Case-control study, Therapeutic study, Level III.

BackgroundRecently, various femoral head fixation devices (HFDs) for trochanteric fractures have become available. However, there are some cases in which femoral head rotation with excessive sliding of the HFD is observed and it is often followed by cutout. The purpose of this study is to compare the ability of the three types of HFDs to prevent femoral head rotation.MethodsBetween July 2005 and December 2009, 206 patients aged over 60 years with trochanteric fractures who had undergone surgical treatment using a short femoral nail in our institution were enrolled into the study. We used the gamma 3 nail (GMN) as the screw-type HFD in 66 cases, the gliding nail (GLN) as a non-cylindrical blade in 76 cases, and the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) as a cylindrical blade in 64 cases. The sliding length of HFDs and the occurrence of femoral head rotation were evaluated by assessing radiographs as the main outcome, and the results were compared among these devices.ResultsA comparison of the degree of sliding in the GMN group showed that femoral head rotation was observed significantly more frequently in cases with rotation. Further, it appeared that femoral head rotation occurred more frequently in comminuted fractures. However, no significant differences between the sliding lengths of the different HFDs were observed among three groups. Femoral head rotation was observed in 15 cases of GMN (22.7%), 0 case of GLN, and 5 case of PFNA (7.8%). Significant differences with regard to the occurrence of femoral head rotation were observed among the three groups. Furthermore, significant differences were also observed between GLN and PFNA with respect to the occurrence of femoral head rotation.ConclusionsThe ability to stabilize femoral head appears to be greater with blade-type materials than with screw-type materials. Furthermore, we believe that a non-cylindrical blade is preferable to a cylindrical blade for the surgical treatment of comminuted, unstable trochanteric fractures in order to prevent femoral head rotation and cut-out.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The purpose of this study was to use second-look arthroscopic findings and clinical assessment to determine outcome in two cases of knee osteoarthritis treated by intra-articular knee injection of adipose-derived regenerative cells (ADRCs). Case presentation This study involved two patients who received ADRC therapy for knee osteoarthritis and completed the six-month post-treatment follow-up period. For each treatment, 130 mL of subcutaneous adipose tissue was harvested using tumescent liposuction technique and manual aspiration of tissue from the thigh using a suction cannula under local anesthesia in the operating room. The adipose tissue harvested was processed using the Celution® Centrifuge in a dedicated cell processing room. The ADRCs were injected into the articular cavity of both knees for one patient and into a single affected knee in the second patient (three joints). Pain and knee function were assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Knee Outcome in Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS) respectively. The cartilage defect was assessed by direct visualization (arthroscopy). No serious adverse events were reported throughout follow-up. Pain and knee function were significantly improved from baseline in all treated knees at one, three and six months after ADRCs. At six-months after ADRCs treatment, the second-look arthroscopy showed that almost all the cartilage defect areas were covered by regenerated cartilage, some cartilage fibrillation area was reduced, and meniscus tear areas were repaired. Conclusions Cartilage and meniscus repair were observed six-months after ADRCs therapy under second-look arthroscopy. It was shown that a single administration of ADRCs might be effective as a treatment for knee osteoarthritis.