. Conclusion In patients with chronic type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation, the modified Weaver-Dunn procedure is an effective technique to restore vertical but not horizontal joint stability 4 years after surgery. High levels of satisfaction with surgery and functional outcomes comparable with sex- and age-matched healthy individuals can be achieved.

No abstract