Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Dislocation after revision THA is a common complication. Large heads have the potential to decrease dislocation rate, but it is unclear whether they do so in revision THA. Questions/purposes We therefore determined whether a large femoral head (36 and 40 mm) resulted in a decreased dislocation rate compared to a standard head (32 mm). Methods We randomized 184 patients undergoing revision THA to receive either a 32-mm head (92 patients) or 36- and 40-mm head (92 patients) and stratified patients by surgeon. The two groups had similar baseline demographics. The primary end point was dislocation. Quality-of-life (QOL) measures were WOMAC and SF-36. The mean followup for dislocation was 5 years (range, 2–7 years); the mean followup for QOL was 2.2 years (range, 1.6–4 years). Results In the 36- and 40-mm head group, the dislocation rate was 1.1% (one of 92) versus 8.7% (eight of 92) for the 32-mm head. There was no difference in QOL outcomes between the two groups. Conclusions Our observations confirm a large femoral head (36 or 40 mm) reduces dislocation rates in patients undergoing revision THA at short-term followup. We now routinely use large heads with a highly crosslinked polyethylene acetabular liner in all revision THAs. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background/aimTo compare outcome of early mobilisation and plaster immobilisation in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. We hypothesised that early mobilisation would result in earlier functional recovery.MethodsFrom August 2009 to September 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were enrolled in this multicentre randomised controlled trial. Patients were randomised to early mobilisation (n=48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilisation (n=52). Primary outcome measure was the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH) score. Secondary outcomes were the Oxford Elbow Score, Mayo Elbow Performance Index, pain, range of motion, complications and activity resumption. Patients were followed for 1 year.ResultsQuick-DASH scores at 1 year were 4.0 (95% CI 0.9 to 7.1) points in the early mobilisation group versus 4.2 (95% CI 1.2 to 7.2) in the plaster immobilisation group. At 6 weeks, early mobilised patients reported less disability (Quick-DASH 12 (95% CI 9 to 15) points vs 19 (95% CI 16 to 22); p<0.05) and had a larger arc of flexion and extension (121° (95% CI 115° to 127°) vs 102° (95% CI 96° to 108°); p<0.05). Patients returned to work sooner after early mobilisation (10 vs 18 days; p=0.020). Complications occurred in 12 patients; this was unrelated to treatment. No recurrent dislocations occurred.ConclusionsEarly active mobilisation is a safe and effective treatment for simple elbow dislocations. Patients recovered faster and returned to work earlier without increasing the complication rate. No evidence was found supporting treatment benefit at 1 year.Trial registration numberNTR 2025.

Out-of-hospital analgosedation in trauma patients is challenging for emergency physicians due to associated complications. We compared peripheral nerve block (PNB) with analgosedation (AS) as an analgetic approach for patients with isolated extremity injury, assuming that prehospital required medical interventions (e.g. reduction, splinting of dislocation injury) using PNB are less painful and more feasible compared to AS. Thirty patients (aged 18 or older) were randomized to receive either ultrasound-guided PNB (10 mL prilocaine 1%, 10 mL ropivacaine 0.2%) or analgosedation (midazolam combined with s-ketamine or with fentanyl). Reduction-feasibility was classified (easy, intermediate, impossible) and pain scores were assessed using numeric rating scales (NRS 0-10). Eighteen patients were included in the PNB-group and twelve in the AS-group; 15 and 9 patients, respectively, suffered dislocation injury. In the PNB-group, reduction was more feasible (easy: 80.0%, impossible: 20.0%) compared to the AS-group (easy: 22.2%, intermediate: 22.2%, impossible: 55.6%; p = 0.01). During medical interventions, 5.6% [1/18] of the PNB-patients and 58.3% [7/12] of the AS-patients experienced pain (p<0.01). Recorded pain scores were significantly lower in the PNB-group during prehospital medical intervention (median[IQR] NRS PNB: 0[0-0]) compared to the AS-group (6[0-8]; p<0.001) as well as on first day post presentation (NRS PNB: 1[0-5], AS: 5[5-7]; p = 0.050). All patients of the PNB-group would recommend their analgesic technique (AS: 50.0%, p<0.01). Prehospital ultrasound-guided PNB is rapidly performed in extremity injuries with high success. Compared to the commonly used AS in trauma patients, PNB significantly reduces pain intensity and severity.

Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders have complex and sometimes controversial etiologies. Also, under similar circumstances, one person’s TMJ may appear to deteriorate, while another’s does not. However, once degenerative changes start in the TMJ, this pathology can be crippling, leading to a variety of morphological and functional deformities. Primarily, TMJ disorders have a non-inflammatory origin. The pathological process is characterized by deterioration and abrasion of articular cartilage and local thickening. These changes are accompanied by the superimposition of secondary inflammatory changes. Therefore, appreciating the pathophysiology of the TMJ degenerative disorders is important to an understanding of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of internal derangement and osteoarthrosis of the TMJ. The degenerative changes in the TMJ are believed to result from dysfunctional remodeling, due to a decreased host-adaptive capacity of the articulating surfaces and/or functional overloading of the joint that exceeds the normal adaptive capacity. This paper reviews etiologies that involve biomechanical and biochemical factors associated with functional overloading of the joint and the clinical, radiographic, and biochemical findings important in the diagnosis of TMJ-osteoarthrosis. In addition, non-invasive and invasive modalities utilized in TMJ-osteoarthrosis management, and the possibility of tissue engineering, are discussed.

BackgroundThe arthroscopically assisted Double-TightRope technique has recently been reported to yield good to excellent clinical results in the treatment of acute, high-grade acromioclavicular dislocation. However, the orientation of the transclavicular–transcoracoidal drill holes remains a matter of debate.HypothesisA V-shaped drill hole orientation leads to better clinical and radiologic results and provides a higher vertical and horizontal stability compared to parallel drill hole placement.Study designThis was a cohort study; level of evidence, 2b.MethodsTwo groups of patients with acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint instability (Rockwood type V) were included in this prospective, non-randomized cohort study. 15 patients (1 female/14 male) with a mean age of 37.7 (18–66) years were treated with a Double-TightRope technique using a V-shaped orientation of the drill holes (group 1). 13 patients (1 female/12 male) with a mean age of 40.9 (21–59) years were treated with a Double-TightRope technique with a parallel drill hole placement (group 2). After 2 years, the final evaluation consisted of a complete physical examination of both shoulders, evaluation of the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Constant Score (CS), Taft Score (TF) and Acromioclavicular Joint Instability Score (ACJI) as well as a radiologic examination including bilateral anteroposterior stress views and bilateral Alexander views.ResultsAfter a mean follow-up of 2 years, all patients were free of shoulder pain at rest and during daily activities. Range of motion did not differ significantly between both groups (p > 0.05). Patients in group 1 reached on average 92.4 points in the CS, 96.2 % in the SSV, 10.5 points in the TF and 75.9 points in the ACJI. Patients in group 2 scored 90.5 points in the CS, 93.9 % in the SSV, 10.5 points in the TF and 84.5 points in the ACJI (p > 0.05). Radiographically, the coracoclavicular distance was found to be 13.9 mm (group 1) and 13.4 mm (group 2) on the affected side and 9.3 mm (group 1) and 9.4 mm (group 2) on the contralateral side. The distance of neither the affected side nor the contralateral side differed significantly between both groups (p > 0.05). In group 1, eight patients (53 %) and in group 2 four patients (31 %) revealed signs of dynamic posterior instability (p > 0.05). Clavicular drill hole enlargement was found to be equally distributed in group 1, whereas group 2 displayed a cone-shaped form.ConclusionThe Double-TightRope technique yields good to excellent clinical results in both V-shaped and parallel drill hole placement. Partial recurrent vertical and horizontal instability represents a problem in both techniques. So far, no significant differences regarding clinical or radiologic results have been found. Long-term results are needed to reveal possible advantages in terms of clinical and radiologic acromioclavicular stability.

Validation study using data from a multicenter, randomized, clinical trial (RCT). To evaluate the reliability, validity, responsiveness, and minimal important change (MIC) of the Dutch version of the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH) in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly important for assessing outcome following elbow injuries, both in daily practice and in clinical research. However measurement properties of the OES and Quick-DASH in these patients are not fully known. OES and Quick-DASH were completed four times until one year after trauma. Mayo Elbow Performance Index, pain (VAS), Short Form-36, and EuroQol-5D were completed for comparison. Data of a multicenter RCT (n = 100) were used. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach's alpha. Construct and longitudinal validity were assessed by determining hypothesized strength of correlation between scores or changes in scores, respectively, of (sub)scales. Finally, floor and ceiling effects, MIC, and smallest detectable change (SDC) were determined. OES and Quick-DASH demonstrated adequate internal consistency (Cronbach α, 0.882 and 0.886, respectively). Construct validity and longitudinal validity of both scales were supported by >75% correctly hypothesized correlations. MIC and SDC were 8.2 and 12.0 point for OES, respectively. For Quick-DASH, these values were 11.7 and 25.0, respectively. OES and Quick-DASH are reliable, valid, and responsive instruments for evaluating elbow-related quality of life. The anchor-based MIC was 8.2 points for OES and 11.7 for Quick-DASH.

Purpose Traumatic high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) separations can be surgically stabilized by numerous anatomic and non-anatomic procedures. The return to sport (Maffe et al. in Am J Sports Med 23:93–98, 1995 ] and remaining sport-associated impairments after acute ACJ stabilization has not yet been investigated. Methods 73 consecutive athletes with acute high-grade ACJ separation were prospectively assigned into two groups (64.4% randomized, 35.6% intention-to-treat): open clavicular hook plate (cHP) implantation (GI) or arthroscopically assisted double double-suture-button (dDSB) implantation (GII). Patients were analyzed using shoulder sport-specific measurement tools for sport ability (ASOSS), sport activity (SSAS), and numerical analog scales: NAS pain during sport , NAS shoulder function in sport , and NAS re-achievement of sport level . Four points of examination were established: preoperative evaluation (FU0) and first postoperative follow-up (FU1) at 6 months; FU2 at 12 months; and FU3 at 24 months after surgery. The control group (GIII) consisted of 140 healthy athletes without anamnesis of prior macro-injury or surgery. Results After surgical stabilization, 29 of 35 athletes in GI (82.9%; 38.6 ± 9.9 years) and 32 of 38 in GII (82.9%; 38.6 ± 9.9 years) were followed up for 24 months (FU3) (loss 17.8%). All operated athletes showed significantly increased scores compared to FU0 ( p  < 0.05). Compared to GI, GII showed significantly superior outcome data for sporting ability as well as for NAS re-achievement of sport level ( p  < 0.05). While GII re-achieved GIII-comparable SSAS and ASOSS levels, GI remained at a significantly inferior level. Athletes after ACJ injury of Rockwood grade IV/V and overhead athletes benefited significantly from the dDSB procedure. Conclusion The dDSB procedure enabled significantly superior sport-specific outcomes compared to the cHP procedure. Athletes after dDSB surgeries re-achieved the sporting ability and the sport activity levels of healthy athletes, whereas athletes after cHP implantation remained at significantly inferior levels. The more extensive dDSB procedure and the more restrictive rehabilitation are recommended for treatment of acute high-grade ACJ separations of functionally high-demanding athletes. Level of evidence I.

Objective To observe the effect of warming needle moxibustion combined with rehabilitation techniques on clinical symptoms and quality of life of patients with anterior disc displacement without reduction (ADDwoR). Methods This randomized controlled trial included 66patients, with ADDwoR, attending the Hangzhou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Patients were assigned to the Experimental (12 sessions of warming needle moxibustion combined with rehabilitation manipulation therapy) and Control (rehabilitation therapy only) group ( n  = 33, each). Duration of treatment was 4 weeks, with 3 times a week. Outcomes included VAS pain score, maximum mouth opening (MMO), mandibular function impairment score (MFIQ), oral health impact scale (OHIP-14 scale), and mandibular dysfunction index (Fricton score). Safety assessments during treatment included incidence of fainting, broken needle, bleeding, hematoma and scalding. Results After treatment, the VAS scores, mandibular function impairment scores, oral health impact degree scale, and the scores of Dysfunction index (DI), palpation index (PI) and craniomandibular index (CMI) in the two groups were significantly decreased compared with before. While the maximum mouth opening was increased in both groups, the clinical efficacy evaluation showed the total significant rate of the control group was 59%, and the total significant rate of the experimental group was 83%, demonstrating a significant clinical efficacy difference between the two groups. Conclusion Compared to targeted rehabilitation exercises only, warming needle moxibustion combined with rehabilitation manipulation can not only improve the pain and maximum mouth opening, but also mandibular function impairment, mandibular joint disorder and oral health of patients with ADDwoR. Clinical trial registration http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx , identififier: ChiCTR2200059039.

Purpose and hypothesis Due to high rate of persisting dynamic posterior translation (DPT) following isolated coracoclavicular double-button technique for reconstruction of the acromioclavicular (AC) joint reported in the literature, an additional acromioclavicular cerclage was added to the procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological results of patients with high-grade AC-joint instability treated with a double TightRope technique with an additional percutaneous acromioclavicular cerclage. Methods Fifty-nine patients (6 f/53 m; median age 38.3 (range 21.5–63.4 years) who sustained an acute high-grade AC-joint dislocation (Rockwood type V) were treated using the above-mentioned technique. At the final follow-up, the constant score (CS), the subjective shoulder value (SSV), the Taft score (TF) and the acromioclavicular joint instability score (ACJI) as well as bilateral anteroposterior stress views with 10 kg of axial load and bilateral modified Alexander views were obtained. Results At a median follow-up of 26.4 (range 20.3–61.0) months, 34 patients scored a median of 90 (33–100) points in the CS, 90 (25–100) % in the SSV, 11 (4–12) points in the TF and 87 (43–100) points in the ACJI. The coracoclavicular (CC) distance was 12.1 (6.5–19.8) mm and the CC difference 2.0 (0.0–11.0) mm. Two patients (5.8%) showed a complete DPT of the AC joint, and fourteen patients (41.1%) displayed a partial DPT. The overall revision rate was 11.7%. Two patients presented implant irritation, one patient a recurrent instability, and one patient suffered from a local infection. Conclusion The arthroscopically assisted and image-intensifier-controlled double TightRope technique with an additional percutaneous acromioclavicular cerclage leads to good and excellent clinical results after a follow-up of 2 years. The incidence of persisting dynamic horizontal translation is lower compared to isolated coracoclavicular stabilization. Thus, we recommend using the double TightRope implant with an additional acromioclavicular cerclage. Level of evidence IV.

Background Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is a popular method for treatment of displaced Lisfranc injuries. However, even with anatomic reduction and solid internal fixation, treatment does not provide good outcomes in certain severe dislocations. The purpose of this study was to compare ORIF and primary arthrodesis (PA) of the first tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint for Lisfranc injuries with the first TMT joint dislocation. Methods Seventy-eight Lisfranc injuries with first TMT joint dislocation were finally enrolled and analyzed in a prospective, randomized trial comparing ORIF and PA. They were 50 males and females with a mean age of 40.7 years and randomized to ORIF group and PA group. Outcome measures included radiographs, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot scale, Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) Sports subscale, visual analog scale (VAS), and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Complications and revision rate were also analyzed. Results Forty patients were treated by ORIF, while PA group includes 38 cases. Patients were followed up for 37.8(range, 24–48) months. At final follow-up, the mean AOFAS midfoot score ( P  < 0.01), the FAAM Sports subscale ( P  < 0.01), the physical function score ( P  < 0.05), and the Bodily Pain score of SF-36 ( P  < 0.05) after ORIF treatment were significantly lower than PA group. The mean VAS score in ORIF group was higher ( P  < 0.01). In ORIF group, redislocation of the first TMT joint was observed in ten cases, and thirteen patients had pain in midfoot. No redislocation and no hardware failure were identified in PA group. Conclusion PA of the first TMT joint provided a better medium-term outcome than ORIF for Lisfranc injuries with the first TMT dislocation. Possible complications and revision could be avoided by PA for dislocated first ray injuries.