Introduction Comparison of different surgical techniques to treat patients with rhizarthrosis or carpometacarpal osteoarthritis of the thumb. Materials and Methods A systematic review was conducted using three electronic databases. Randomized, controlled trials in patients who underwent surgery for the treatment of rhizarthrosis were included. The literature review followed the PRISMA protocol. Results A total of 15 articles involving a total population of 958 patients were selected. Seven different surgical techniques were compared. Conclusions We conclude that no procedure is superior to another in terms of pain, physical function, overall patient assessment, range of motion, or strength. Outcome measurements should be standardized to enable better comparison between surgical techniques. Level of evidence II, Systematic Review.

Objective: To evaluate the choice of surgical approach among Brazilian orthopedists and whether shoulder surgery specialty training or duration of experience influences the decision-making. Methods: A questionnaire on the preferred approach and complications was administered to orthopedic surgeons with and without shoulder specialization training. The chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was applied. Results: We interviewed 114 orthopedists, 49 (43.0%) traumatologists, 36 (31.5%) specialist surgeons, and 29 (25%) shoulder surgery specialist residents. In cases of fracture without dislocation, specialized training and duration of experience did not influence the approach used (primarily deltopectoral). In cases of fracture/dislocation, 97.2% of the specialists versus 82.1% of the traumatologists opted for the deltopectoral approach (p = 0.034). In cases of fractures/dislocation, 92.5% of surgeons with more than 5 years of experience and 78.7% with less than 5 years of experience opted for the deltopectoral approach (p = 0.032). Conclusion: Specialization in shoulder surgery did not influence surgeons' approaches to manage fractures without dislocation. In cases of fracture/dislocation, shoulder surgery specialization training and duration of experience were associated with selection of the deltopectoral approach. Level of Evidence V, Expert opinion.

No abstract

Objective: To evaluate the early postoperative complications associated with the surgical approach of the cervical spine of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM), comparing the anterior surgical, the posterior surgical, and the combined approaches. Methods: This is a retrospective study based on a database with 169 patients. Demographic data, such as gender and age, and surgical data, such as surgical approach, number of segments with arthrodesis, surgical time, and complications, were evaluated. Complications were divided into major (deep surgical wound infection, intercurrence with the implant, early new compression, and heart failure) and minor (dysphagia, superficial infection, pain, urinary intercurrence, neuropraxia of the C5 root, acute confusional state, and surgical wound hematoma). Results: This included 169 patients, 57 women (33.7%) and 112 men (66.2%). Age ranged from 21 to 87 years, with a mean of 56.48 (± 11) years. Of these, 52 (30.8%) underwent the anterior approach; 111 (65.7%), the posterior approach; and 6 (3.5%), the combined approach. Conclusion: As in the literature, we evinced dysphagia, pain, and superficial infection of the surgical wound as the most frequent postoperative complications. However, it was impossible to establish a statistical relationship between the incidence of complications and surgical time, access route, and number of fixed segments. Level of Evidence III, Retrospective Comparative Study.