Aims Aseptic loosening is a major cause of failure in cemented endoprosthetic reconstructions. This paper presents the long-term outcomes of a custom-designed cross-pin fixation construct designed to minimize rotational stress and subsequent aseptic loosening in selected patients. The paper will also examine the long-term survivorship and modes of failure when using this technique. Patients and Methods A review of 658 consecutive, prospectively collected cemented endoprosthetic reconstructions for oncological diagnoses at a single centre between 1980 and 2017 was performed. A total of 51 patients were identified with 56 endoprosthetic implants with cross-pin fixation, 21 of which were implanted following primary resection of tumour. Locations included distal femoral (n = 36), proximal femoral (n = 7), intercalary (n = 6), proximal humeral (n = 3), proximal tibial (n = 3), and distal humeral (n = 1). Results The median follow-up was 132 months (interquartile range (IQR) 44 to 189). In all, 20 stems required revision: eight for infection, five for structural failure, five for aseptic loosening, and two for tumour progression. Mechanical survivorship at five, ten, and 15 years was 84%, 78%, and 78%, respectively. Mechanical failure rate varied by location, with no mechanical failures of proximal femoral constructs and distal femoral survivorship of 82%, 77%, and 77% at five, ten, and 15 years. The survivorship of primary constructs at five years was 74%, with no failure after 40 months, while the survivorship for revision constructs was 89%, 80%, and 80% at five, ten, and 15 years. Conclusion The rate of mechanical survivorship in our series is similar to those reported for other methods of reconstruction for short diaphyseal segments, such as compressive osseointegration. The mechanical failure rate differed by location, while there was no substantial difference in long-term survival between primary and revision reconstructions. Overall, custom cross-pin fixation is a viable option for endoprosthetic reconstruction of short metaphyseal segments with an acceptable rate of mechanical failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:724–731.

Purpose of Review Pigmented villonodular synovitis (PVNS) or tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) encompasses a wide spectrum of disease and is divided into localized and diffuse variants. Surgical resection remains the principal treatment for nearly all localized type disease and most diffuse type. Recent mechanistic understanding of the disease led to drug discovery that has opened new avenues for patients with recalcitrant disease. In this manuscript, we review the current treatment options for TGCT, presenting outcomes from traditional surgical approaches as well as those from nonsurgical approaches. Recent Findings Arthroscopic and/or open surgery remains the mainstay of treatment for TGCT for the vast majority of patients. While radiosynoviorthesis and external beam radiation have been used for recalcitrant disease, recent understanding of the colony stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) pathway and its paracrine and autocrine role in TGCT has led to the development of targeted inhibitors. Their optimal role and efficacy are unclear due to limited number of high-quality studies and contradictory results; however, recent and ongoing studies suggest there may be a role for their use, especially in diffuse and/or refractory disease. Summary Surgery remains the most common treatment for TGCT, however, there may be an increasing role for adjuvant therapies, including the new targeted agents. Weighing the side effects of these treatments against the symptomatic benefit on a patient-by-patient basis in this benign disease remains critical.

The purpose of this study was to determine what orthopaedic surgery department leadership characteristics are most closely correlated with securing NIH funding and increasing scholarly productivity. Scopus database was used to identify number of publications/h-index for 4,328 faculty, department chairs (DC), and research directors (RD), listed on departmental websites from 138 academic orthopaedic departments in the United States. NIH funding data was obtained for the 2013 fiscal year. While all programs had a DC, only 46% had a RD. Of $54,925,833 in NIH funding allocated to orthopaedic surgery faculty in 2013, 3% of faculty and 31% of departments were funded. 16% of funded institutions had a funded DC whereas 65% had a funded RD. Department productivity and funding were highly correlated to leadership productivity and funding(p< 0.05). Mean funding was $1,700,000 for departments with a NIH-funded RD, $104,000 for departments with an unfunded RD, and $72,000 for departments with no RD. These findings suggest that orthopaedic department academic success is directly associated with scholarly productivity and funding of both DC and RD. The findings further highlight the correlation between a funded RD and a well-funded department. This does not hold for an unfunded RD.

Implant related infections are the most common cause of joint arthroplasty failure, requiring revision surgeries and a new implant, resulting in a cost of $8.6 billion annually. To address this problem, we created a class of coating technology that is applied in the operating room, in a procedure that takes less than 10 min, and can incorporate any desired antibiotic. Our coating technology uses an in situ coupling reaction of branched poly(ethylene glycol) and poly(allyl mercaptan) (PEG-PAM) polymers to generate an amphiphilic polymeric coating. We show in vivo efficacy in preventing implant infection in both post-arthroplasty infection and post-spinal surgery infection mouse models. Our technology displays efficacy with or without systemic antibiotics, the standard of care. Our coating technology is applied in a clinically relevant time frame, does not require modification of implant manufacturing process, and does not change the implant shelf life.

KPF report that they are employees of PerkinElmer, a manufacturer of optical and PET imaging equipment. LSM reports that he has received grant support from MedImmune, Pfizer, Moderna Therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Boehringer Ingelheim and consulting fees from Integrated BioTherapeutics, related to Staphylococcus aureus vaccines and therapeutics. JMVD reports that he has filed a patent application (WO2015/088346) on the use of 1D9, which is owned by his employer University Medical Center Groningen. NMB reports that he has received consulting fees from Zimmer Biomet, Bonesupport, Daiichi Sankyo, and Onkos and that he is a board or committee member of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society and Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation.

Background Although there is widespread acceptance of core needle biopsy (CNB) for diagnosing solid tumors, there is reluctance by some clinicians to use CNB for aneurysmal bone cysts (ABCs) as a result of concerns of safety (bleeding, nerve injury, fracture, readmission, or infection) and reliability, particularly to rule out malignant diagnoses like telangiectatic osteosarcoma. This is especially true when CNB tissue is sent from an outside hospital, where the technique used to obtain the tissue may be spurious. Questions/purposes (1) Is CNB effective (provided adequate information to indicate appropriate surgical treatment without further open biopsy) as an initial diagnostic test for ABC? (2) Is CNB accurate (pathology consistent with the subsequent definitive surgical pathologic diagnosis) in differentiating between benign lesions such as primary or secondary ABCs and malignant radiolucent lesions such as telangiectatic osteosarcoma? (3) What are the complications of CNB? (4) Is there any difference in the effectiveness or accuracy of CNB performed at outside institutions when compared with a referral center? Methods A retrospective study of our musculoskeletal tumor board pathology database (1990-2016) was per-One of the authors (NMB) has or may receive payments or benefits from Onkos (Parsippany, NJ, USA) not related to this work. Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number 5K08AR069112-01 (NMB). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® neither advocates nor endorses the use of any treatment, drug, or device. Readers are encouraged to always seek additional information, including FDA-approval status, of any drug or device prior to clinical use. Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the human protocol for this investigation and that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.

Extremity reconstruction surgery is increasingly performed rather than amputation for patients with large-segment pathologic bone loss. Debate persists as to the optimal void filler for this “limb salvage” surgery, whether metal or allograft bone. Clinicians focus on optimizing important functional gains for patients, and the risk of devastating implant infection has been thought to be similar regardless of implant material. Recent insights into infection pathophysiology are challenging this equipoise, however, with both basic science data suggesting a novel mechanism of infection of Staphylococcus aureus (the most common infecting agent) into the host lacunar–canaliculi network, and also clinical data revealing a higher rate of infection of allograft over metal. The current translational study was therefore developed to bridge the gap between these insights in a longitudinal murine model of infection of allograft bone and metal. Real-time Staphylococci infection characteristics were quantified in cortical bone vs metal, and both microarchitecture of host implant and presence of host immune response were assessed. An orders-of-magnitude higher bacterial burden was established in cortical allograft bone over both metal and cancellous bone. The establishment of immune-evading microabscesses was confirmed in both cortical allograft haversian canal and the submicron canaliculi network in an additional model of mouse femur bone infection. These study results reveal a mechanism by which Staphylococci evasion of host immunity is possible, contributing to elevated risks of infection in cortical bone. The presence of this local infection reservoir imparts massive clinical implications that may alter the current paradigm of osteomyelitis and bulk allograft infection treatment.

Background: There is a paucity of data on long-term survivorship and outcomes for total humerus replacements (THR) with only two series reporting 10-year survival. Patients and Methods: A review of 769 consecutive, prospectively collected endoprosthetic reconstructions for oncological diagnoses at a single-center between 1980 and 2019 was performed. Patients with THRs were isolated and analyzed for outcomes, complications, and modes of failure. Results: Eighteen patients with 20 THR implants were identified. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 148 months (interquartile range [IQR] = 74-194) and 60 months (IQR = 17-155 months) for all patients. Two prostheses required revision for failure, both for symptomatic shoulder dislocation. There were three local recurrences. Revision-free survival at 5, 10, and 15 years was 100%, 86% and 86%, respectively. There were no cases of ulnar component failure, radial nerve palsy, or periprosthetic infection. Conclusions: THR prosthesis survivorship is comparable to the previous series, with a longer follow-up than has previously been reported. Symptomatic shoulder instability was common (25%), and was the only cause of revision. Reverse total shoulder could be an important way to address this in the future. Local recurrence rates were high, as has been reported elsewhere for THR.