Diagnostic prospective study: level III.

a b s t r a c tBackground: CT analysis of arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis rarely finds complete fusion. The aim of the present study was to determine, at 12 months' follow-up of arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis: (1) CT fusion ratio, (2) functional results, and (3) the correlation between the two. Hypothesis: Incomplete fusion ratio does not impair the result of arthrodesis. Materials and methods: A continuous series of 22 arthroscopic subtalar arthrodeses was assessed at 12 months' follow-up. The procedure used a posterior approach without bone graft, with stabilization by 2 compression screws. Clinical assessment comprised of a numerical analog pain scale (NAS, AOFAS and SF12) scores. Satisfaction was assessed on an NAS and on Odom's criteria. CT analysis at 12 months determined the posterior subtalar joint fusion ratio. Results: At follow-up, 2 patients showed non-union (9.1%). Among the 20 patients with fusion (91%), fusion was complete ( > 67 • ) in 16 (72.7%) and partial (34-66%) in 4 (18.2%). Mean fusion ratio at 12 months was 77.7% ± 14.8 (range, 36-98%). Functional gains ( ) were: pain NAS 4.8 ± 2 (range, 1-10) and AOFAS score 31.1 ± 14 (range, 10-59). Mean satisfaction score was 8 ± 2.5 (range, 3-10). There were no significant correlations between fusion ratio and any clinical or satisfaction scores. Conclusion: Although clinical gain was systematic, functional and satisfaction scores were independent of whether subtalar fusion ratio was partial or complete. Level of evidence: IV, retrospective study.

No abstract

Introduction: Total hip replacement provides mostly fair functional and clinical results. Many factors play an essential role in hip stability and long-term outcomes. Surgical positioning remains fundamental for obtaining accurate implant fit and prevent hip dislocation or impingement. Different categories of robotic assistance have been established throughout the previous years and all of the technologies target accuracy and reliability to reduce complications, and enhance clinical outcomes. Materials and methods: An overview is proposed over the principles of robotic assistance in hip arthroplasty surgery. Accuracy, reliability, management of the bone stock, clinical outcomes, constraints and limits of this technology are reported, based on recent literature. Results: Potential advantages regarding pre-operative planning accuracy, cup positioning, maintenance of the center of rotation, preservation of an adequate bone stock nay clinical short- and mid-term outcomes are balanced with some reported disadvantages and limits like hip anatomical specificity, cost-effectiveness, engineering dependence. Discussion: The use of robotic-assisted THA presents clear and evident benefits related to accurate implant positioning and maintenance of a minimal bone while allowing. For some authors, an early improvement in functional results and patient’s recovery. This technology demonstrated a shorter surgical time and a short learning curve required to optimize its use and this technology presents promising outcomes and results and potential use in routine clinical application but its limitation of use is still present especially the cost of the robot, the need for the presence of an engineer during the surgery, its availability of use in all hospitals as well as the difficulty presented in dysplastic or dysmorphic hip joints.

IV, retrospective study.

Purpose: To evaluate the technique, results and complications of arthroscopic iliopsoas tenotomies either on native hips or total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: A systematic review was performed using 3 databases: PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library from January 2000 to December 2018 in accordance with the PRISMA procedure. The literature search, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by 2 independent reviewers. Surgical technique, clinical outcomes, recurrences and complication rate were evaluated. Results: Out of 115 articles reviewed, 20 articles concerned native hips and 8 articles THA. 3 levels of release were described. For native hips, the recurrence rate was higher for central compartment than peripheral or lesser trochanter releases. Complication rates were similar for hip arthroscopy but remained low in all series. Loss of strength was evaluated mainly using the MRC muscle scale. Most studies noted strength recovery. MRI analysis of muscle atrophy was greater for lesser trochanter than for central compartment release but unrelated to loss of strength. The complication rate was low for tenotomy after THA, heterotopic ossification being the most common complication. Conclusions: Central compartment releases lead to the highest rate of recurrence due to incomplete release. Peripheral releases have a potential risk of vascular injury. The lesser trochanteric approach has the disadvantage of not having direct access to the joint. The main difficulty with THA lies in the diagnosis of cup/iliopsoas impingement. Diagnostic tests with infiltration should be made before iliopsoas release to prevent its failure. Cup protrusion of over 8mm is a potential indication for acetabular revision.

• Delivered dose in surgery depends on procedure, practice and patient. • Diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) are proposed for eight surgical procedures. • DRLs are useful to benchmark practices and optimize protocols.

No abstract