ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Restoring Nature Through Individualized Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery has significantly evolved in recent years. This has led to development of new technologies that facilitate the diagnosis of ACL injury and the application of state of the art methods for treatment. In particular, individualized anatomical ACL reconstruction aims to restore native ACL function. Treatment is tailored to each patient based on each individual’s characteristics. Individualized treatment approach continues after reconstruction surgery and during rehabilitation period and return to sporting activities.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7544_3c3bf9229a7a0a7ff2d747d18e08cd92.pdf
2016-10-01
289
290
10.22038/abjs.2016.7544
anterior cruciate ligament
Anatomic
Individualized treatment
Amir Ata
Rahnemai-Azar
amir.ata.azar@gmail.com
1
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania, USA
AUTHOR
Soheil
Sabzevari
soheil.sabzevari60@gmail.com
2
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania, USA
AUTHOR
Sebastián
Irarrázaval
sirarraz@gmail.com
3
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania, USA
AUTHOR
Tom
Chao
chaot@upmc.edu
4
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania, USA
AUTHOR
Freddie
Fu
ffu@upmc.edu
5
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania, USA
LEAD_AUTHOR
Fu FH, van Eck CF, Tashman S, Irrgang JJ, Moreland MS.
1
Anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction:
2
a changing paradigm. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol
3
Arthrosc. 2015; 23(3):640-8.
4
2. Hofbauer M, Muller B, Murawski CD, van Eck CF, Fu
5
FH. The concept of individualized anatomic anterior
6
cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Knee Surg
7
Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014; 22(5):979-86.
8
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Anatomical Individualized ACL Reconstruction
The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is composed of two bundles, which work together to provide both antero-posterior and rotatory stability of the knee. Understanding the anatomy and function of the ACL plays a key role in management of patients with ACL injury. Anatomic ACL reconstruction aims to restore the function of the native ACL. Femoral and tibial tunnels should be placed in their anatomical location accounting for both the native ACL insertion site and bony landmarks. One main component of anatomical individualized ACL reconstruction is customizing the treatment according to each patient’s individual characteristics, considering preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of the native ACL and knee bony anatomy. Anatomical individualized reconstruction surgery should also aim to restore the size of the native ACL insertion as well. Using this concept, while single bundle ACL reconstruction can restore the function of the ACL in some patients, double bundle reconstruction is indicated in others to achieve optimal outcome.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7543_1881e1f1d7473418d851b60e8b152e87.pdf
2016-10-01
291
297
10.22038/abjs.2016.7543
Anatomic ACL reconstruction surgery
anterior cruciate ligament
Individualized medicine
Amir Ata
Rahnemai-Azar
amir.ata.azar@gmail.com
1
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, USA
AUTHOR
Soheil
Sabzevari
soheil.sabzevari60@gmail.com
2
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, USA
AUTHOR
Sebastián
Irarrázaval
sirarraz@gmail.com
3
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, USA
AUTHOR
Tom
Chao
chaot@upmc.edu
4
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, USA
AUTHOR
Freddie
Fu
ffu@upmc.edu
5
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, USA
LEAD_AUTHOR
1. Ajuied A, Wong F, Smith C, Norris M, Earnshaw P,
1
Back D, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament injury and
2
radiologic progression of knee osteoarthritis: a
3
systematic review and meta-analysis. The American
4
journal of sports medicine. 2014;42(9):2242-52.
5
2. Atarod M, Frank CB, Shrive NG. Increased meniscal
6
loading after anterior cruciate ligament transection
7
in vivo: a longitudinal study in sheep. Knee.
8
2015;22(1):11-7.
9
3. Lipke JM, Janecki CJ, Nelson CL, McLeod P, Thompson
10
C, Thompson J, et al. The role of incompetence of the
11
anterior cruciate and lateral ligaments in anterolateral
12
and anteromedial instability. A biomechanical study of
13
cadaver knees. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981;63(6):954-60.
14
4. Fu FH, Jordan SS. The lateral intercondylar ridge--a key
15
to anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
16
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(10):2103-4.
17
5. Zantop T, Herbort M, Raschke MJ, Fu FH, Petersen
18
W. The role of the anteromedial and posterolateral
19
bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament in anterior
20
tibial translation and internal rotation. The American
21
journal of sports medicine. 2007;35(2):223-7.
22
6. Chalmers PN, Mall NA, Moric M, Sherman SL, Paletta
23
GP, Cole BJ, et al. Does ACL reconstruction alter natural
24
history?: A systematic literature review of long-term
25
outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(4):292-300.
26
7. Frobell RB, Roos EM, Roos HP, Ranstam J, Lohmander
27
LS. A randomized trial of treatment for acute anterior
28
cruciate ligament tears. The New England journal of
29
medicine. 2010;363(4):331-42.
30
8. Fitzgerald GK, Axe MJ, Snyder-Mackler L. Proposed
31
practice guidelines for nonoperative anterior cruciate
32
ligament rehabilitation of physically active individuals.
33
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2000;30(4):194-203.
34
9. Fitzgerald GK, Axe MJ, Snyder-Mackler L. A decisionmaking
35
scheme for returning patients to highlevel
36
activity with nonoperative treatment after
37
anterior cruciate ligament rupture. Knee Surg Sports
38
Traumatol Arthrosc. 2000;8(2):76-82.
39
10. Shea KG, Carey JL, Richmond J, Sandmeier R, Pitts
40
RT, Polousky JD, et al. The American Academy of
41
Orthopaedic Surgeons evidence-based guideline on
42
management of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. J
43
Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(8):672-4.
44
11. Adachi N, Ochi M, Uchio Y, Sumen Y. Anterior
45
cruciate ligament augmentation under arthroscopy.
46
A minimum 2-year follow-up in 40 patients. Arch
47
Orthop Trauma Surg. 2000;120(3-4):128-33.
48
12. Ochi M, Adachi N, Uchio Y, Deie M, Kumahashi
49
N, Ishikawa M, et al. A minimum 2-year followup
50
after selective anteromedial or posterolateral
51
bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
52
Arthroscopy. 2009;25(2):117-22.
53
13. Hu J, Qu J, Xu D, Zhang T, Zhou J, Lu H. Clinical outcomes
54
of remnant preserving augmentation in anterior
55
cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic
56
review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.
57
2014;22(9):1976-85.
58
14. Middleton KK, Muller B, Araujo PH, Fujimaki Y,
59
Rabuck SJ, Irrgang JJ, et al. Is the native ACL insertion
60
site “completely restored” using an individualized
61
approach to single-bundle ACL-R? Knee Surg Sports
62
Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(8):2145-50.
63
15. Magnussen RA, Lawrence JT, West RL, Toth AP,
64
Taylor DC, Garrett WE. Graft size and patient age are
65
predictors of early revision after anterior cruciate
66
ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft.
67
Arthroscopy. 2012;28(4):526-31.
68
16. van Eck CF, Lesniak BP, Schreiber VM, Fu FH. Anatomic
69
single-and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament
70
reconstruction flowchart. Arthroscopy: The Journal of
71
Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2010;26(2):258-68.
72
17. Shen W, Forsythe B, Ingham SM, Honkamp NJ, Fu
73
FH. Application of the anatomic double-bundle
74
reconstruction concept to revision and augmentation
75
anterior cruciate ligament surgeries. J Bone Joint Surg
76
Am. 2008;90(Supplement 4):20-34.
77
18. Kopf S, Pombo MW, Szczodry M, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH. Size
78
variability of the human anterior cruciate ligament
79
insertion sites. The American journal of sports
80
medicine. 2011;39(1):108-13.
81
19. Zelle BA, Vidal AF, Brucker PU, Fu FH. Double-bundle
82
reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament:
83
anatomic and biomechanical rationale. J Am Acad
84
Orthop Surg. 2007;15(2):87-96.
85
20. Yagi M, Wong EK, Kanamori A, Debski RE, Fu FH, Woo
86
SL. Biomechanical analysis of an anatomic anterior
87
cruciate ligament reconstruction. The American
88
journal of sports medicine. 2002;30(5):660-6.
89
21. Morimoto Y, Ferretti M, Ekdahl M, Smolinski P, Fu FH.
90
Tibiofemoral joint contact area and pressure after
91
single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament
92
reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2009;25(1):62-9.
93
22. Hussein M, van Eck CF, Cretnik A, Dinevski D, Fu
94
FH. Prospective randomized clinical evaluation of
95
conventional single-bundle, anatomic single-bundle,
96
and anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate
97
ligament reconstruction 281 cases with 3-to 5-year
98
follow-up. The American journal of sports medicine.
99
2012;40(3):512-20.
100
23. Desai N, Bjornsson H, Musahl V, Bhandari M, Petzold
101
M, Fu FH, et al. Anatomic single- versus double-bundle
102
ACL reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports
103
Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(5):1009-23.
104
24. Chen G, Wang S. Comparison of single-bundle
105
versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament
106
reconstruction after a minimum of 3-year follow-up:
107
a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J
108
Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(9):14604-14.
109
25. Hussein M, van Eck CF, Cretnik A, Dinevski D, Fu FH.
110
Individualized Anterior Cruciate Ligament Surgery A
111
Prospective Study Comparing Anatomic Single-and
112
Double-Bundle Reconstruction. The American journal
113
of sports medicine. 2012;40(8):1781-8.
114
26. Cohen SB, Fu FH. Three-portal technique for anterior
115
cruciate ligament reconstruction: use of a central
116
medial portal. Arthroscopy. 2007;23(3):325 e1-5.
117
27. Steiner ME, Hecker AT, Brown CH, Hayes WC. Anterior
118
cruciate ligament graft fixation comparison of
119
hamstring and patellar tendon grafts. The American
120
journal of sports medicine. 1994;22(2):240-7.
121
28. Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Fleming BC, Kannus P,
122
Kaplan M, Samani J, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament
123
replacement: comparison of bone-patellar tendonbone
124
grafts with two-strand hamstring grafts. J Bone
125
Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(9):1503-13.
126
29. Adam F, Pape D, Schiel K, Steimer O, Kohn D, Rupp S.
127
Biomechanical properties of patellar and Hamstring
128
graft tibial fixation techniques in anterior cruciate
129
ligament reconstruction experimental study with
130
roentgen stereometric analysis. The American journal
131
of sports medicine. 2004;32(1):71-8.
132
30. Araujo P, van Eck CF, Torabi M, Fu FH. How to optimize
133
the use of MRI in anatomic ACL reconstruction.
134
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.
135
2013;21(7):1495-501.
136
31. Ma Y, Murawski CD, Rahnemai-Azar AA, Maldjian C,
137
Lynch AD, Fu FH. Graft maturity of the reconstructed
138
anterior cruciate ligament 6 months postoperatively: a
139
magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of quadriceps
140
tendon with bone block and hamstring tendon
141
autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.
142
2015;23(3):661-8.
143
32. Kaeding CC, Aros B, Pedroza A, Pifel E, Amendola A,
144
Andrish JT, et al. Allograft versus autograft anterior
145
cruciate ligament reconstruction predictors of failure
146
from a MOON prospective longitudinal cohort. Sports
147
Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach. 2011;3(1):73-81.
148
33. Zeng C, Gao SG, Li H, Yang T, Luo W, Li YS, et al.
149
Autograft Versus Allograft in Anterior Cruciate
150
Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis of
151
Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Review
152
of Overlapping Systematic Reviews. Arthroscopy.
153
2016;32(1):153-63 e18.
154
34. Chen JL, Allen CR, Stephens TE, Haas AK, Huston LJ,
155
Wright RW, et al. Differences in mechanisms of failure,
156
intraoperative findings, and surgical characteristics
157
between single- and multiple-revision ACL
158
reconstructions: a MARS cohort study. The American
159
journal of sports medicine. 2013;41(7):1571-8.
160
35. Araujo PH, Asai S, Pinto M, Protta T, Middleton K,
161
Linde-Rosen M, et al. ACL graft position affects in situ
162
graft force following ACL reconstruction. J Bone Joint
163
Surg Am. 2015;97(21):1767-73.
164
36. Ferretti M, Ekdahl M, Shen W, Fu FH. Osseous
165
landmarks of the femoral attachment of the anterior
166
cruciate ligament: an anatomic study. Arthroscopy:
167
The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery.
168
2007;23(11):1218-25.
169
37. Ferretti M, Doca D, Ingham SM, Cohen M, Fu FH. Bony
170
and soft tissue landmarks of the ACL tibial insertion
171
site: an anatomical study. Knee Surgery, Sports
172
Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2012;20(1):62-8.
173
38. Colvin A, Sharma C, Parides M, Glashow J. What is
174
the best femoral fixation of hamstring autografts
175
in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?: a
176
meta-analysis. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related
177
Research®. 2011;469(4):1075-81.
178
39. Ibrahim SAR, Ghafar SA, Marwan Y, Mahgoub AM, Al
179
Misfer A, Farouk H, et al. Intratunnel Versus Extratunnel
180
Autologous Hamstring Double-Bundle Graft for Anterior
181
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction A Comparison of 2
182
Femoral Fixation Procedures. The American journal of
183
sports medicine. 2015;43(1):161-8.
184
40. Johnson JS, Smith SD, LaPrade CM, Turnbull TL,
185
LaPrade RF, Wijdicks CA. A biomechanical comparison
186
of femoral cortical suspension devices for soft tissue
187
anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction under
188
high loads. The American journal of sports medicine.
189
2015;43(1):154-60.
190
41. Matsumoto A, Yoshiya S, Muratsu H, Matsui N, Yagi M,
191
Kuroda R, et al. Mechanical evaluation of a soft tissue
192
interference screw with a small diameter: significance
193
of graft/bone tunnel cross-sectional area ratio.
194
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.
195
2006;14(4):330-4.
196
42. Jisa KA, Williams BT, Jaglowski JR, Turnbull TL,
197
LaPrade RF, Wijdicks CA. Lack of consensus regarding
198
pretensioning and preconditioning protocols for soft
199
tissue graft reconstruction of the anterior cruciate
200
ligament. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology,
201
Arthroscopy. 2015:1-8.
202
43. Arneja S, McConkey MO, Mulpuri K, Chin P, Gilbart
203
MK, Regan WD, et al. Graft tensioning in anterior
204
cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic
205
review of randomized controlled trials. Arthroscopy:
206
The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery.
207
2009;25(2):200-7.
208
44. Austin JC, Phornphutkul C, Wojtys EM. Loss of
209
knee extension after anterior cruciate ligament
210
reconstruction: effects of knee position and graft
211
tensioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(7):1565-74.
212
45. Spencer L, Burkhart TA, Tran MN, Rezansoff AJ, Deo S,
213
Caterine S, et al. Biomechanical analysis of simulated
214
clinical testing and reconstruction of the anterolateral
215
ligament of the knee. The American journal of sports
216
medicine. 2015;43(9):2189-97.
217
46. Kittl C, El-Daou H, Athwal KK, Gupte CM, Weiler
218
A, Williams A, et al. The role of the anterolateral
219
structures and the ACL in controlling laxity of the
220
intact and ACL-deficient knee. The American journal
221
of sports medicine. 2016;44(2):345-54.
222
47. Dombrowski ME, Costello JM, Ohashi B, Murawski CD,
223
Rothrauff BB, Arilla FV, et al. Macroscopic anatomical,
224
histological and magnetic resonance imaging
225
correlation of the lateral capsule of the knee. Knee
226
Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2015:1-7.
227
48. Rasmussen MT, Nitri M, Williams BT, Moulton SG, Cruz
228
RS, Dornan GJ, et al. An In Vitro Robotic Assessment
229
of the Anterolateral Ligament, Part 1: Secondary
230
Role of the Anterolateral Ligament in the Setting of
231
an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury. The American
232
journal of sports medicine. 2016;44(3):585-92.
233
49. Rezende FC, de Moraes VY, Martimbianco AL, Luzo
234
MV, da Silveira Franciozi CE, Belloti JC. Does Combined
235
Intra- and Extraarticular ACL Reconstruction Improve
236
Function and Stability? A Meta-analysis. Clin Orthop
237
Relat Res. 2015;473(8):2609-18.
238
50. Hewison CE, Tran MN, Kaniki N, Remtulla A, Bryant
239
D, Getgood AM. Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis
240
Reduces Rotational Laxity When Combined With
241
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A
242
Systematic Review of the Literature. Arthroscopy.
243
2015;31(10):2022-34.
244
51. Arilla F, Guenther D, Yacuzzi C, Rahnemai-Azar A, Fu F,
245
Debski R, et al. Effects Of Anterolateral Capsular Injury
246
And Extra-Articular Tenodesis On Knee Kinematics
247
During Physical Examination. American Orthopaedic
248
Society for Sports Medicine; 2015; Orlando, FL, USA:
249
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine; 2015. p.
250
2325967115S00032.
251
52. Rahnemai-Azar AA, Miller RM, Guenther D, Fu FH,
252
Lesniak BP, Musahl V, et al. Structural properties
253
of the anterolateral capsule and iliotibial band of
254
the knee. The American journal of sports medicine.
255
2016;44(4):892-7.
256
53. Branch T, Lavoie F, Guier C, Branch E, Lording T, Stinton
257
S, et al. Single-bundle ACL reconstruction with and
258
without extra-articular reconstruction: evaluation
259
with robotic lower leg rotation testing and patient
260
satisfaction scores. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol
261
Arthrosc. 2015;23(10):2882-91.
262
54. Tashman S. Letter to the Editor: Does Combined
263
Intra-and Extraarticular ACL Reconstruction
264
Improve Function and Stability? A Meta-analysis.
265
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®.
266
2016;474(5):1339-40.
267
55. Muller B, Hofbauer M, Rahnemai-Azar AA, Wolf M,
268
Araki D, Hoshino Y, et al. Development of computer
269
tablet software for clinical quantification of lateral
270
knee compartment translation during the pivot
271
shift test. Computer methods in biomechanics and
272
biomedical engineering. 2016;19(2):217-28.
273
56. Hoshino Y, Araujo P, Ahlden M, Samuelsson K, Muller
274
B, Hofbauer M, et al. Quantitative evaluation of the
275
pivot shift by image analysis using the iPad. Knee Surg
276
Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(4):975-80.
277
57. Rahnemai-Azar AA, Naendrup JH, Soni A, Olsen A,
278
Zlotnicki J, Musahl V. Knee instability scores for
279
ACL reconstruction. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med.
280
2016;9(2):170-7.
281
58. Bull AM, Earnshaw PH, Smith A, Katchburian MV,
282
Hassan AN, Amis AA. Intraoperative measurement
283
of knee kinematics in reconstruction of the anterior
284
cruciate ligament. The Journal of bone and joint
285
surgery British volume. 2002;84(7):1075-81.
286
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
The Effect of Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome on Gait Parameters: A Literature Review
Background: Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) is one of the most frequent causes of anterior knee pain in adolescents and adults. This disorder can have a big effect on patients’ ability and quality of life and gait. Methods: This review included all articles published during 1990 to 2016. An extensive literature search was performed in databases of Science Direct, Google Scholar, PubMed and ISI Web of Knowledge using OR, AND, NOT between the selected keywords. Finally, 16 articles were selected from final evaluation. Results: In PFPS subjects, there was lower gait velocity, decreased cadence, and reduced knee extensor moment in the loading response and terminal stance, delayed peak rear foot eversion during gait and greater hip adduction compared to healthy subjects, while for hip rotation, there was controversy in studies. Conclusion: Changes in the walking patterns of PFPS subjects may be associated with the strategy used for the reduction of patellofemoral joint reaction force and pain.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7541_0b6dae536772139db4cac7ebb31dfac9.pdf
2016-10-01
298
306
10.22038/abjs.2016.7541
Kinematic
kinetics
patellofemoral pain syndrome
Spatiotemporal
Mokhtar
Arazpour
m.arazpour@gmail.com
1
Department of Orthotics and Prosthetics, University of
Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Science, Tehran, Knee
and Sport Medicine Education and Research Center, Milad
Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Fateme
Bahramian
fbahramian69@gmail.com
2
Knee and Sport Medicine Education and Research Center,
Milad Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Atefe
Aboutorabi
aboutorabito11@yahoo.com
3
Department of Orthotics and Prosthetics, University of
Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Science, Tehran, Knee
and Sport Medicine Education and Research Center, Milad
Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Seyed Taghi
Nourbakhsh
nourbakhsh@yahoo.com
4
Orthopedic Surgeon, Knee and Sport Medicine Research
and Education Center, Milad Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Ardeshir
Alidousti
ardeshir.alidousti@yahoo.com
5
Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Knee and
Sport Medicine Research and Education Center, Milad
Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Hamidreza
Aslani
hraslani1342@gmail.om
6
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Knee and
Sport Medicine Education and Research Center, Milad
Hospital, Tehran, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
1. Saubade M, Martin R, Becker A, Gremion G.
1
Patellofemoral pain syndrome: understand better
2
in order to treat better. Rev Med Suisse. 2014;
3
10(437):1451-6.
4
2. Shwayhat AF, Linenger JM, Hofherr LK, Slymen DJ,
5
Johnson CW. Profiles of exercise history and overuse
6
injuries among United States Navy Sea, Air, and Land
7
(SEAL) recruits. Am J Sports Med. 1994; 22(6):835-40.
8
3. Baker MM, Juhn MS. Patellofemoral pain syndrome
9
in the female athlete. Clin Sports Med. 2000;
10
19(2):315-29.
11
4. Nejati P, Forogh B, Moeineddin R, Baradaran HR,
12
Nejati M. Patellofemoral pain syndrome in Iranian
13
female athletes. Acta Med Iran. 2011; 49(3):169-72.
14
5. Bolgla LA, Malone TR, Umberger BR, Uhl TL. Hip
15
strength and hip and knee kinematics during stair
16
descent in females with and without patellofemoral
17
pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;
18
38(1):12-8.
19
6. Boling M, Padua D, Marshall S, Guskiewicz K, Pyne S,
20
Beutler A. Gender differences in the incidence and
21
prevalence of patellofemoral pain syndrome. Scand
22
J Med Sci Sports. 2010; 20(5):725-30.
23
7. Larson M. Evaluation of risk factors associated
24
with Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome. [Doctoral
25
dissertation]. Boston: Boston University; 2014.
26
8. Boling MC, Padua DA, Alexander Creighton
27
R. Concentric and eccentric torque of the hip
28
musculature in individuals with and without
29
patellofemoral pain. J Athl Train. 2009; 44(1):7-13.
30
9. Dugan SA. Sports-related knee injuries in female
31
athletes: what gives? Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;
32
84(2):122-30.
33
10. Myer GD, Ford KR, Barber Foss KD, Goodman A,
34
Ceasar A, Rauh MJ, et al. The incidence and potential
35
pathomechanics of patellofemoral pain in female
36
athletes. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2010;
37
25(7):700-7.
38
11. Stauffer RN. Disorders of the patellofemoral joint.
39
Canada: Mayo Clinic Proceedings; 1990.
40
12. Johnston LB, Gross MT. Effects of foot orthoses on
41
quality of life for individuals with patellofemoral
42
pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;
43
34(8):440-8.
44
13. Dixit S, DiFiori JP, Burton M, Mines B. Management
45
of patellofemoral pain syndrome. Am Fam Physician.
46
2007; 75(2):194-202.
47
14. Arazpour M, Notarki TT, Salimi A, Bani MA, Nabavi
48
H, Hutchins SW. The effect of patellofemoral bracing
49
on walking in individuals with patellofemoral pain
50
syndrome. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2013; 37(6):465-70
51
15. Tiberio D. The effect of excessive subtalar joint
52
pronation on patellofemoral mechanics: a theoretical
53
model. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1987; 9(4):160-5.
54
16. Barton CJ, Bonanno D, Levinger P, Menz HB. Foot
55
and ankle characteristics in patellofemoral pain
56
syndrome: a case control and reliability study. J
57
Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010; 40(5):286-96.
58
17. Barton CJ, Levinger P, Webster KE, Menz HB. Walking
59
kinematics in individuals with patellofemoral pain
60
syndrome: a case-control study. Gait Posture. 2011;
61
33(2):286-91.
62
18. Levinger P, Gilleard W. The heel strike transient
63
during walking in subjects with patellofemoral pain
64
syndrome. Phys Ther Sport. 2005; 6(2):83-8.
65
19. Paoloni M, Mangone M, Fratocchi G, Murgia M,
66
Saraceni VM, Santilli V. Kinematic and kinetic
67
features of normal level walking in patellofemoral
68
pain syndrome: more than a sagittal plane alteration.
69
J Biomech. 2010; 43(9):1794-8.
70
20. Powers CM, Heino JG, Rao S, Perry J. The influence of
71
patellofemoral pain on lower limb loading during gait.
72
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1999; 14(10):722-8.
73
21. Salsich GB, Brechter JH, Powers CM. Lower extremity
74
kinetics during stair ambulation in patients with and
75
without patellofemoral pain. Clin Biomech (Bristol,
76
Avon). 2001; 16(10):906-12.
77
22. Levinger P, Gilleard W. Tibia and rearfoot motion
78
and ground reaction forces in subjects with
79
patellofemoral pain syndrome during walking. Gait
80
Posture. 2007; 25(1):2-8.
81
23. Nadeau S, Gravel D, Hébert LJ, Arsenault AB, Lepage
82
Y. Gait study of patients with patellofemoral pain
83
syndrome. Gait Posture. 1997; 5(1):21-7.
84
24. Souza RB, Powers CM. Differences in hip kinematics,
85
muscle strength, and muscle activation between
86
subjects with and without patellofemoral pain. J
87
Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009; 39(1):12-9.
88
25. Willson JD, Davis IS. Lower extremity mechanics of
89
females with and without patellofemoral pain across
90
activities with progressively greater task demands.
91
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2008; 23(2):203-11.
92
26. Willson JD, Sharpee R, Meardon SA, Kernozek TW.
93
Effects of step length on patellofemoral joint stress in
94
female runners with and without patellofemoral pain.
95
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2014; 29(3):243-7.
96
27. Xergia S, Pappas E, Georgoulis AD. Gait analysis in
97
patellofemoral disorders. The patellofemoral joint.
98
Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2014. P. 45-50.
99
28. Powers CM, Perry J, Hsu A, Hislop HJ. Are
100
patellofemoral pain and quadriceps femoris muscle
101
torque associated with locomotor function? Phys
102
Ther. 1997; 77(10):1063-75.
103
29. Perry J. Observational gait analysis handbook. The
104
pathokinesiology service and the physical therapy
105
department of Rancho Los Amigos Medical Center..
106
Downey, CA: Loas Amigos Research and Education
107
Institute, Inc; 2001.
108
30. Noehren B, Pohl MB, Sanchez Z, Cunningham T,
109
Lattermann C. Proximal and distal kinematics
110
in female runners with patellofemoral pain. Clin
111
Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2012; 27(4):366-71.
112
31. Noehren B, Davis I. Prospective study of the
113
biomechanical factors associated with patellofemoral
114
pain syndrome. Palo Alto, CA: American Society of
115
Biomechanics Annual Meeting; 2007.
116
32. Dierks TA, Manal KT, Hamill J, Davis IS. Proximal
117
and distal influences on hip and knee kinematics in
118
runners with patellofemoral pain during a prolonged
119
run. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008; 38(8):448-56.
120
33. Aliberti S, Costa MdS, Passaro Ade C, Arnone AC,
121
Hirata R, Sacco IC. Influence of patellofemoral pain
122
syndrome on plantar pressure in the foot rollover
123
process during gait. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011;
124
66(3):367-72.
125
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Unicompartmental Knee Osteoarthritis (UKOA): Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) or High Tibial Osteotomy (HTO)?
Background: The aim of this review article is to analyze the results of high tibial osteotomy compared to unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients with unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis. Methods: The search engine used was PubMed. The keywords were: "high tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty". Twenty-one articles were found on 28 February 2015, but only eighteen were selected and reviewed because they strictly focused on the topic. Results: In a meta-analysis the ratio for an excellent outcome was higher in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty than high tibial osteotomy and the risks of revision and complications were lower in the former. A prospective comparative study showed that unicompartmental knee arthroplasty offers better long-term success (77% for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and 60% for high tibial osteotomy at 7-10 years). However, a review of the literature showed no evidence of superior results of one treatment over the other. A multicenter study stated that unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis without constitutional deformity should be treated with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty while in cases with constitutional deformity high tibial osteotomy should be indicated. A case control study stated that unicompartmental knee arthroplasty offers a viable alternative to high tibial osteotomy if proper patient selection is done. Conclusion: The literature is still controversial regarding the best surgical treatment for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (high tibial osteotomy or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty). However, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty utilization is increasing, while high tibial osteotomy utilization is decreasing, and a meta-analysis has shown better outcomes and less risk of revision and complications in the former. A systematic review has found that with correct patient selection, both procedures show effective and reliable results. However, prospective randomized studies are needed in order to answer the question of this article.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_5815_b54a08f8694ae58f5f34ff927c7c6516.pdf
2016-10-01
307
313
10.22038/abjs.2015.5815
Comparison
High tibial osteotomy
knee
Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
Unicompartmental osteoarthritis
E. Carlos
RODRIGUEZ-MERCHAN
ecrmerchan@hotmail.com
1
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
LEAD_AUTHOR
1. Mont MA, Stuchin SA, Paley D, Sharkey PF, Parvisi J,
1
Tria AJ Jr, et al. Different surgical options for mono�-
2
compartmental osteoarthritis of the knee: high tibial
3
osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
4
versus total knee arthroplasty: indications,
5
techniques, results, and controversies. Instr Course
6
Lect. 2004; 53(1):265-83.
7
2. Karpman RR, Volz RG. Osteotomy versus unicompartmental
8
prosthetic replacement in the treatment
9
of unicompartmental arthritis of the knee. Orthopedics.
10
1982; 5(8):989-91.
11
3. Stukenborg-Colsman C, Wirth CJ, Lazovic D, Wefer
12
A. High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental
13
joint replacement in unicompartmental knee joint
14
osteoarthritis: 7-10-year follow-up prospective randomised
15
study. Knee. 2001; 8(3):187-94.
16
4. Zhang QD, Guo WS, Liu ZH, Zhang Q, Cheng LM, Li ZR.
17
Meta-analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
18
versus high tibial osteotomy in the treatment of
19
unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis. Zhonghua Yi
20
Xue Za Zhi. 2009; 89(39):2768-72.
21
5. Dettoni F, Bonasia DE, Castoldi F, Bruzzone M, Blonna
22
D, Rossi R. High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental
23
knee arthroplasty for medial compartment
24
arthrosis of the knee: a review of the literature. Iowa
25
Orthop J. 2010; 30(1):131-40.
26
6. Yim JH, Song EK, Seo HY, Kim MS, Seon JK. Comparison
27
of high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental
28
knee arthroplasty at a minimum follow-up of 3 years.
29
J Arthroplasty. 2013; 28(2):243-7.
30
7. Fu D, Li G, Chen K, Zhao Y, Hua Y, Cai Z. Comparison
31
of high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee
32
arthroplasty in the treatment of unicompartmental
33
osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2013;
34
28(5):759-65.
35
8. Nwachukwu BU, McCormick FM, Schairer WW, Frank
36
RM, Provencher MT, Roche MW. Unicompartmental
37
knee arthroplasty versus high tibial osteotomy: United
38
States practice patterns for the surgical treatment
39
of unicompartmental arthritis. J Arthroplasty. 2014;
40
29(8):1586-9.
41
9. Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner JD. Osteotomy around
42
the knee vs. Unicondylar knee replacement. Orthopade.
43
2014; 43(10):923-9.
44
10. Brouwer RW, Jakma TS, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Verhagen
45
AP, Verhaar J. Osteotomy for treating knee
46
osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;
47
(1):CD004019.
48
11. Brouwer RW, Raaij van TM, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Verhagen
49
AP, Jakma TS, Verhaar JA. Osteotomy for treating
50
knee osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
51
2007; (3):CD004019.
52
12. Brouwer RW, Huizinga MR, Duivenvoorden T, van
53
Raaij TM, Verhagen AP, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, et al.
54
Osteotomy for treating knee osteoarthritis. Cochrane
55
Database Syst Rev. 2014; 12:CD004019.
56
13. Kim SJ, Koh YG, Chun YM, Kim YC, Park YS, Sung CH. Medial
57
opening wedge high-tibial osteotomy using a kinematic
58
navigation system versus a conventional method:
59
a 1-year retrospective, comparative study. Knee Surg
60
Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009; 17(2):128-34.
61
14. Ducat A, Sariali E, Lebel B, Mertl P, Hernigou P,
62
Flecher X, et al. Posterior tibial slope changes after
63
opening- and closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy: a
64
comparative prospective multicenter study. Orthop
65
Traumatol Surg Res. 2012; 98(1):68-74.
66
15. Bastos Filho R, Magnussen RA, Duthon V, Demey G,
67
Servien E, Granjeiro JM, et al. Total knee arthroplasty
68
after high tibial osteotomy: a comparison of opening
69
and closing wedge osteotomy. Int Orthop. 2013;
70
37(3):427-31.
71
16. Atrey A, Morison Z, Tosounidis T, Tunggal J, Waddell
72
JP. Complications of closing wedge high tibial
73
osteotomies for unicompartmental osteoarthritis of
74
the knee. Bone Joint Res. 2012; 1(9):205-9.
75
17. King-Martínez AC, Cuéllar-Avaroma A, Pérez-Correa
76
J, Torres-González R, Guevara-López U. High tibial
77
dome osteotomy complications in genu varum
78
patients. Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc. 2007;
79
45(2):111-6.
80
18. Saragaglia D, Rouchy RC, Krayan A, Refaie R.
81
Return to sports after valgus osteotomy of the knee
82
joint in patients with medial unicompartmental
83
osteoarthritis. Int Orthop. 2014; 38(10):2109-14.
84
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Predicting the Hamstring Tendon Diameter Using Anthropometric Parameters
Background: Despite the importance of hamstring tendon autograft, one major disadvantage in applying this technique in the surgical reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament is individual variability in the tendon diameter. Hence, the purpose of the present study was to use anthropometric parameters such as gender, height and body mass index to predict 4-strand (quadruple) hamstring tendons (gracilis and 2-strand semitendinosus tendons). Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted on all consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction between 2013 and 2015. The anthropometric variables (age, gender, height, and body mass index) were recorded. The quadruple hamstring tendon (gracilis and semitendinosus) autografts were measured using sizing cylinders. The relationship between these parameters was statistically determined using the Pearson Spearman test and linear regression test. Results: The mean age of the 178 patients eligible for the study was 29.58±9.93 (118 males and 60 females). The mean hamstring tendon diameter was 7.8±0.7 mm, the mean for males was 7.9±0.6 and for females 7.89± mm (P=0.0001). There were significant correlations between the mean hamstring tendon diameter with BMI (Pearson correlation=0.375, R2=0.380, and P=0.0001), height (Pearson correlation=0.441, R2=0.121, and P=0.0001), and weight (Pearson correlation=0.528, R2= -0.104 and P=0.0001). However,patient’s age and genderwerenot found to be a predictor of the size of the hamstring tendon diameter. Conclusion: Based on findings from this study weight, height, body mass index,and the length of the tendon may be predictors of the hamstring tendon diameter for anterior cruciate ligamentreconstruction. These findings could be used in preoperative planning of patients undergoing ACL reconstruction surgery to estimate the size of the graft and select of the appropriate type of graft.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7535_ec7525bf1bfee41d908cf513600a6a18.pdf
2016-10-01
314
317
10.22038/abjs.2016.7535
anterior cruciate ligament
Anthropometric parameters
Body mass index
Hamstring tendon
Mohsen
Mardani-Kivi
mardani.kivi@gmail.com
1
Guilan Road Trauma Research Center, Poursina Hospital,
Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
AUTHOR
Mahmoud
Karimi-Mobarakeh
drkarimi_m@yahoo.com
2
Kerman University of medical sciencesOrthopedic Department, Bahonar Hospital, Kerman
University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
AUTHOR
Ahmadreza
Mirbolook
ahmadreza.mirblok@gmail.com
3
Orthopedic Research Center, Poursina Hospital, Guilan
University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
AUTHOR
Sohrab
Keyhani
sohrab_keyhani4@yahoo.com
4
Orthopedics Department, School of Medicine, Shahid
Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Khashayar
Saheb-Ekhtiari
dr.khashi@gmail.com
5
Guilan Road Trauma Research Center, Poursina Hospital,
Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Keyvan
Hashemi-Motlagh
dr.keyvan.hashemi@gmail.com
6
Guilan Road Trauma Research Center, Poursina Hospital,
Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
AUTHOR
Parham
Porteghali
parham.porteghali@gmail.com
7
Orthopedic Research Center, Poursina Hospital, Guilan
University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
AUTHOR
1. Beyzadeoglu T, Akgun U, Tasdelen N, Karahan M.
1
Prediction of semitendinosus and gracilis autograft
2
sizes for ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports
3
Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012; 20(7):1293-7.
4
2. Stergios PG, Georgios KA, Konstantinos N, Efthymia P,
5
Nikolaos K, Alexandros PG. Adequacy of semitendinosus
6
tendon alone for anterior cruciate ligament
7
reconstruction graft and prediction of hamstring graft
8
size by evaluating simple anthropometric parameters.
9
Anat Res Int. 2012; 2012(2012):1-8.
10
3. Alentorn-Geli E, Samitier G, Alvarez P, Steinbacher
11
G, Cugat R. Anteromedial portal versus transtibial
12
drilling techniques in ACL reconstruction: a blinded
13
cross-sectional study at two- to five-year follow-up.
14
Int Orthop. 2010; 34(5):747-54.
15
4. Farshad M, Gerber C, Meyer DC, Schwab A, Blank PR,
16
Szucs T. Reconstruction versus conservative treatment
17
after rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament: cost
18
effectiveness analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;
19
11(1):317-26.
20
5. Ma CB, Keifa E, Dunn W, Fu FH, Harner CD. Can preoperative
21
measures predict quadruple hamstring
22
graft diameter? Knee. 2010; 17(1):81-3.
23
6. Xie G, Huangfu X, Zhao J. Prediction of the graft size
24
of 4-stranded semitendinosus tendon and 4-stranded
25
gracilis tendon for anterior cruciate ligament
26
reconstruction: a Chinese Han patient study. Am J
27
Sports Med. 2012; 40(5):1161-6.
28
7. Schwartzberg R, Burkhart B, Lariviere C. Prediction
29
of hamstring tendon autograft diameter and length
30
for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J
31
Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2008; 37(3):157-9.
32
8. Wernecke G, Harris IA, Houang MT, Seeto BG, Chen
33
DB, MacDessi SJ. Using magnetic resonance imaging
34
to predict adequate graft diameters for autologous
35
hamstring double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament
36
reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2011; 27(8):1055-9.
37
9. Thomas S, Bhattacharya R, Saltikov JB, Kramer
38
DJ. Influence of anthropometric features on graft
39
diameter in ACL reconstruction. Arch Orthop Trauma
40
Surg. 2013; 133(2):215-8.
41
10. Treme G, Diduch DR, Billante MJ, Miller MD, Hart JM.
42
Hamstring graft size prediction: a prospective clinical
43
evaluation. Am J Sports Med. 2008; 36(11):2204-9.
44
11. Tuman JM, Diduch DR, Rubino LJ, Baumfeld JA, Nguyen
45
HS, Hart JM. Predictors for hamstring graft diameter
46
in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J
47
Sports Med. 2007; 35(11):1945-9.
48
12. Brittberg M, Aglietti P, Gambardella R. ICRS cartilage
49
injury evaluation package. Switzerland: International
50
Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS); 2000.
51
13. Mardani-Kivi M, Madadi F, Keyhani S, Karimi-Mobarake
52
M, Hashemi-Motlagh K, Saheb-Ekhtiari K. Anteromedial
53
portal vs. Transtibial techniques for drilling
54
femoral tunnel in ACL reconstruction using 4-strand
55
hamstring tendon: a cross-sectional study with 1-year
56
follow-up. Med Sci Monit. 2012;18(11):CR674-9.
57
14. Karimi-Mobarakeh M, Mardani-Kivi M, Mortazavi A,
58
Saheb-Ekhtiari K, Hashemi-Motlagh K. Role of gracilis
59
harvesting in four-strand hamstring tendon anterior
60
cruciate ligament reconstruction: a double-blinded
61
prospective randomized clinical trial. Knee Surg
62
Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23(4):1086-91.
63
15. Wotherspoon SD, Giffin JR, Fowler PJ, Litchfield RB,
64
Neligan M, Willits KR. Prediction of anterior cruciate
65
ligament hamstring autograft size using preoperative
66
magnetic resonance imaging. Orthp Proc. 2009;
67
91(Suppl II):241.
68
16. Conte EJ, Hyatt AE, Gatt CJJr, Dhawan A.Hamstring
69
autograft size can be predicted and is a potential risk
70
factor for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
71
failure. Arthroscopy. 2014;30(7):882-90.
72
17. Bickel BA, Fowler TT, Mowbray JG, Adler B, Klingele
73
K, Phillips G. Preoperative magnetic resonance
74
imaging cross-sectional area for the measurement of
75
hamstring autograft diameter for reconstruction of the
76
adolescent anterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopy.
77
2008; 24(12):1336-41.
78
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Proximity of Vital Structures to the Clavicle: Comparison of Fractured and Non-fractured Side
Background: Previous anatomic and radiological studies have described the relationship of the clavicle to major neurovascular structures in healthy subjects. We were curious about this relationship in patients with a clavicle fracture and if it is different from non-fractured clavicles. Methods: We retrospectively identified all patients with a clavicle fracture between July 2001 and October 2013 in two level 1 trauma centers. Patients aged 18 years or greater with an acute unilateral clavicle fracture and a chest CT scan in the supine position displaying both clavicles and the complete fracture were included. Seventy patients were available for study. The distance was measured from the fracture site and from the closest clavicular cortex to the closest major artery, major vein, and inner surface of the thoracic cavity. CT data was evaluated in OsiriX DICOM viewer software with the use of three-dimensional Multiplanar Reconstruction. Results: Compared to the fractured side, the clavicle was significantly closer to the artery and vein on the non-fractured side (PP=0.0025 respectively). There was a significant difference in the median distance of the fracture site to the artery, vein, and inner surface of thoracic cavity between the different types of fractures (P<0.001). A post-hoc comparison showed significant differences in all distances between fracture types, except for the distance of proximal third compared to middle third fractures to the closest artery (P=0.41). There was no significant difference in distance when the arm is up overhead compared to down by the side of the body in computed tomography (CT) scans. Conclusions: A fracture of the clavicle changes the relationship of the clavicle to major vital structures. The minimum distance of the clavicle to the closest artery and vein is significantly less on the non-fractured side, compared to the fractured side.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_6698_896799aa03f4eccde9c562347ee46914.pdf
2016-10-01
318
322
10.22038/abjs.2016.6698
Clavicle
Computed Tomography
distance
Fracture
Vital structures
Frans
Mulder
f.j.mulder@student.vu.nl
1
Hand and Upper Extremity Service, Department of
Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital,
Boston, MA, USA
AUTHOR
Jos
Mellema
josjmellema@gmail.com
2
Hand and Upper Extremity Service, Department of
Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital,
Boston, MA, USA
AUTHOR
David
Ring
david.ring@austin.utexas.edu
3
Department of Surgery and Perioperative
Care, Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin,
Texas, USA; 1400 Barbara Jordan Blvd. Suite 2.834; MC: R1800, Austin,
TX 78723
LEAD_AUTHOR
1. Allman FL Jr. Fractures and ligamentous injuries of
1
the clavicle and its articulation. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2
1967; 49(4):774-84.
3
2. Liu GD, Tong SL, Ou S, Zhou LS, Fei J, Nan GX, et
4
al. Operative versus non-operative treatment for
5
clavicle fracture: a meta-analysis. Int Orthop. 2013;
6
37(8):1495-500.
7
3. Khan LA, Bradnock TJ, Scott C, Robinson CM.
8
Fractures of the clavicle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;
9
91(2):447-60.
10
4. Qin D, Zhang Q, Zhang YZ, Pan JS, Chen W. Safe
11
drilling angles and depths for plate-screw fixation
12
of the clavicle: avoidance of inadvertent iatrogenic
13
subclavian neurovascular bundle injury. J Trauma.
14
2010; 69(1):162-8.
15
5. Sinha A, Edwin J, Sreeharsha B, Bhalaik V, Brownson
16
P. A radiological study to define safe zones for drilling
17
during plating of clavicle fractures. J Bone Joint Surg
18
Br. 2011; 93(9):1247-52.
19
6. Werner SD, Reed J, Hanson T, Jaeblon T. Anatomic
20
relationships after instrumentation of the midshaft
21
clavicle with 3.5-mm reconstruction plating: an
22
anatomic study. J Orthop Trauma. 2011; 25(11):657-
23
7. Hussey MM, Chen Y, Fajardo RA, Dutta AK. Analysis of
24
neurovascular safety between superior and anterior
25
plating techniques of clavicle fractures. J Orthop
26
Trauma. 2013; 27(11):627-32.
27
8. Lo EY, Eastman J, Tseng S, Lee MA, Yoo BJ.
28
Neurovascular risks of anteroinferior clavicular
29
plating. Orthopedics. 2010; 33(1):21.
30
9. Shrout PE. Measurement reliability and agreement
31
in psychiatry. Stat Methods Med Res. 1998; 7(3):301-
32
10. Kubo T, Lin PJ, Stiller W, Takahashi M, Kauczor HU,
33
Ohno Y, et al. Radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a
34
review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 190(2):335-43.
35
11. Van de Velde J, Audenaert E, Speleers B, Vercauteren
36
T, Mulliez T, Vandemaele P, et al. An anatomically
37
validated brachial plexus contouring method for
38
intensity modulated radiation therapy planning. Int
39
J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 87(4):802-8.
40
12. Yates DW. Complications of fractures of the clavicle.
41
Injury. 1976; 7(3):189-93.
42
13. Lohse GR, Lee DH. Clavicle fracture with intrathoracic
43
displacement. Orthopedics. 2013; 36(8):e1099-102.
44
14. Barbier O, Malghem J, Delaere O, Vande Berg B,
45
Rombouts JJ. Injury to the brachial plexus by a
46
fragment of bone after fracture of the clavicle. J Bone
47
Joint Surg Br. 1997; 79(4):534-6.
48
15. Kachooei AR, Badiei Z, Zandinezhad ME,
49
Ebrahimzadeh MH, Mazloumi SM, Omidi-Kashani F,
50
et al. Influencing factors on the functional level of
51
haemophilic patients assessed by FISH. Haemophilia.
52
2014; 20(2):185-9.
53
16. Faisham WI, Mohammad P, Juhara H, Munirah NM,
54
Shamsulkamaruljan H, Ziyadi GM. Clavicle fracture
55
and subclavian vessels disruption with massive
56
haemothorax mimic intrathoracic injury. Malays J
57
Med Sci. 2011; 18(2):74-7.
58
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Potential Role of Local Estrogen in Enhancement of Fracture Healing: Preclinical Study in Rabbits
Background: Effects of estrogen on bone metabolism and its protective role on prevention of osteoporosis are well documented. However, the efficacy of estrogen treatment on bone healing is not well investigated. The drug can be delivered both systemically or locally to the bone with differences in concentrations and side effects. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of local and systemic administration of estrogen on the fracture healing process. Methods: Standardized tibial fractures with 4 millimeter gaps were created in twenty four adult male Dutch rabbits. Fractures were fixed using intramedullary wires and long leg casts. Rabbits were randomly divided into three groups. Group A was treated with twice a week administration of long acting systemic estrogen; group B was treated with a similar regimen given locally at the fracture gap; and group C received sham normal saline injections (control). Fracture healing was assessed at six weeks post fracture by gross examination, radiographic and histomorphometric analysis. Results: Group B had significantly higher gross stability, radiographic union and gap reduction than the two other groups. Histomorphometric analysis showed higher cartilaginous proportion of periosteal callus area in the control group. Conclusions: Our results showed that estrogen may enhance fracture healing of long bone in rabbits. Furthermore, local estrogen treatment might have better effect than systemic treatment.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7536_c07bbbf20b342f7ce13da732756299ec.pdf
2016-10-01
323
329
10.22038/abjs.2016.7536
Local estrogen
Fracture healing
Preclinical study
Rabbit
Mohammad
Tahami
mohammad.tahami@yahoo.com
1
Bone and Joint Research Centre, Shiraz University of
Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Behrooz
Haddad
behrooz.haddad@gmail.com
2
University College London Hospital, 235 Euston Road,
London, NW1 2BU UK
AUTHOR
Armin
Abtahian
armin_abtahian@yahoo.com
3
Bone and Joint Research Centre, Shiraz University of
Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
AUTHOR
Ali
Hashemi
sahashemi1411@gmail.com
4
Bone and Joint Research Centre, Shiraz University of
Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
AUTHOR
Amir
Aminian
amir_aminian@yahoo.com
5
Bone and Joint Research Centre, Shiraz University of
Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
AUTHOR
Sujith
Konan
mt94057@gmail.com
6
University College London Hospital, 235 Euston Road,
London, NW1 2BU UK
AUTHOR
1. Buckwalter JA, Glimcher MJ, Cooper RR, Recker
1
R. Bone biology. I: Structure, blood supply, cells,
2
matrix, and mineralization. Instr Course Lect. 1996;
3
45(1):371-86.
4
2. Buckwalter JA, Glimcher MJ, Cooper RR, Recker
5
R. Bone biology. II: Formation, form, modeling,
6
remodeling, and regulation of cell function. Instr
7
Course Lect. 1996; 45(8):387-99.
8
3. Monroe DG, Secreto FJ, Spelsberg TC. Overview of
9
estrogen action in osteoblasts: role of the ligand,
10
the receptor, and the co-regulators. J Musculoskelet
11
Neuronal Interact. 2003; 3(4):357-62.
12
4. Rath NC, Huff GR, Huff WE, Balog JM. Factors
13
regulating bone maturity and strength in poultry.
14
Poult Sci. 2000; 79(7):1024-32.
15
5. Ulstrup AK. Biomechanical concepts of fracture
16
healing in weight-bearing long bones. Acta Orthop
17
Belg. 2008; 74(3):291-302.
18
6. Tanaka H, Wakisaka A, Ogasa H, Kawai S, Liang CT.
19
Effect of IGF-I and PDGF administered in vivo on the
20
expression of osteoblast-related genes in old rats. J
21
Endocrinol. 2002; 174(1):63-70.
22
7. Leboy PS. Regulating bone growth and development
23
with bone morphogenetic proteins. Ann N Y Acad
24
Sci. 2006; 1068(1):14-8.
25
8. Vanderschueren D, van Herck E, Nijs J, Ederveen
26
AG, De Coster R, Bouillon R. Aromatase inhibition
27
impairs skeletal modeling and decreases bone
28
mineral density in growing male rats. Endocrinology.
29
1997; 138(6):2301-7.
30
9. Carani C, Qin K, Simoni M, Faustini-Fustini M,
31
Serpente S, Boyd J, et al. Effect of testosterone and
32
estradiol in a man with aromatase deficiency. N Engl
33
J Med. 1997; 337(2):91-5.
34
10. Lanyon L, Armstrong V, Ong D, Zaman G, Price
35
J. Is estrogen receptor alpha key to controlling
36
bones’ resistance to fracture? J Endocrinol. 2004;
37
182(2):183-91.
38
11. Bonnelye E, Aubin JE. Estrogen receptor-related
39
receptor alpha: a mediator of estrogen response in
40
bone. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005; 90(5):3115-21.
41
12. Nakamura T, Imai Y, Matsumoto T, Sato S, Takeuchi
42
K, Igarashi K, et al. Estrogen prevents bone loss via
43
estrogen receptor alpha and induction of Fas ligand
44
in osteoclasts. Cell. 2007; 130(5):811-23.
45
13. Suda T, Takahashi N, Udagawa N, Jimi E, Gillespie MT,
46
Martin TJ. Modulation of osteoclast differentiation
47
and function by the new members of the tumor
48
necrosis factor receptor and ligand families. Endocr
49
Rev. 1999; 20(3):345-57.
50
14. Raisz LG. Pathogenesis of osteoporosis: concepts,
51
conflicts, and prospects. J Clin Invest. 2005;
52
115(12):3318-25.
53
15. Bucay N, Sarosi I, Dunstan CR, Morony S, Tarpley
54
J, Capparelli C, et al. osteoprotegerin-deficient
55
mice develop early onset osteoporosis and arterial
56
calcification. Genes Dev. 1998; 12(9):1260-8.
57
16. Shevde NK, Bendixen AC, Dienger KM, Pike JW.
58
Estrogens suppress RANK ligand-induced osteoclast
59
differentiation via a stromal cell independent
60
mechanism involving c-Jun repression. Proc Natl
61
Acad Sci U S A. 2000; 97(14):7829-34.
62
17. Riggs BL, Khosla S, Melton LJ 3rd. Sex steroids and
63
the construction and conservation of the adult
64
skeleton. Endocr Rev. 2002; 23(3):279-302.
65
18. He YX, Liu Z, Pan XH, Tang T, Guo BS, Zheng LZ, et al.
66
Deletion of estrogen receptor beta accelerates early
67
stage of bone healing in a mouse osteotomy model.
68
Osteoporos Int. 2012; 23(1):377-89.
69
19. Beil FT, Barvencik F, Gebauer M, Beil B, Pogoda P,
70
Rueger JM, et al. Effects of increased bone formation
71
on fracture healing in mice. J Trauma. 2010;
72
70(4):857-62.
73
20. Monaghan BA, Kaplan FS, Lyttle CR, Fallon MD,
74
Boden SD, Haddad JG. Estrogen receptors in fracture
75
healing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992; 280:277-80.21.
76
21. Nissenson R, Fluoret G, Hechter O. Opposing effects
77
of estradiol and progesterone on oxytocin receptors
78
in rabbit uterus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1978;
79
75(4):2044-8.
80
22. Lin AD, Mannikarottu A, Kogan BA, Whitbeck C,
81
Chichester P, Leggett RE, et al. Estrogen induces
82
angiogenesis of the female rabbit bladder. J
83
Endocrinol. 2006; 190(2):241-6.
84
23. Negulesco JA, Eglitis JA. Effect of hypophysectomy
85
and estrogen treatment on long bone fracture
86
healing of young domestic fowls. Ohio J Sci. 1975;
87
75(5):217-22.
88
24. Stuermer EK, Sehmisch S, Rack T, Wenda E, Seidlova-
89
Wuttke D, Tezval M, et al. Estrogen and raloxifene
90
improve metaphyseal fracture healing in the early
91
phase of osteoporosis. A new fracture-healing model
92
at the tibia in rat. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2010;
93
395(2):163-72.
94
25. Ahmad MA, Kuhanendran D, Kamande IW,
95
Charalambides C. Accelerated tibial fracture union
96
in the third trimester of pregnancy: a case report. J
97
Med Case Rep. 2008; 2(1):44.
98
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Long-term Results, Functional Outcomes and Complications after Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Neglected and Displaced Greater Tuberosity of Humerus Fractures
Background: Humerus fractures include 5% to 8% of total fractures. Non-union and delayed union of GT (GT) fractures is uncommon; however they present a challenge to the orthopedic surgeons. Significant controversy surrounds optimal treatment of neglected fractures. The purpose of this article was to perform a comparative study to evaluate the outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of neglected GT fractures. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the results of surgical intervention in 12 patients with displaced nonunion of GT fractures who were referred to our center. Before and minimally 25 months after surgery ROM, muscle forces, Constant Shoulder Score (Constant-Murley score) (CSS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score were all recorded. Additionally, the results were compared with undamaged shoulder. Results: Between March 2006 and January 2013, 12 patients underwent surgical intervention and followed for 36.2 months in average. All fractures healed. Anatomic reduction achieved only in 6 cases with no report of avascular necrosis or infection. All ROMs and muscle forces increased significantly (Mean Forward Flexion: 49.16 to 153.3, Mean Internal Rotation: 3 to 9, Mean External Rotation: -5 to 27.5) (P value<0.0001). All functional scores including CSS, VAS, ADL and ASES score improved significantly (Mean VAS: 6.5 to 1.3, Mean CSS: 29.83 to 86, Mean ADL: 6.6 to 27.1, Mean ASES: 28.6 to 88.9) (P value<0.0001). Conclusion: ORIF for neglected and displaced GT fractures has satisfactory functional outcomes, despite of non-anatomical reduction of the fracture.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7540_534db9c53f2c4be49a5d81bec7b3f9b3.pdf
2016-10-01
330
336
10.22038/abjs.2016.7540
nonunion
greater tuberosity
Reduction
Shoulder fractures
Morteza
Nakhaei Amroodi
drmna@yahoo.com
1
Bone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Shafa Orthopedic Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Vahid
Behshad
vahidbehshad71@gmail.com
2
Bone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Shafa
Orthopedic Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences,
Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Paniz
Motaghi
paniz.motaqi@gmail.com
3
Iran University of Medical Scirences, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
1. Baron JA, Barrett JA, Karagas MR. The epidemiology
1
of peripheral fractures. Bone. 1996; 18(3
2
Suppl):209S–13.
3
2. Baron JA, Karagas M, Barrett J, Kniffin W, Malenka
4
D, Mayor M, et al. Basic epidemiology of fractures of
5
the upper and lower limb among Americans over 65
6
years of age. Epidemiology. 1996; 7(6):612-8.
7
3. Gerber C. Reconstructive surgery following malunion
8
of fractures of the proximal humerus in adults.
9
Orthopade. 1990; 19(6):316-23.
10
4. Boyle MJ, Youn SM, Frampton CM, Ball CM. Functional
11
outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty compared
12
with hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral
13
fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013; 22(1):32–7.
14
5. Carbone S, Tangari M, Gumina S, Postacchini R, Campi
15
A, Postacchini F. Percutaneous pinning of three- or
16
four-part fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly
17
patients in poor general condition: MIROS® versus
18
traditional pinning. Int Orthop. 2012; 36(6):1267–73.
19
6. Hardeman F, Bollars P, Donnelly M, Bellemans J, Nijs S.
20
Predictive factors for functional outcome and failure
21
in angular stable osteosynthesis of the proximal
22
humerus. Injury. 2012; 43(2):153–8.
23
7. Muncibì F, Paez DC, Matassi F, Carulli C, Nistri L,
24
Innocenti M. Long term results of percutaneous
25
fixation of proximal humerus fractures. Indian J
26
Orthop. 2012; 46(6):664–7.
27
8. Lu Y, Jiang C, Zhu Y, Wang M, Bowles RJ, Mauffrey
28
C. Delayed ORIF of proximal humerus fractures at
29
a minimum of 3 weeks from injury: a functional
30
outcome study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014;
31
24(5):715-21.
32
9. Siegel JA, Dines DM. Proximal humerus malunions.
33
Orthop Clin North Am. 2000; 31(1):35–50.
34
10. Healy WL, Jupiter JB, Kristiansen TK, White RR.
35
Nonunion of the proximal humerus. A review of 25
36
cases. J Orthop Trauma. 1990; 4(4):424–31.
37
11. Scheck M. Surgical treatment of nonunions of the
38
surgical neck of the humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
39
1982; 167(1):255–9.
40
12. Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM. Nonunions of the
41
proximal humerus: their prevalence and functional
42
outcome. J Trauma. 2008; 64(6):1517–21.
43
13. Dines DM, Warren RF, Altchek DW, Moeckel B.
44
Posttraumatic changes of the proximal humerus:
45
Malunion, nonunion, and osteonecrosis. Treatment with
46
modular hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty.
47
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1993; 2(1):11–21.
48
14. Boileau P, Chuinard C, Le Huec JC, Walch G, Trojani
49
C. Proximal humerus fracture sequelae: impact of a
50
new radiographic classification on arthroplasty. Clin
51
Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 442(2):121–30.
52
15. Boileau P, Krishnan SG, Tinsi L, Walch G, Coste JS, Mole
53
D. Tuberosity malposition and migration: reasons for
54
poor outcomes after hemiarthroplasty for displaced
55
fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow
56
Surg. 2002; 11(5):401–12.
57
16. Antuña SA, Sperling JW, Sánchez-Sotelo J, Cofield RH.
58
Shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral nonunions. J
59
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002; 11(2):114–21.
60
17. Pinkas D, Wanich TS, DePalma AA, Gruson KI. Management
61
of mal-union of the proximal humerus: current concepts.
62
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014; 22(8):491-502.
63
18. Duralde XA, Leddy LR. The results of ORIF of displaced
64
unstable proximal humeral fractures using a locking
65
plate. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010; 19(4):480-8.
66
19. Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of
67
functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop
68
Relat Res. 1987; 214(4):160–4.
69
20. 20) Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, Friedman RJ,
70
Gartsman GM, Gristina AG, et al. A standardized
71
method for the assessment of shoulder function. J
72
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1994; 3(6):347–52.
73
21. Paavolainen P, Bjorkenheim JM, Slatis P, Paukku P.
74
Operative treatment of severe proximal humeral
75
fracture. Acta Orthop Scand. 1983; 54(3):374-9.
76
22. Garg A, McQueen MM. Nerve injury after greater
77
tuberosity fracture dislocation. J Orthopaed Trauma.
78
2000; 14(2):117-8.
79
23. Martin TG, Iannotti JP. Reverse total shoulder
80
arthroplasty for acute fractures and failed
81
management after proximal humeral fractures.
82
Orthop Clin North Am. 2008; 39(4):451–7.
83
24. Beredjiklian PK, Iannotti JP, Norris TR, Williams GR.
84
Operative treatment of malunion of a fracture of the
85
proximal aspect of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
86
1998; 80(10):1484–97.
87
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Does Computed Tomography Change our Observation and Management of Fracture Non-Unions?
Background: The purpose of this study was to determine whether Multi-Detector Computed Tomography (MDCT) in addition to plain radiographs influences radiologists’ and orthopedic surgeons’ diagnosis and treatment plans for delayed unions and non-unions. Methods: A retrospective database of 32 non-unions was reviewed by 20 observers. On a scale of 1 to 5, observers rated on X-Ray and a subsequent Multi Detector Helical Computer Tomography (MDCT) scan was performed to determine the following categories: "healed", "bridging callus present", "persistent fracture line" or "surgery advised". Interobserver reliability in each category was calculated using the Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). The influence of the MDCT scan on the raters’ observations was determined in each case by subtracting the two scores of both time points. Results: All four categories show fair interobserver reliability when using plain radiographs. MDCT showed no improvement, the reliability was poor for the categories "bridging callus present" and "persistent fracture line", and fair for "healed" and "surgery advised". In none of the cases, MDCT led to a change of management from nonoperative to operative treatment or vice versa. For 18 out of 32 cases, the treatment plans did not alter. In seven cases MDCT led to operative treatment while on X-ray the treatment plan was undecided. Conclusion: In this study, the interobserver reliability of MDCT scan is not greater than conventional radiographs for determining non-union. However, a MDCT scan did lead to a more invasive approach in equivocal cases. Therefore a MDCT is only recommended for making treatment strategies in those cases.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7534_ade8b4dbffd2443678e5c5b0222e8482.pdf
2016-10-01
337
342
10.22038/abjs.2016.7534
Computed Tomography
Non-union
Fracture
Reliability
Ydo V.
Kleinlugtenbelt
ijdoklb@hotmail.com
1
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint
Research Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the
Netherlands.
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University,
Canada.
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery,
Deventer ziekenhuis, Deventer, the Netherlands
LEAD_AUTHOR
Vanessa A.B.
Scholtes
v.a.b.scholtes@olvg.nl
2
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint
Research Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the
Netherlands
AUTHOR
Jay
Toor
jtoor090@uottawa.ca
3
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University,
Canada
AUTHOR
Christian
Amaechi
c.amaechi@gmail.com
4
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint
Research Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the
Netherlands
AUTHOR
Mario
Maas
m.maas@amc.uva.nl
5
Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center,
University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
AUTHOR
Mohit
Bhandari
bhandam@mcmaster.ca
6
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University,
Canada
AUTHOR
Rudolf W.
Poolman
rwp@jointresearch.org
7
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Joint
Research Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the
Netherlands
AUTHOR
Peter
Kloen
p.kloen@amc.uva.nl
8
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Academic
Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the
Netherlands
AUTHOR
1. Krestan CR, Noske H, Vasilevska V, Weber M, Schueller
1
G, Imhof H, et al. MDCT versus digital radiography in
2
the evaluation of bone healing in orthopedic patients.
3
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186(6):1754-60.
4
2. Kuhlman JE, Fishman EK, Magid D, Scott WW Jr,
5
Brooker AF, Siegelman SS. Fracture nonunion:
6
CT assessment with multiplanar reconstruction.
7
Radiology. 1988; 167(2):483-8.
8
3. Bhandari M, Guyatt GH, Swiontkowski MF, Tornetta P
9
3rd, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH. A lack of consensus in
10
the assessment of fracture healing among orthopaedic
11
surgeons. J Orthop Trauma. 2002; 16(8):562-6.
12
4. Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP, Prevedello LM,
13
Nawfel RD, Hanson R, et al. Recurrent CT, cumulative
14
radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced
15
cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology. 2009;
16
251(1):175-84.
17
5. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography--an
18
increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med.
19
2007; 357(22):2277-84.
20
6. Ohashi K, El-Khoury GY, Bennett DL, Restrepo JM,
21
Berbaum KS. Orthopedic hardware complications
22
diagnosed with multi-detector row CT. Radiology.
23
2005; 237(2):570-7.
24
7. Karanicolas PJ, Bhandari M, Kreder H, Moroni A,
25
Richardson M, Walter SD, et al. Evaluating agreement:
26
conducting a reliability study. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
27
2009; 91(Suppl 3):99-106.
28
8. Giraudeau B, Mary JY. Planning a reproducibility
29
study: how many subjects and how many replicates
30
per subject for an expected width of the 95 per cent
31
confidence interval of the intraclass correlation
32
coefficient. Stat Med. 2001; 20(21):3205-14.
33
9. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb
34
for evaluating normed and standardized assessment
35
instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess . 1994;
36
6(4):284-290.
37
10. Bhandari M, Chiavaras MM, Parasu N, Choudur H,
38
Ayeni O, Chakravertty R, et al. Radiographic union score
39
for hip substantially improves agreement between
40
surgeons and radiologists. BMC Musculoskelet Disord.
41
2013; 14(1):1.
42
11. Whelan DB, Bhandari M, Stephen D, Kreder H, McKee
43
MD, Zdero R, et al. Development of the radiographic
44
union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of
45
tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation. J
46
Trauma. 2010; 68(3):629-32.
47
12. Buijze GA, Wijffels MM, Guitton TG, Grewal R, van Dijk
48
CN, Ring D, et al. Interobserver reliability of computed
49
tomography to diagnose scaphoid waist fracture
50
union. J Hand Surg Am. 2012; 7(2):250-4.
51
13. Grewal R, Frakash U, Osman S, McMurtry RY. A
52
quantitative definition of scaphoid union: determining
53
the inter-rater reliability of two techniques. J Orthop
54
Surg Res. 2013; 8(1):28-33.
55
14. Hannemann PF, Brouwers L, van der Zee D, Stadler
56
A, Gottgens KW, Weijers R, et al. Multiplanar
57
reconstruction computed tomography for diagnosis
58
of scaphoid waist fracture union: a prospective cohort
59
analysis of accuracy and precision. Skeletal Radiol.
60
2013; 42(10):1377-82.
61
15. Bhattacharyya T, Bouchard KA, Phadke A, Meigs JB,
62
Kassarjian A, Salamipour H. The accuracy of computed
63
tomography for the diagnosis of tibial nonunion. J
64
Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88(4):692-7.
65
16. Koller H, Kolb K, Zenner J, Reynolds J, Dvorak M,
66
Acosta F, et al. Study on accuracy and interobserver
67
reliability of the assessment of odontoid fracture
68
union using plain radiographs or CT scans. Eur Spine
69
J. 2009; 18(11):1659-68.
70
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Inter-observer agreement between 2-dimensional CT versus 3-dimensional I-Space model in the Diagnosis of Occult Scaphoid Fractures
Background: The I-Space is a radiological imaging system in which Computed Tomography (CT)-scans can be evaluated as a three dimensional hologram. The aim of this study is to analyze the value of virtual reality (I-Space) in diagnosing acute occult scaphoid fractures. Methods: A convenient cohort of 24 patients with a CT-scan from prior studies, without a scaphoid fracture on radiograph, yet high clinical suspicion of a fracture, were included in this study. CT-scans were evaluated in the I-Space by 7 observers of which 3 observers assessed the scans in the I-Space twice. The observers in this study assessed in the I-Space whether the patient had a scaphoid fracture. The kappa value was calculated for inter- and intra-observer agreement. Results: The Kappa value varied from 0.11 to 0.33 for the first assessment. For the three observers who assessed the CT-scans twice; observer 1 improved from a kappa of 0.33 to 0.50 (95% CI 0.26-0.74, P=0.01), observer 2 from 0.17 to 0.78 (95% CI 0.36-1.0, P<0.001), and observer 3 from 0.11 to 0.24 (95% CI 0.0-0.77, P=0.24). Conclusion: Following our findings the I-Space has a fast learning curve and has a potential place in the diagnostic modalities for suspected scaphoid fractures.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_6598_c4e2aaaa053f14447e94f165fad93eaa.pdf
2016-10-01
343
347
10.22038/abjs.2016.6598
3D Imaging
Occult fracture
Scaphoid
Virtual Reality
Tessa
Drijkoningen
tessa.drijkoningen@gmail.com
1
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
LEAD_AUTHOR
Robert
Knotter
rknotter@gmail.com
2
Emergency Department, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft,
The Netherlands
AUTHOR
Frank
J. Beeres
fjpbeeres@gmail.com
3
Surgery Department, Medisch Centrum Haaglanden, Den
Haag, The Netherlands
AUTHOR
Emile G.
Coerkamp
e.coerkamp@mchaaglanden.nl
4
Radiology Department, Medisch Centrum Haaglanden,
Den Haag, The Netherlands
AUTHOR
Anton H.J.
Koning
a.koning@erasmusmc.nl
5
Department of Bioinformatics, Erasmus MC University
Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
AUTHOR
Steven J.
Rhemrev
s.rhemrev@mchaaglanden.nl
6
Surgery Department, Medisch Centrum Haaglanden, Den
Haag, The Netherlands
AUTHOR
1. Rhemrev SJ, de Zwart AD, Kingma LM, Meylaerts
1
SA, Arndt JW, Schipper IB, et al. Early computed
2
tomography compared with bone scintigraphy in
3
suspected scaphoid fractures. Clin Nucl Med. 2010;
4
35(12):931-4.
5
2. Mallee WH, Wang J, Poolman RW, Kloen P, Maas M, de
6
Vet HC, et al. Computed tomography versus magnetic
7
resonance imaging versus bone scintigraphy for
8
clinically suspected scaphoid fractures in patients
9
with negative plain radiographs. Cochrane Database
10
Syst Rev. 2015; 5(6):CD010023.
11
3. Hannemann PF, Brouwers L, Dullaert K, van der
12
Linden ES, Poeze M, Brink PR. Determining scaphoid
13
waist fracture union by radiographic examination:
14
an analysis of reliability and validity. Arch Orthop
15
Trauma Surg. 2015; 135(2):291-6.
16
4. Timmermans L, Deerenberg EB, van Dijk SM, Lamme
17
B, Koning AH, Kleinrensink GJ, et al. Abdominal
18
rectus muscle atrophy and midline shift after
19
colostomy creation. Surgery. 2014; 155(4):696-701.
20
5. Meuffels DE, Potters JW, Koning AH, Brown CH Jr,
21
Verhaar JA, Reijman M. Visualization of postoperative
22
anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction bone
23
tunnels: reliability of standard radiographs, CT
24
scans, and 3D virtual reality images. Acta Orthop.
25
2011; 82(6):699-703.
26
6. van Adrichem LN, van Vlimmeren LA, Cadanová
27
D, Helders PJ, Engelbert RH, van Neck HJ, et al.
28
Validation of a simple method for measuring cranial
29
deformities (plagiocephalometry). J Craniofac Surg.
30
2008; 19(1):15-21.
31
7. Baken L, van Gruting IM, Steegers EA, van der Spek
32
PJ, Exalto N, Koning AH. Design and validation of a
33
3D virtual reality desktop system for sonographic
34
length and volume measurements in early pregnancy
35
evaluation. J Clin Ultrasound. 2015; 43(3):164-70.
36
8. Baken L, Rousian M, Koning AH, Bonsel GJ, Eggink
37
AJ, Cornette JM, et al. First-trimester detection
38
of surface abnormalities: a comparison of 2- and
39
3-dimensional ultrasound and 3-dimensional virtual
40
reality ultrasound. Reprod Sci. 2014; 21(8):993-9.
41
9. Rifouna MS, Reus AD, Koning AH, van der Spek
42
PJ, Exalto N, Steegers EA, et al. First trimester
43
trophoblast and placental bed vascular volume
44
measurements in IVF or IVF/ICSI pregnancies. Hum
45
Reprod. 2014; 29(12):2644-9.
46
10. Baken L, van Heesch PN, Wildschut HI, Koning AH,
47
van der Spek PJ, Steegers EA, et al. First-trimester
48
crown-rump length and embryonic volume of
49
aneuploid fetuses measured in virtual reality.
50
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 41(5):521-5.
51
11. Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver
52
agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med. 2005;
53
37(5):360-3.
54
12. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer
55
agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;
56
33(1):159-74.
57
13. Adey L, Souer JS, Lozano-Calderon S, Palmer W, Lee S,
58
Ring D. Computed tomography of suspected scaphoid
59
fractures. J Hand Surg Am. 2007; 32(1):61-6.
60
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
A Slightly Dorsally Tilted Lunate on MRI can be Considered Normal
Background: Abnormal angulation of the lunate can be an indication of intercarpal pathology. On magnetic resonance images (MRIs) the lunate often looks dorsally angulated, even in healthy wrists. The tilt on individual slices can also be different and might be misinterpreted as pathological, contributing to inaccurate diagnoses and unnecessary surgery. The primary aim of this study was to determine the average radiolunate angle on sagittal wrist MRI images as well as the radiolunate angle in the most radial, central and most ulnar part of the lunate; also the interobserver reliability was determined. Methods: 140 MRIs from adult, non-pregnant patients presenting to the outpatient hand and upper extremity service between 2010 and 2013 with wrist pain were used for this retrospective study. One author measured the radiolunate and capitolunate angle (i.e., tangential and axial method) in all MRIs. Additionally, two authors measured the same angles independently in 46 MRIs to analyze interobserver reliability. Results: The average radiolunate angle was 8.7 degrees dorsal. There were no significant differences in the radiolunate angles between the different parts of the lunate. A very good interrater agreement was measured considering the radiolunate angle and capitolunate angle (tangential and axial method). Conclusions: Our study showed that the lunate appears slightly dorsally angulated on an MRI of a healthy wrist. Regarding the radiolunate angle, 10 to 15 degrees of dorsal tilt can be considered normal. This study provides reference information of normal anatomy for carpal axial alignment that may facilitate diagnoses of wrist pathology.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_6139_d597237e44db6ea2b1ec94b28cdc0c2b.pdf
2016-10-01
348
352
10.22038/abjs.2015.6139
Capitolunate angle
Lunate bone
MRI
Radiolunate angle
Anne-Carolin
Doring
doring.ac@gmail.com
1
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service, Yawkey
Center, Suite 2100, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
MA, USA
LEAD_AUTHOR
Celeste L.
Overbeek
c.l.overbeek@umail.leidenuniv.nl
2
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service, Yawkey
Center, Suite 2100, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
MA, USA
AUTHOR
Teun
Teunis
teunteunis@gmail.com
3
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service, Yawkey
Center, Suite 2100, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
MA, USA
AUTHOR
Stéphanie J.E.
Becker
sjebecker@gmail.com
4
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service, Yawkey
Center, Suite 2100, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
MA, USA
AUTHOR
David
Ring
dring@mgh.harvard.edu
5
Chief Orthopaedic Hand Service, Yawkey Center, Suite
2100, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
AUTHOR
1. Nakamura R, Hori M, Imamura T, Horii E, Miura
1
T. Method for measurement and evaluation of
2
carpal bone angles. J Hand Surg Am. 1989;14(2 Pt
3
2. Smith DK, Gilula LA, Amadio PC. Dorsal lunate tilt
4
(DISI configuration): sign of scaphoid fracture
5
displacement. Radiology. 1990;176(2):497-9.
6
3. Timins ME, Jahnke JP, Krah SF, Erickson SJ, Carrera
7
GF. MR imaging of the major carpal stabilizing
8
ligaments: normal anatomy and clinical examples.
9
Radiographics. 1995;15(3):575-87.
10
4. Wolfe SW, Pederson WC, Hotchkiss RN, Kozin SH,
11
Cohen MS. Green’s Operative Hand Surgery. 6th ed.
12
Elsevier; 2011.
13
5. Rhee PC, Moran SL, Shin AY. Association between
14
lunate morphology and carpal collapse in cases
15
of scapholunate dissociation. J Hand Surg Am.
16
2009;34(9):1633-9.
17
6. Yang Z, Mann FA, Gilula LA, Haerr C, Larsen CF.
18
Scaphopisocapitate alignment: criterion to establish
19
a neutral lateral view of the wrist. Radiology.
20
1997;205(3):865-9.
21
7. Larsen CF, Mathiesen FK, Lindequist S.
22
Measurements of carpal bone angles on lateral wrist
23
radiographs. J Hand Surg Am. 1991;16(5):888-93.
24
8. Maizlin ZV, Vos PM. How to measure scapholunate
25
and Cobb’s angles on MRI and CT. J Digit
26
Imaging.25(4):558-61.
27
9. Larsen CF, Stigsby B, Lindequist S, Bellstrom T,
28
Mathiesen FK, Ipsen T. Observer variability in
29
measurements of carpal bone angles on lateral wrist
30
radiographs. J Hand Surg Am. 1991;16(5):893-8.
31
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Assessment of Decisional Conflict about the Treatment of Trigger Finger, Comparing Patients and Physicians
Background: As an early step in the development of a decision aid for idiopathic trigger finger (TF) we were interested in the level of decisional conflict experienced by patients and hand surgeons. This study tested the null hypothesis that there is no difference in decisional conflict between patients with one or more idiopathic trigger fingers and hand surgeons. Secondary analyses address the differences between patients and surgeons regarding the influence of the DCS-subcategories on the level of decisional conflict, as well as the influence of patient and physician demographics, the level of self-efficacy, and satisfaction with care on decisional conflict. Methods: One hundred and five hand surgeon-members of the Science of Variation Group (SOVG) and 84 patients with idiopathic TF completed the survey regarding the Decisional Conflict Scale. Patients also filled out the Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) and the Patient Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9). Results: On average, patients had decisional conflict comparable to physicians, but by specific category patients felt less informed and supported than physicians. The only factors associated with greater decisional conflict was the relationship between the patient and doctor. Conclusions: There is a low, but measurable level of decisional conflict among patients and surgeons regarding idiopathic trigger finger. Studies testing the ability of decision aids to reduce decisional conflict and improve patient empowerment and satisfaction with care are merited.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_6319_b91ecebd8e97081f76d99c171b3a2fa3.pdf
2016-10-01
353
358
10.22038/abjs.2016.6319
Assessment of Needs
Decisional Conflict Scale
Shared decision making
Trigger Finger
Michiel G.J.S.
Hageman
michielhageman@gmail.com
1
Yawkey Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
USA
AUTHOR
Anne Caroline
Döring
doring.ac@gmail.com
2
Yawkey Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
USA
AUTHOR
Silke A.
Spit
silkespit@gmail.com
3
Yawkey Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
USA
AUTHOR
Thierry G.
Guitton
guitton@gmail.com
4
Yawkey Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
USA
AUTHOR
David
Ring
david.ring@austin.utexas.edu
5
Chief Orthopaedic Hand
Service, Yawkey Center, Suite 2100, Massachusetts General
Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, USA
LEAD_AUTHOR
Science
Of Variation group
dring@mgh.harvard.edu
6
Yawkey Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston,
USA
AUTHOR
1. Shaw D, Elger B. Evidence-based persuasion: an
1
ethical imperative. JAMA. 2013; 309(16):1689-90.
2
2. Wennberg JE, Mulley AG Jr, Hanley D, Timothy
3
RP, Fowler FJ Jr, Roos NP, et al. An assessment of
4
prostatectomy for benign urinary tract obstruction.
5
Geographic variations and the evaluation of medical
6
care outcomes. JAMA. 1988; 259(20):3027-30.
7
3. Vranceanu AM, Cooper C, Ring D. Integrating patient
8
values into evidence-based practice: effective
9
communication for shared decision-making. Hand
10
Clin. 2009; 25(1):83-96.
11
4. Clark JP, Hudak PL, Hawker GA, Coyte PC, Mahomed
12
NN, Kreder HJ, et al. The moving target: a qualitative
13
study of elderly patients’ decision-making regarding
14
total joint replacement surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
15
2004; 86-A(7):1366-74.
16
5. Stacey D, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Col NF, Eden KB,
17
Holmes-Rovner M, et al. Decision aids for people facing
18
health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane
19
Database Syst Rev. 2011; 10(10):CD001431.
20
6. Legare F, O’Connor AM, Graham ID, Wells GA,
21
Tremblay S. Impact of the Ottawa Decision Support
22
Framework on the agreement and the difference
23
between patients’ and physicians’ decisional conflict.
24
Med Decis Making. 2006; 26(4):373-90.
25
7. Goel V, Sawka CA, Thiel EC, Gort EH, O’Connor AM.
26
Randomized trial of a patient decision aid for choice
27
of surgical treatment for breast cancer. Med Decis
28
Making. 2001; 21(1):1-6.
29
8. Knops AM, Goossens A, Ubbink DT, Legemate
30
DA, Stalpers LJ, Bossuyt PM. Interpreting patient
31
decisional conflict scores: behavior and emotions in
32
decisions about treatment. Med Decis Making. 2013;
33
33(1):78-84.
34
9. Elwyn G, O’Connor A, Stacey D, Volk R, Edwards A,
35
Coulter A, et al. Developing a quality criteria framework
36
for patient decision aids: online international Delphi
37
consensus process. BMJ. 2006; 333(7565):417.
38
10. Koedoot N, Molenaar S, Oosterveld P, Bakker P, de
39
Graeff A, Nooy M, et al. The decisional conflict scale:
40
further validation in two samples of Dutch oncology
41
patients. Patient Educ Couns. 2001; 45(3):187-93.
42
11. O’Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale.
43
Med Decis Making. 1995; 15(1):25-30.
44
12. O’Connor AM. User manual-Decisional conflict scale.
45
Available at: URL: http://decisionaidohrica/docs/
46
develop/User_Manuals/UM_Decisional_Conflictpdf;
47
13. Asghari A, Nicholas MK. Pain self-efficacy beliefs
48
and pain behaviour. A prospective study. Pain. 2001;
49
94(1):85-100.
50
14. Nicholas MK. The pain self-efficacy questionnaire:
51
Taking pain into account. Eur J Pain. 2007; 11(2):153-
52
15. Van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Van Oppen P, Van Marwijk
53
HW, De Beurs E, Van Dyck R. A patient-doctor
54
relationship questionnaire (PDRQ-9) in primary
55
care: development and psychometric evaluation. Gen
56
Hosp Psychiatry. 2004; 26(2):115-20.
57
16. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez
58
N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture
59
(REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and
60
workflow process for providing translational
61
research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;
62
42(2):377-81.
63
17. Obeid JS, McGraw CA, Minor BL, Conde JG, Pawluk R,
64
Lin M, et al. Procurement of shared data instruments
65
for Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). J
66
Biomed Inform. 2013; 46(2):259-65.
67
18. Goh AC, Kowalkowski MA, Bailey DE Jr, Kazer MW,
68
Knight SJ, Latini DM. Perception of cancer and
69
inconsistency in medical information are associated
70
with decisional conflict: a pilot study of men with
71
prostate cancer who undergo active surveillance.
72
BJU Int. 2012; 110(2 Pt 2):E50-6.
73
19. van Randenborgh A, de Jong-Meyer R, Huffmeier
74
J. Decision making in depression: differences in
75
decisional conflict between healthy and depressed
76
individuals. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2010;
77
17(4):285-98.
78
20. Salkovskis PM, Rimes KA, Warwick HM, Clark DM.
79
The Health Anxiety Inventory: development and
80
validation of scales for the measurement of health
81
anxiety and hypochondriasis. Psychol Med. 2002;
82
32(5):843-53.
83
21. Vranceanu AM, Safren S, Zhao M, Cowan J, Ring D.
84
Disability and psychologic distress in patients with
85
nonspecific and specific arm pain. Clin Orthop Relat
86
Res. 2008; 466(11):2820-6.
87
22. Vranceanu AM, Jupiter JB, Mudgal CS, Ring D.
88
Predictors of pain intensity and disability after minor
89
hand surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 2010; 35(6):956-60.
90
23. Vranceanu AM, Barsky A, Ring D. Psychosocial
91
aspects of disabling musculoskeletal pain. J Bone
92
Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91(8):2014-8.
93
24. Gruber JS, Hageman M, Neuhaus V, Mudgal CS, Jupiter
94
JB, Ring D. Patient activation and disability in upper
95
extremity illness. J Hand Surg. 2014; 39(7):1378-83
96
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Predictors of Upper-Extremity Physical Function in Older Adults
Background: Little is known about the influence of habitual participation in physical exercise and diet on upper-extremity physical function in older adults. To assess the relationship of general physical exercise and diet to upper-extremity physical function and pain intensity in older adults. Methods: A cohort of 111 patients 50 or older completed a sociodemographic survey, the Rapid Assessment of Physical Activity (RAPA), an 11-point ordinal pain intensity scale, a Mediterranean diet questionnaire, and three Patient- Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) based questionnaires: Pain Interference to measure inability to engage in activities due to pain, Upper-Extremity Physical Function, and Depression. Multivariable linear regression modeling was used to characterize the association of physical activity, diet, depression, and pain interference to pain intensity and upper-extremity function. Results: Higher general physical activity was associated with higher PROMIS Upper-Extremity Physical Function and lower pain intensity in bivariate analyses. Adherence to the Mediterranean diet did not correlate with PROMIS Upper-Extremity Physical Function or pain intensity in bivariate analysis. In multivariable analyses factors associated with higher PROMIS Upper-Extremity Physical Function were male sex, non-traumatic diagnosis and PROMIS Pain Interference, with the latter accounting for most of the observed variability (37%). Factors associated with greater pain intensity in multivariable analyses included fewer years of education and higher PROMIS Pain Interference. Conclusions: General physical activity and diet do not seem to be as strongly or directly associated with upper-extremity physical function as pain interference.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_6712_928fdfcc84a21f916693673733340269.pdf
2016-10-01
359
365
10.22038/abjs.2016.6712
Diet
Exercise
pain intensity
Pain interference
Upper-extremity physical function
Hugo H.
Hermanussen
hugohermanussen@gmail.com
1
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
AUTHOR
Mariano E.
Menendez
memenendez@partners.org
2
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
AUTHOR
Neal C.
Chen
nchen1@partners.org
3
Orthopaedic Hand and Upper Extremity Service
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
AUTHOR
David
Ring
david.ring@austin.utexas.edu
4
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA
LEAD_AUTHOR
Ana-Maria
Vranceanu
avranceanu@mgh.harvard.edu
5
Massachusetts General Hospital, Behavioral Med Services,
Boston, USA
AUTHOR
1. Menendez ME, Bot AG, Hageman MG, Neuhaus V,
1
Mudgal CS, Ring D. Computerized adaptive testing
2
of psychological factors: relation to upper-extremity
3
disability. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013; 95(20):e149.
4
2. Overbeek CL, Nota SP, Jayakumar P, Hageman MG,
5
Ring D. The PROMIS physical function correlates
6
with the QuickDASH in patients with upper extremity
7
illness. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473(1):311-7.
8
3. Ring D, Kadzielski J, Fabian L, Zurakowski D, Malhotra
9
LR, Jupiter JB. Self-reported upper extremity health
10
status correlates with depression. J Bone Joint Surg
11
Am. 2006; 88(9):1983-8.
12
4. Vranceanu AM, Jupiter JB, Mudgal CS, Ring D.
13
Predictors of pain intensity and disability after minor
14
hand surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 2010; 35(6):956-60.
15
5. Drewnowski A, Evans WJ. Nutrition, physical activity,
16
and quality of life in older adults: summary. J Gerontol
17
A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001; 56 (Suppl 2):89-94.
18
6. American College of Sports Medicine, Chodzko-Zajko
19
WJ, Proctor DN, Fiatarone Singh MA, Minson CT, Nigg
20
CR, et al. American college of sports medicine position
21
stand. Exercise and physical activity for older adults.
22
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009; 41(7):1510-30.
23
7. DiPietro L. The epidemiology of physical activity and
24
physical function in older people. Med Sci Sports
25
Exerc. 1996; 28(5):596-600.
26
8. Wen CP, Wai JP, Tsai MK, Yang YC, Cheng TY, Lee MC, et
27
al. Minimum amount of physical activity for reduced
28
mortality and extended life expectancy: a prospective
29
cohort study. Lancet. 2011; 378(9798):1244-53.
30
9. Brach JS, Simonsick EM, Kritchevsky S, Yaffe K,
31
Newman AB; Health, Aging and Body Composition
32
Study Research Group. The association between
33
physical function and lifestyle activity and exercise
34
in the health, aging and body composition study. J Am
35
Geriatr Soc. 2004; 52(4):502-9.
36
10. Miszko TA, Cress ME, Slade JM, Covey CJ, Agrawal SK,
37
Doerr CE. Effect of strength and power training on
38
physical function in community-dwelling older adults.
39
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2003; 58(2):171-5.
40
11. Cress ME, Buchner DM, Questad KA, Esselman PC,
41
deLateur BJ, Schwartz RS. Exercise: effects on physical
42
functional performance in independent older adults.
43
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1999; 54(5):M242-8.
44
12. Chandler JM, Hadley EC. Exercise to improve
45
physiologic and functional performance in old age.
46
Clin Geriatr Med. 1996; 12(4):761-84.
47
13. Kachooei AR, Moradi A, Janssen SJ, Ring D. The
48
influence of dominant limb involvement on DASH
49
and QuickDASH. Hand (N Y). 2015; 10(3):512-5.
50
14. Shahar DR, Houston DK, Hue TF, Lee JS, Sahyoun
51
NR, Tylavsky FA, et al. Adherence to mediterranean
52
diet and decline in walking speed over 8 years in
53
community-dwelling older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc.
54
2012; 60(10):1881-8.
55
15. Zbeida M, Goldsmith R, Shimony T, Vardi H, Naggan
56
L, Shahar DR. Mediterranean diet and functional
57
indicators among older adults in non-Mediterranean
58
and Mediterranean countries. J Nutr Health Aging.
59
2014; 18(4):411-8.
60
16. Gershon RC, Rothrock N, Hanrahan R, Bass M, Cella D.
61
The use of PROMIS and assessment center to deliver
62
patient-reported outcome measures in clinical
63
research. J Appl Meas. 2010; 11(3):304-14.
64
17. Henderson C, Evans-Lacko S, Flach C, Thornicroft G.
65
Responses to mental health stigma questions: the
66
importance of social desirability and data collection
67
method. Can J Psychiatry. 2012; 57(3):152-60.
68
18. Deshields TL, Tait RC, Gfeller JD, Chibnall JT.
69
Relationship between social desirability and selfreport
70
in chronic pain patients. Clin J Pain. 1995;
71
11(3):189-93.
72
19. Vega-Lopez S, Chavez A, Farr KJ, Ainsworth BE.
73
Validity and reliability of two brief physical activity
74
questionnaires among Spanish-speaking individuals
75
of Mexican descent. BMC Res Notes. 2014; 7:29-36.
76
20. Tyser AR, Beckmann J, Franklin JD, Cheng C, Hon
77
SD, Wang A, et al. Evaluation of the PROMIS physical
78
function computer adaptive test in the upper
79
extremity. J Hand Surg Am. 2014; 39(10):2047-51 e4.
80
21. Doring AC, Nota SP, Hageman MG, Ring DC.
81
Measurement of upper extremity disability using
82
the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement
83
Information System. J Hand Surg Am. 2014;
84
39(6):1160-5.
85
22. Vilagut G, Forero CG, Adroher ND, Olariu E, Cella D,
86
Alonso J, et al. Testing the PROMIS® Depression
87
measures for monitoring depression in a clinical sample
88
outside the US. J Psychiatr Res. 2015; 68:140-50.
89
23. Amtmann D, Cook KF, Jensen MP, Chen WH, Choi
90
S, Revicki D, et al. Development of a PROMIS item
91
bank to measure pain interference. Pain. 2010;
92
150(1):173-82.
93
24. Martinez-Gonzalez MA, Garcia-Arellano A, Toledo E,
94
Salas-Salvado J, Buil-Cosiales P, Corella D, et al. A 14-
95
item Mediterranean diet assessment tool and obesity
96
indexes among high-risk subjects: the PREDIMED
97
trial. PloS one. 2012; 7(8):e43134.
98
25. Lavrakas PJ. Encyclopedia of survey research methods.
99
California: Sage Publications; 2008. P. 660-1.
100
26. Galesic M, Bosnjak M. Effects of questionnaire length
101
on participation and indicators of response quality in a
102
web survey. Public Opin Quarter. 2009; 73(2):349-60.
103
27. Reiner M, Niermann C, Jekauc D, Woll A. Long-term
104
health benefits of physical activity--a systematic
105
review of longitudinal studies. BMC public health.
106
2013; 13:813-21.
107
28. Vranceanu AM, Hageman M, Strooker J, ter Meulen
108
D, Vrahas M, Ring D. A preliminary RCT of a mind
109
body skills based intervention addressing mood and
110
coping strategies in patients with acute orthopaedic
111
trauma. Injury. 2015; 46(4):552-7.
112
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Surgical Treatment of Tennis Elbow; Minimal Incision Technique
Background: When non-operative treatment of tennis elbow fails; a surgical procedure can be performed to improve the associated symptoms. Different surgical techniques for treatment of lateral epicondylitis are prescribed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of surgical treatment for tennis elbow based on small incision techniques. Methods: This technique was performed on 24 consecutive patients between June 2011 and July 2013. Outcomes were assessed using the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE), Nirschl’s staging system and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction criteria. Results: There were 15 female and 9 male patients in the study. The mean duration of symptoms before surgery was 3.7 years. The average duration of follow-up was 34.8 months. The post-operative outcome was good to excellent in most patients. The mean VAS score improved from 7.2 to 3.5 points. The total PRTEE improved from 68.7 to 15.8 points. Conclusion: This procedure provides a low complication rate which is associated with a high rate of patient satisfaction. Therefore, we suggest this option after failed conservative management of tennis elbow.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7539_581cefd4e687369ac734ecb76d9d5aee.pdf
2016-10-01
366
370
10.22038/abjs.2016.7539
Lateral epicondylitis
surgical technique
Tennis elbow
Morteza
Nakhaei Amroodi
drmna@yahoo.com
1
Shafa Orthopedic Hospital, Iran University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Ali
Mahmuudi
ali_mahmuudi@yahoo.com
2
Shafa Orthopedic Hospital, Iran University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Mostafa
Salariyeh
mostafa.salariye@gmail.com
3
Shafa Orthopedic Hospital, Iran University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Arash
Amiri
amiria49@yahoo.com
4
Shafa Orthopedic Hospital, Iran University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
1. Allander E. Prevalence, incidence, and remission
1
rates of some common rheumatic diseases or
2
syndromes. Scand J Rheumatol. 1974; 3(3):145-53.
3
2. Dorf ER, Chhabra AB, Golish SR, McGinty JL,
4
Pannunzio ME. Effect of elbow position on grip
5
strength in the evaluation of lateral epicondylitis. J
6
Hand Surg Am. 2007; 32(6):882-6.
7
3. Gruchow HW, Pelletier D. An epidemiologic
8
study of tennis elbow Incidence, recurrence, and
9
effectiveness of prevention strategies. Am J Sports
10
Med. 1979; 7(4):234-8.
11
4. Kraushaar BS, Nirschl RP. Tendinosis of the elbow
12
(tennis elbow). Clinical features and findings of
13
histological, immunohistochemical, and electron
14
microscopy studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;
15
81(2):259-78.
16
5. Major HP. Lawn-tennis elbow. Br Med J. 1883; 2(2):557.
17
6. Labelle H, Guibert R, Joncas J, Newman N, Fallaha M,
18
Rivard CH. Lack of scientific evidence for the treatment
19
of lateral epicondylitis of the elbow. An attempted metaanalysis.
20
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992; 74(5):646-51.
21
7. Coonrad RW, Hooper WR. Tennis elbow: its course,
22
natural history, conservative and surgical management.
23
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1973; 55(6):1177-82.
24
8. Boyd HB, Mcleod AC. Tennis elbow. J Bone Joint Surg
25
Am. 1973; 55(6):1183-7.
26
VAS improved from 9.2 before the operation to 0.64 after
27
the operation. On Nirschl’s scale, the patients presented
28
an improvement from a mean value of 6.5 before the
29
operation to approximately one. There were significant
30
differences between before to after the surgery for the
31
three used functional scores (P<0.01). No correlations
32
were observed using the Spearman test between the
33
results and age, gender, length of time with symptoms
34
before the operation or injury mechanism (P>0.05)
35
(26). Peart et al. compared the arthroscopic release
36
technique and the open technique. In their study, 54
37
patients underwent open release of the ECRB tendon
38
and 33 patients were operated arthroscopically. Of the
39
75 patients reviewed, there was no significant difference
40
in the functional results between the two groups.
41
However, the patients in the arthroscopic group were
42
able to return to work earlier and had fewer associated
43
postoperative treatments (27).
44
The limitation of this study was that an analysis was
45
not made based on a comparison with other methods of
46
anesthesia and surgical techniques. Such comparisons
47
should be performed in further studies.
48
24 elbows with lateral epicondylitis, which were
49
unresponsive to long-term conservative treatments, were
50
managed successfully with minimal incision technique
51
under general anesthesia. Overall, it is believed that this
52
procedure provides an effective treatment option that
53
reduces the time and expense required for conservative
54
treatments, and promotes a rapid return to work. In
55
addition, it is a relatively simple procedure, giving good
56
results for patients with chronic tennis elbow, with low
57
morbidity and early recovery.
58
9. Nirschl RP, Pettrone FA. Tennis elbow. The surgical
59
treatment of lateral epicondylitis. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
60
1979; 61(6):832-9.
61
10. Verhaar J, Walenkamp G, Kester A, van Mameren H, van
62
der Linden T. Lateral extensor release for tennis elbow.
63
A prospective long-term follow-up study. J Bone Joint
64
Surg Am. 1993; 75(7):1034-43.
65
11. Bosworth DM. Surgical treatment of tennis elbow;
66
a follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1965;
67
47(8):1533-6.
68
12. Moore Jr M. Radiohumeral synovitis, a cause of
69
persistent elbow pain. Surg Clin North Am. 1953;
70
33(5):1363-71.
71
13. Hughes ES. Acute deposition of calcium near the elbow.
72
Bone Joint J. 1950; 32(1):30-4.
73
14. Grundberg AB, Dobson JF. Percutaneous release of the
74
common extensor origin for tennis elbow. Clin Orthop
75
Relat Res. 2000; 376:137-40.
76
15. Baker CL Jr, Murphy KP, Gottlob CA, Curd DT.
77
Arthroscopic classification and treatment of lateral
78
epicondylitis: two-year clinical results. J Shoulder
79
Elbow Surg. 2000; 9(6):475-82.
80
16. 16. Nirschl RP. Elbow tendinosis/tennis elbow. Clin
81
Sports Med. 1992; 11(4):851-70.
82
17. Gellman H. Tennis elbow (lateral epicondylitis). Orthop
83
Clin North Am. 1992; 23(1):75-82.
84
18. 18. Kamien M. A rational management of tennis elbow.
85
Sports Med. 1990; 9(3):173-91.
86
19. Lo MY, Safran MR. Surgical treatment of lateral
87
epicondylitis: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat
88
Res. 2007; 463:98-106.
89
20. Szabo SJ, Savoie FH 3rd, Field LD, Ramsey JR, Hosemann
90
CD. Tendinosis of the extensor carpi radialis brevis: an
91
evaluation of three methods of operative treatment. J
92
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006; 15(6):721-7.
93
21. Inhyeo R, Chaei C, Gu SB, Wo KB, Kyo PH. Arthroscopic
94
treatment of the refractory lateral epicondylitis
95
and associated synovitis. J Shoulder Elbow Soc. 2005;
96
5(2):86-7.
97
22. Kim SJ, Park BM, Oh KS. Arthroscopic treatment of
98
lateral epicondylitis. J Korean Orthop Sports Med. 2007;
99
6(2):105-9.
100
23. Pannier S, Masquelet AC. Treatment of epicondylitis by
101
deep fasciotomy of the extensor carpi radialis brevis
102
and supinator: a review of 18 cases. Rev Chir Orthop
103
Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2002; 88(6):565-72
104
24. Leppilahti J, Raatikainen T, Pienimäki T, Hänninen
105
A, Jalovaara P. Surgical treatment of resistant tennis
106
elbow. A prospective, randomized study comparing
107
decompression of the posterior interosseous nerve
108
and lengthening of the tendon of the extensor carpi
109
radialis brevis muscle. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2001;
110
121(6):329-32.
111
25. Cho BK, Kim YM, Kim DS, Choi ES, Shon HC, Park KJ, et
112
al. Mini-open muscle resection procedure under local
113
anesthesia for lateral and medial epicondylitis. Clin
114
Orthop Surg. 2009; 1(3):123-7.
115
26. Terra BB, Rodrigues LM, Filho AN, de Almeida GD,
116
Cavatte JM, De Nadai A. Arthroscopic treatment for
117
chronic lateral epicondylitis. Rev Bras Ortop. 2015;
118
50(4):395-402.
119
27. Peart RE, Strickler SS, Schweitzer Jr KM. Lateral
120
epicondylitis: a comparative study of open and
121
arthroscopic lateral release. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead
122
NJ). 2004; 33(11):565-7.
123
28. Kachooei AR, Talaei-Khoei M, Faghfouri A, Ring
124
D. Factors associated with operative treatment of
125
enthesopathy of the extensor carpi radialis brevis
126
origin. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016; 25(4):666-70.
127
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Assessment of Diagnostic Value of Single View Dynamic Technique in Diagnosis of Developmental Dysplasia of Hip: A Comparison with Static and Dynamic Ultrasond Techniques
Background: Developmental dysplasia of hip (DDH) is a common childhood disorder, and ultrasonography examination is routinely used for screening purposes. In this study, we aimed to evaluate a modified combined static and dynamic ultrasound technique for the detection of DDH and to compare with the results of static and dynamic ultrasound techniques. Methods:In this cross-sectional study, during 2013- 2015, 300 high-risk infants were evaluated by ultrasound for DDH. Both hips were examined with three techniques: static, dynamic and single view static and dynamic technique. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 11.5. Results:Patients aged 9 days to 83 weeks. 75% of the patients were 1 to 3 months old. Among 600 hip joints, about 5% were immature in static sonography and almost all of them were unstable in dynamic techniques. 0.3% of morphologically normal hips were unstable in dynamic sonography and 9% of unstable hips had normal morphology. The mean β angle differences in coronal view before and after stress maneuver was 14.43±5.47° in unstable hips. Single view static and dynamic technique revealed that all cases with acetabular dysplasia, instability and dislocation, except two dislocations, were detected by dynamic transverse view. For two cases, Ortolani maneuver showed femoral head reversibility in dislocated hips. Using single view static and dynamic technique was indicative and applicable for detection of more than 99% of cases. Conclusion:Single view static and dynamic technique not only is a fast and easy technique, but also it is of high diagnostic value in assessment of DDH.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7045_81739a5ca4756378989b46d1a1f93a78.pdf
2016-10-01
371
375
10.22038/abjs.2016.7045
α and β angles Graf method
Bone Diseases
Developmental Ultrasonography
Hip Dislocation
Seyed Ali
Alamdaran
alamdarana@mums.ac.ir
1
Surgical Oncology Research Center, Faculty of Medicine,
Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical
Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad
University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Sahar
Kazemi
kazemis911@mums.ac.ir
2
Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad
University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Ali
Parsa
aliparsadr@yahoo.com
3
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical
Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Mohammad
Hallaj Moghadam
hallajm@mums.ac.ir
4
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical
Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Ali
Feyzi
feyzila@mums.ac.ir
5
Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad
University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Reza
Mardani
mardanir911@mums.ac.ir
6
Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad
University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
1. Rosendahl K, Toma P. Ultrasound in the diagnosis of
1
developmental dysplasia of the hip in newborns. The
2
European approach. A review of methods, accuracy
3
and clinical validity. Eur Radiol. 2007; 17(8):1960-7.
4
2. Lehmann HP, Hinton R, Developmental dysplasia of the
5
hip practice guideline: technical report. Committee
6
on Quality Improvement, and Subcommittee on
7
Developmental Dysplasia of the HipDevelopmental
8
dysplasia of the hip practice guideline: technical
9
report. Pediatrics. 2000; 105(4):E57.
10
3. Boeree NR, Clarke NM. Ultrasound imaging and
11
secondary screening for congenital dislocation of the
12
hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994; 76(4):525-33.
13
4. Harcke HT. Screening newborns for developmental
14
dysplasia of the hip: the role of sonography. AJR Am J
15
Roentgenol. 1994; 162(2):395-7.
16
5. Morin C, Harcke HT, MacEwen GD. The infant hip:
17
real-time US assessment of acetabular development.
18
Radiology. 1985; 157(3):673-7.
19
6. Keller MS, Weltin GG, Rattner Z, Taylor KJ, Rosenfield
20
NS. Normal instability of the hip in the neonate: US
21
standards. Radiology. 1988; 169(3):733-6.
22
7. Finnbogason T, Jorulf H, Söderman E, Rehnberg L.
23
Anterior dynamic ultrasound and Graf’s examination
24
in neonatal hip instability. Acta Radiol. 2008;
25
49(2):204-11.
26
8. Koşar P, Ergun E, Ü nlübay D, Koşar U. Comparison
27
of morphologic and dynamic US methods in
28
examination of the newborn hip. Diagn Interv Radiol.
29
2009; 15(4):284-9.
30
9. Rosendahl K, Markestad T, Lie R. Ultrasound in the
31
early diagnosis of congenital dislocation of the hip:
32
the significance of hip stability versus acetabular
33
morphology. Pediatr Radiol. 1992; 22(6):430-3.
34
10. Kosar P, Ergun E, Gökharman FD, Turgut AT, Kosar
35
U. Follow-up sonographic results for graf type 2A
36
hips association with risk factors for developmental
37
dysplasia of the hip and instability. J Ultrasound Med.
38
2011; 30(5):677-83.
39
11. Wientroub S, Grill F. Ultrasonography in developmental
40
dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;
41
82(7):1004.
42
12. Aronsson DD, Goldberg MJ, Kling TF, Roy DR.
43
Developmental dysplasia of the hip. Pediatrics. 1994;
44
94(2 Pt 1):201-8.
45
13. Dogruel H, Atalar H, Yavuz OY, Sayli U. Clinical
46
examination versus ultrasonography in detecting
47
developmental dysplasia of the hip. Int Orthop. 2008;
48
32(3):415-9.
49
14. Rosendahl K, Markestad T, Lie RT. Congenital
50
dislocation of the hip: a prospective study comparing
51
ultrasound and clinical examination. Acta Paediatr.
52
1992; 81(2):177-81.
53
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Assessment of Coronal Radiographic Parameters of the Spine in the Treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis
Background: To determine the most important preoperative factors that affect postoperative coronal parameters of scoliotic curves. Methods: All Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) patients included in the study were classified according to Lenke and King Classification. The fusion levels were selected according to the rigidity of the existing curves (correction less than 50%), tilt of T1 and shoulders, sagittal angle of the curves and with considering stable and neutral end vertebra. The radiographic coronal parameters: shoulders tilt angle, iliolumbar angle and coronal balance were measured in all patients before, after, and in the last follow- up visit. Results: One hundred twenty patients after mean of 25 months follow-up (18-40 months) were included in the study. Before operation, abnormal coronal balance (more than 2 cm shift) was noticed in 46 patents (38%) and in the last visit, was noted in 22 patients (18%). Multivariate regression analysis revealed a significant predictive value of the preoperative coronal balance on the last visit coronal balance (P value=0.01). Conclusion: Preoperative coronal balance is very important to make a balanced spine after surgery. Other parameters like Lenke classification or main thoracic overcorrection did not affect postoperative coronal decompensation.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7538_bd9bcdd503468ca7799faf8046256c77.pdf
2016-10-01
376
380
10.22038/abjs.2016.7538
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
Deformity
spine
Trunk balance
Mohsen
Karami
mn.karami@gmail.com
1
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Taleghani Hospital,
School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Arash
Maleki
arashmal@yahoo.com
2
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mofid Children
Hospital, School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University
of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
keyan
Mazda
keyvan.mazda@gmail.com
3
Robert Debre Hospital, Paris 7 University, Paris, France
AUTHOR
1. Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Baldus C, Blanke K.
1
Preventing decompensation in King type II curves
2
treated with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation.
3
Strict guidelines for selective thoracic fusion. Spine.
4
1992; 17(8 Suppl):274-81.
5
2. Frez R, Cheng JC, Wong EM. Longitudinal changes
6
in trunkal balance after selective fusion of King II
7
curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine.
8
2000; 25(11):1352-9.
9
3. Lenke CL. SRS Terminology committee and working
10
group on spinal classification. Revised Glossary of
11
Terms. Scoliosis Research Society, Milwaukee, US; 2000.
12
4. Harrington PR. Treatment of scoliosis. Correction
13
and internal fixation by spine instrumentation. J
14
Bone Joint Surg Am. 1962; 44(4):591-610.
15
5. Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J, Bridwell KH, Clements DH,
16
Lowe TG, et al. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a new
17
classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis.
18
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83(8):1169-81.
19
6. King HA. Selection of fusion levels for posterior
20
instrumentation and fusion in idiopathic scoliosis.
21
Orthop Clin North Am. 1988; 19(2):247-55.
22
7. Richards BS, Scaduto A, Vanderhave K, Browne R.
23
Assessment of trunk balance in thoracic scoliosis.
24
Spine. 2005; 30(14):1621-6.
25
8. Majdouline Y, Aubin CE, Robitaille M, Sarwark
26
JF, Labelle H. Scoliosis correction objectives in
27
adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop.
28
2007; 27(7):775-81.
29
9. McCance SE, Denis F, Lonstein JE, Winter RB. Coronal
30
and sagittal balance in surgically treated adolescent
31
idiopathic scoliosis with the King II curve pattern:
32
a review of 67 consecutive cases having selective
33
thoracic arthrodesis. Spine. 1998; 23(19):2063-73.
34
10. Demura S, Yaszay B, Bastrom TP, Carreau J, Newton
35
PO, Harms Study Group. Is decompensation
36
preoperatively a risk in Lenke 1C curves? Spine.
37
2013; 38(11):E649-55.
38
11. Moore MR, Baynham GC, Brown CW, Donaldson DH,
39
Odom JA Jr. Analysis of factors related to truncal
40
decompensation following Cotrel-Dubousset
41
instrumentation. J Spinal Disord. 1991; 4(2):188-92.
42
12. Gomez JA, Matsumoto H, Colacchio ND, Roye
43
DP, Sucato DJ, Richards BS, et al. Risk factors for
44
coronal decompensation after posterior spinal
45
instrumentation and fusion in adolescent idiopathic
46
scoliosis. Spine Deform. 2014; 2(5):380-5.
47
13. Chang KW, Chang KI, Wu CM. Enhanced Capacity
48
for spontaneous correction of lumbar curve in
49
the treatment of major thoracic–compensatory
50
C modifier lumbar curve pattern in idiopathic
51
scoliosis. Spine. 2007; 32(26):3020-9.
52
14. Arlet V, Marchesi D, Papin P, Aebi M. Decompensation
53
following scoliosis surgery: treatment by decreasing
54
the correction of the main thoracic curve or “letting
55
the spine go”. Eur Spine J. 2000; 9(2):156-60.
56
15. Liu Z, Guo J, Zhu Z, Qian B, Sun X, Xu L, et al. Role
57
of the upper and lowest instrumented vertebrae
58
in predicting the postoperative coronal balance in
59
Lenke 5C patients after selective posterior fusion.
60
Eur Spine J. 2013; 22(11):2392-8.
61
16. Ishikawa M, Cao K, Pang L, Watanabe K, Yagi M, Hosogane
62
N, et al. Postoperative behavior of thoracolumbar/
63
lumbar curve and coronal balance after posterior
64
thoracic fusion for Lenke 1C and 2C adolescent
65
idiopathic scoliosis. J Orthop Sci. 2015; 20(1):31-7.
66
17. Ward WT, Rihn JA, Solic J, Lee JY. A comparison of the
67
Lenke and King classification systems in the surgical
68
treatment of idiopathic thoracic scoliosis. Spine.
69
2008; 33(1):52-60.
70
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Spinopelvic Fixation of Sacroiliac Joint Fractures and Fracture-Dislocations: A Clinical 8 Years Follow-Up Study
Background: Pelvic ring injuries and sacroiliac dislocations have significant impacts on patient’s quality of life. Several techniques have been described for posterior pelvic fixation. The current study has been designed to evaluate the spinopelvic method of fixation for sacroiliac fractures and fracture-dislocations. Methods: Between January 2006 and December 2014, 14 patients with sacroiliac joint fractures, dislocation and fracture-dislocation were treated by Spinopelvic fixation at Shahid Sadoughi Training Hospital, Yazd, Iran. Patients were seen in follow up, on average, out to 32 months after surgery. Computed tomographic (CT) scans of patients with sacral fractures were reviewed to determine the presence of injuries. A functional assessment of the patients was performed using Majeed’s score. Patient demographics, reduction quality, loss of fixation, outcomes and complications, return to activity, and screw hardware characteristics are described Results: The injury was unilateral in 11 (78.5%) patients and bilateral in 3 (21.5%). Associated injuries were present in all patients, including fractures, dislocation and abdominal injuries. Lower limb length discrepancy was less than 10 mm in all patients except two. Displacement, as a measure of quality of reduction was less than 5 mm in 13 patients. The mean Majeed score was 78/100. Wound infection and hardware failure were observed in 3 (21.4%) and 1 (7.1%) cases, respectively. In this study most patients (85%) return to work postoperatively. Conclusion: According to the findings, spinopelvic fixation is a safe and effective technique for treatment of sacroiliac injuries. This method can obtain early partial to full weight bearing and possibly reduce the complications.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7537_55f95a94fd31840d57f0f3a81143e8a9.pdf
2016-10-01
381
386
10.22038/abjs.2016.7537
Dislocation
Fractures
Sacroiliac joint
Spinopelvic fixation
Mohammad R.
Sobhan
sobhanardakani@gmail.com
1
Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Shahid
Sadoughi Hospital, Yazd, Iran
AUTHOR
Seyed Mohammad J.
Abrisham
sobhanardakani@gmail.com
2
Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Shahid
Sadoughi Hospital, Yazd, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mahmood
Vakili
neamatzadehh@gmail.com
3
School of Medicine, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical
Sciences, Yazd, Iran
AUTHOR
Saeed
Shirdel
husen.karagunlu@gmail.co
4
Yazd University of Medical Sciences, Shahid Sadoughi
Hospital, Yazd, Iran
AUTHOR
1. Ayoub MA. Displaced spinopelvic dissociation with
1
sacral cauda equina syndrome: outcome of surgical
2
decompression with a preliminary management
3
algorithm. Eur Spine J. 2012; 21(9):1815-25.
4
2. Yi C, Hak DJ. Traumatic spinopelvic dissociation or
5
U-shaped sacral fracture: a review of the literature.
6
Injury. 2012; 43(4):402-8.
7
3. Bederman SS, Hassan JM, Shah KN, Kiester PD, Bhatia
8
NN, Zamorano DP. Fixation techniques for complex
9
traumatic transverse sacral fractures: a systematic
10
review. Spine. 2013; 38(16):E1028-40.
11
4. Zehtab M, Siavoshi B, Sadat MM, Sadrosadat
12
H. Evaluation of unstable pelvic fractures with
13
posterior plate fixationand external anterior fixator.
14
Iran J Surg. 2006; 14(4):1-8.
15
5. Hoffmann E, Lenoir T, Morel E, Levassor N, Rillardon
16
L, Guigui P. Posterior bridging osteosynthesis for
17
traumatic sacroiliac joint dislocation: a report of seven
18
cases. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2007; 18(1):47-53.
19
6. Bijlsma TS, Van der Werken C, Fernandez Dell’Oca A.
20
Transperitoneal screw fixation of the sacroiliac joint. J
21
Trauma. 2000; 49(1):152-5.
22
7. Simpson LA, Waddell JP, Leighton RK, Kellam JF, Tile M.
23
Anterior approach and stabilization of the disrupted
24
sacroiliac joint. J Trauma. 1987; 27(12):1332-9.
25
8. Kabak S, Halici M, Tuncel M, Avsarogullari L, Baktir
26
A, Basturk M. Functional outcome of open reduction
27
and internal fixation for completely unstable pelvic
28
ring fractures (type C): a report of 40 cases. J Orthop
29
Trauma. 2003; 17(8):555-62.
30
9. Dabezies EJ, Millet CW, Murphy CP, Acker JH,
31
Robicheaux RE, D’Ambrosia RD. Stabilization of
32
sacroiliac joint disruption with threaded compression
33
rods. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989(246):165-71.
34
10. Sar C, Kilicoglu O. S1 pediculoiliac screw fixation in
35
instabilities of the sacroiliac complex: biomechanical
36
study and report of two cases. J Orthop Trauma.
37
2003; 17(4):262-70.
38
11. Letournel E. Surgical fixation of displaced pelvic
39
fractures and dislocations of the symphysis pubis
40
(excluding acetabular fractures) (author’s transl).
41
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1981;
42
67(8):771-82.
43
12. Starr AJ, Walter JC, Harris RW, Reinert CM, Jones AL.
44
Percutaneous screw fixation of fractures of the iliac
45
wing and fracture-dislocations of the sacro-iliac joint
46
(OTA Types 61-B2.2 and 61-B2.3, or Young-Burgess
47
“lateral compression type II” pelvic fractures). J
48
OrthopTrauma. 2002; 16(2):116-23.
49
13. Abumi K, Saita M, Iida T, Kaneda K. Reduction
50
and fixation of sacroiliac joint dislocation by the
51
combined use of S1 pedicle screws and the galveston
52
technique. Spine. 2000; 25(15):1977-83.
53
14. Vasiliadis E, Polyzois VD, Grivas TB, Koinis A,
54
Malakasis M, Beltsios M. External fixation for acute
55
pelvic stabilisation as a definite method of treatment.
56
Orthop Proc. 2006; 88(Suppl I):160.
57
15. Canale ST, Beaty JH. Campbell’s operative
58
orthopedics. 12th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier
59
Health Sciences; 2012.
60
16. Majeed SA. Grading the outcome of pelvic fractures. J
61
Bone Joint Surg Br. 1989; 71(2):304-6.
62
17. Saigal R, Lau D, Wadhwa R, Le H, Khashan M, Berven
63
S, et al. Unilateral versus bilateral iliac screws for
64
spinopelvic fixation: are two screws better than one?
65
Neurosurg Focus. 2014; 36(5):E10.
66
18. Kuklo TR, Bridwell KH, Lewis SJ, Baldus C, Blanke
67
K, Iffrig TM, et al. Minimum 2-year analysis of
68
sacropelvic fixation and L5-S1 fusion using S1
69
and iliac screws. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;
70
26(18):1976-83.
71
19. Fridley J, Fahim D, Navarro J, Wolinsky JP, Omeis I.
72
Free-hand placement of iliac screws for spinopelvic
73
fixation based on anatomical landmarks: technical
74
note. Int J Spine Surg. 2014; 8(10):3.
75
20. Lindahl J, Mäkinen TJ, Koskinen SK, Söderlund T.
76
Factors associated with outcome of spinopelvic
77
dissociation treated with lumbopelvic fixation.
78
Injury. 2014; 45(12):1914-20.
79
21. Jones CB, Sietsema DL, Hoffmann MF. Can lumbopelvic
80
fixation salvage unstable complex sacral fractures?
81
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 470(8):2132-41.
82
22. Gibbons KJ, Soloniuk DS, Razack N. Neurological
83
injury and patterns of sacral fractures. J Neurosurg.
84
1990; 72(6):889-93.
85
23. Oh KJ, Hwang SM. Surgical fixation of sacroiliac joint
86
complex in unstable pelvic ring injuries. Hip Pelvis.
87
2012; 24(2):139-47.
88
24. Sagi HC, Militano U, Caron T, Lindvall E. A
89
comprehensive analysis with minimum 1-year
90
follow-up of vertically unstable transforaminal sacral
91
fractures treated with triangular osteosynthesis. J
92
Orthop Trauma. 2009; 23(5):313-9.
93
25. Zhu L, Wang L, Shen D, Ye TW, Zhao LY, Chen AM.
94
Treatment of pelvic fractures through a less invasive
95
ilioinguinal approach combined with a minimally
96
invasive posterior approach. BMC Musculoskelet
97
Disord. 2015; 16(1):167.
98
References
99
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) Questionnaire
Background: To validate the Persian version of the simple shoulder test in patients with shoulder joint problems. Methods: Following Beaton`s guideline, translation and back translation was conducted. We reached to a consensus on the Persian version of SST. To test the face validity in a pilot study, the Persian SST was administered to 20 individuals with shoulder joint conditions. We enrolled 148 consecutive patients with shoulder problem to fill the Persian SST, shoulder specific measure including Oxford shoulder score (OSS) and two general measures including DASH and SF-36. To measure the test-retest reliability, 42 patients were randomly asked to fill the Persian-SST for the second time after one week. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used to demonstrate internal consistency over the 12 items of Persian-SST. Results: ICC for the total questionnaire was 0.61 showing good and acceptable test-retest reliability. ICC for individual items ranged from 0.32 to 0.79. The total Cronbach’s alpha was 0.84 showing good internal consistency over the 12 items of the Persian-SST. Validity testing showed strong correlation between SST and OSS and DASH. The correlation with OSS was positive while with DASH scores was negative. The correlation was also good to strong with all physical and most mental subscales of the SF-36. Correlation coefficient was higher with DASH and OSS in compare to SF-36. Conclusion: Persian version of SST found to be valid and reliable instrument for shoulder joint pain and function assessment in Iranian population.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7545_85635e68417bdb37dab593e2818804f8.pdf
2016-10-01
387
392
10.22038/abjs.2016.7545
Persian
Reliability
Simple Shoulder Test
Validity
Mohammad H.
Ebrahimzadeh
ebrahimzadehmh@mums.ac.ir
1
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of
Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Ehsan
Vahedi
vahedie@mums.ac.ir
2
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of
Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Aslan
Baradaran
aslan.baradaran@gmail.com
3
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of
Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Ali
Birjandinejad
birjandinejada@mums.ac.ir
4
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of
Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Seyyed-Hadi
Seyyed-Hoseinian
shhoseinian@gmail.com
5
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of
Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Farshid
Bagheri
bagherif@mums.ac.ir
6
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of
Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Amir R.
Kachooei
arkachooei@gmail.com
7
Orthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of
Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
1. Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Smith P, Van Eerd D, Tang K,
1
Inrig T, et al. Measurement properties of the QuickDASH
2
(disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) outcome
3
measure and cross-cultural adaptations of the
4
QuickDASH: a systematic review. Qual Life Res. 2013;
5
22(9):2509-47.
6
2. Kachooei AR, Ebrahimzadeh MH, Erfani-Sayyar R,
7
Salehi M, Salimi E, Razi S. Short Form-McGill Pain
8
Questionnaire-2 (SF-MPQ-2): a cross-cultural adaptation
9
and validation study of the persian version in patients
10
with knee osteoarthritis. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2015;
11
3(1):45-50.
12
3. Ebrahimzadeh MH, Birjandinejad A, Golhasani F, Moradi
13
A, Vahedi E, Kachooei AR. Cross-cultural adaptation,
14
validation, and reliability testing of the Shoulder Pain and
15
Disability Index in the Persian population with shoulder
16
problems. Int J Rehabil Res. 2015; 38(1):84-7.
17
4. Ebrahimzadeh MH, Moradi A, Vahedi E, Kachooei AR,
18
Birjandinejad A. Validity and reliability of the persian
19
version of shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder and
20
hand questionnaire (Quick-DASH). Int J Prev Med. 2015;
21
5. Kachooei AR, Moradi A, Janssen SJ, Ring D. The
22
influence of dominant limb involvement on DASH and
23
QuickDASH. Hand (N Y). 2015; 10(3):512-5.
24
6. Lippitt SB, Harryman DT, Matsen FA, Fu FH, Hawkins
25
RJ. A practical tool for evaluating function: the simple
26
shoulder test. The shoulder: a balance of mobility
27
and stability. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of
28
Orthopaedic Surgeons; 1993. P. 501-18.
29
7. Van Kampen DA, van Beers LW, Scholtes VA, Terwee
30
CB, Willems WJ. Validation of the Dutch version of the
31
Simple Shoulder Test. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;
32
21(6):808-14.
33
8. Neto JO, Gesser RL, Steglich V, Bonilauri Ferreira AP,
34
Gandhi M, Vissoci JR, et al. Validation of the Simple
35
Shoulder Test in a Portuguese-Brazilian population.
36
Is the latent variable structure and validation of the
37
Simple Shoulder Test Stable across cultures? PloS
38
One. 2013; 8(5):e62890.
39
9. Membrilla-Mesa M, Tejero-Fernández V, Cuesta-
40
Vargas A, Arroyo-Morales M. Validation and reliability
41
of a Spanish version of Simple Shoulder Test (SST-Sp).
42
Qual Life Res. 2015; 24(2):411-6.
43
10. Marchese C, Cristalli G, Pichi B, Manciocco V, Mercante
44
G, Pellini R, et al. Italian cross-cultural adaptation and
45
validation of three different scales for the evaluation of
46
shoulder pain and dysfunction after neck dissection:
47
University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder
48
Scale, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and
49
Simple Shoulder Test (SST). Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital.
50
2012; 32(1):12-7.
51
11. Godfrey J, Hamman R, Lowenstein S, Briggs K, Kocher
52
M. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the simple
53
shoulder test: psychometric properties by age and injury
54
type. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007; 16(3):260-7.
55
12. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB.
56
Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of
57
self-report measures. Spine. 2000; 25(24):3186-91.
58
13. Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, Abedi M, Askary-Ashtiani
59
A, Karimi A, Khorsandi A, et al. Cultural adaptation and
60
validation of the Persian version of the Disabilities of the
61
Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) outcome measure. Clin
62
Rehabil. 2008; 22(8):749-57.
63
14. Montazeri A, Goshtasebi A, Vahdaninia M, Gandek B.
64
The Short Form Health Survey (SF-36): translation
65
and validation study of the Iranian version. Qual Life
66
Res. 2005; 14(3):875-82.
67
15. Kilinc AS, Ebrahimzadeh MH, Lafosse L. Subacromial
68
internal spacer for rotator cuff tendon repair: “the
69
balloon technique”. Arthroscopy. 2009;25(8):921-4.
70
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Arthroscopic Bridge Technique for PCL Avulsion: Surgical Technique and Key Points
This study redescribes an arthroscopic bridge technique for repair of avulsion of the posterior cruciate ligament. The procedure is performed step-to-step. In this technique we created two bone tunnels in the anterior aspect of the tibia and inferior medial of the tibia tuberosity and then create suture fixation of the fragment using the suture bridge. The arthroscopic bridge technique was used in 3 patients. All were satisfied and returned to activities. This technique is a safe and effective method of repair of PCL avulsion that allows active mobilization with minimal risk of complication
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_7542_a3dbadbe139f0f88ce647bbb68cbada4.pdf
2016-10-01
393
395
10.22038/abjs.2016.7542
ARTHROSCOPIC BRIDGE TECHNIQUE FOR PCL AVULSION: SURGICAL TECHNIQUE AND KEY POINTS
Seyed Taghi
Nourbakhsh
st.norbakhsh@gmail.com
1
Knee and Sport Medicine Research and Education Center,
Milad Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Fateme
Bahramian
fbahramian69@gmail.com
2
Knee and Sport Medicine Research and Education Center,
Milad Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Zohreh
Zafarani
zzafarani@yahoo.com
3
Knee and Sport Medicine Research and Education Center,
Milad Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Ardeshir
Alidousti
ardeshir.alidousti@yahoo.com
4
Medical Student Hormozgan University of Medical
Sciences, Knee and Sport Medicine Research and
Education Center, Milad Hospital, Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Hamidreza
Aslani
hraslani1342@gmail.om
5
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Knee and
Sport Medicine Education and Research Center, Tehran, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
1. Trickey E. Rupture of the posterior cruciate ligament
1
of the knee. J Bone Joint Surge Br. 1968;50(2):334-41.
2
2. Meyers M. Isolated avulsion of the tibial attachment
3
of the posterior cruciate ligament of the knee. J Bone
4
Joint Surg Am. 1975;57(5):669-72.
5
3. Rosenthal MD, Rainey CE, Tognoni A, Worms R. Evaluation
6
and management of posterior cruciate ligament injuries.
7
Physical Therapy in Sport. 2012;13(4):196-208.
8
4. Miyasaka K, Daniel D, Stone M, Hirshman P. The
9
incidence of knee ligament injuries in the general
10
population. Am J Knee Surg. 1991;4(1):3-8.
11
5. Schulz M, Russe K, Weiler A, Eichhorn H, Strobel
12
M. Epidemiology of posterior cruciate ligament
13
injuries. Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery.
14
2003;123(4):186-91.
15
6. Fanelli GC. Posterior cruciate ligament injuries
16
in trauma patients. Arthroscopy: The Journal of
17
Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 1993;9(3):291-4.
18
7. Fanelli GC. Posterior cruciate ligament rehabilitation:
19
how slow should we go? Arthroscopy: The Journal of
20
Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2008;24(2):234-5.
21
8. Lopez-Vidriero E, Simon DA, Johnson DH. Initial
22
evaluation of posterior cruciate ligament injuries:
23
history, physical examination, imaging studies, surgical
24
and nonsurgical indications. Sports medicine and
25
arthroscopy review. 2010;18(4):230-7.
26
9. Kakarlapudi TK, Bickerstaff DR. Topic in Review: Knee
27
instability: isolated and complex. Western Journal of
28
Medicine. 2001;174(4):266.
29
10. Yang C-K, Wu C-D, Chih C-J, Wei K-Y, Su C-C, Tsuang
30
Y-H. Surgical treatment of avulsion fracture of the
31
posterior cruciate ligament and postoperative
32
management. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care
33
Surgery. 2003;54(3):516-9.
34
11. Espejo-Baena A, López-Arévalo R, Urbano V, Montañez
35
E, Martín F. Arthroscopic repair of the posterior cruciate
36
ligament: Two techniques. Arthroscopy: The Journal of
37
Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2000;16(6):656-60.
38
12. Shino K, Nakata K, Mae T, Yamada Y, Shiozaki Y, Toritsuka
39
Y. Arthroscopic fixation of tibial bony avulsion of the
40
posterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopy: The Journal of
41
Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2003;19(2):1-5.
42
13. Veselko M, Saciri V. Posterior approach for arthroscopic
43
reduction and antegrade fixation of avulsion fracture
44
of the posterior cruciate ligament from the tibia
45
with cannulated screw and washer. Arthroscopy:
46
The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery.
47
2003;19(8):916-21.
48
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Complicated Congenital Dislocation of the Knee: A Case Report
Congenital dislocation of the knee (CDK) is a rare disorder. We report the case of a 7-year-old girl with bilateral knee stiffness, marked anterior bowing of both legs, and inability to walk without aid. Radiologic investigation revealed bilateral knee joint dislocation accompanied by severe anterior bowing of both tibia proximally and posterior bowing of both femur distally, demonstrating a complicated congenital knee dislocation. Two-staged open reduction with proximal tibial osteotomy was performed to align the reduced knee joints. The patient was completely independent in her daily activities after surgical correction.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_6711_12d971dfc64f4ab7c08426d4d1841367.pdf
2016-10-01
396
398
10.22038/abjs.2016.6711
Congenital knee dislocation
complication
Firooz
Madadi
fmedadi@sbmui.ir
1
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran,
Iran
AUTHOR
Mohammad A.
Tahririan
tahririan@med.mui.ac.ir
2
Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mohsen
Karami
mn.karami@gmail.com
3
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran,
Iran
AUTHOR
Firoozeh
Madadi
firoozehmadadi@yahoo.com
4
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran,
Iran
AUTHOR
1. Bensahel H, Dal Monte A, Hjelmstedt A, Bjerkreim I,
1
Wientroub S, Matasovic T, et al. Congenital dislocation
2
of the knee. J Pediatr Orthop. 1989; 9(2):174-7.
3
2. Müller M, Strecker W. Congenital knee dislocation in
4
Larsen syndrome treated by arthroplasty. Orthopade.
5
2010; 39(4):444-8.
6
3. Mahirogullari M, Pehlivan O, Kiral A, Cakmak S.
7
Management of the bilateral congential dislocation of
8
the hip and knee: a case report. Arch Orthop Trauma
9
Surg. 2006; 126(9):634-6.
10
4. Naik PV. Management of congenital knee dislocation.
11
Curr Orthop Pract. 2013; 24(1):43-8.
12
5. de Castro Lopez MJ, Iglesias Deus A, Rodriguez Vidal
13
A, Lopez Suarez O, Perez Munuzuri A, Couce Pico
14
ML. Knee dislocation in the delivery room. J Pediatr.
15
2014; 165(4):871.
16
6. Yalaburgi SB. Congenital dislocation of the knee. A
17
report of 5 cases. S Afr Med J. 1981; 59(22):804-6.
18
7. Ferris B, Aichroth P. The treatment of congenital knee
19
dislocation. A review of nineteen knees. Clin Orthop
20
Relat Res. 1987; 1(216):135-40.
21
8. Carlson DH, O’Connor J. Congenital dislocation of the
22
knee. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1976; 127(3):465-8.
23
9. Ko JY, Shih CH, Wenger DR. Congenital dislocation of
24
the knee. J Pediatr Orthop. 1999; 19(2):252-9.
25
10. Johnson E, Audell R, Oppenheim WL. Congenital
26
dislocation of the knee. J Pediatr Orthop. 1987;
27
7(2):194-200.
28
11. Schreiner S, Ganger R, Grill F. Congenital dislocation
29
of the knee (CDK). Orthopade. 2012; 41(1):75-82.
30
12. Makhmalbaf H, Kachooei AR, Mazloumi SM,
31
Ebrahimzadeh M, Omidi-Kashani F, Seyf P, et al.
32
Bilateral one-half spica cast after open reduction
33
and pelvic osteotomy in the developmental
34
dislocation of the hip. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2013;
35
15(12):e13366.
36
13. Bell MJ, Atkins RM, Sharrard WJ. Irreducible
37
congenital dislocation of the knee. Aetiology and
38
management. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987; 69(3):403-
39
14. Oetgen ME, Walick KS, Tulchin K, Karol LA, Johnston
40
CE. Functional results after surgical treatment for
41
congenital knee dislocation. J Pediatr Orthop. 2010;
42
30(3):216-23.
43
15. Katz MP, Grogono BJ, Soper KC. The etiology and
44
treatment of congenital dislocation of the knee. J
45
Bone Joint Surg Br. 1967; 49(1):112-20.
46
16. Kumar J, Dhammi IK, Jain AK. Neglected surgically
47
intervened bilateral congenital dislocation of knee
48
in an adolescent. Indian J Orthop. 2014; 48(1):96-9.
49
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Ossified Dorsal Wrist Ganglion Cyst: A Case Report
Ganglion cysts are the most common wrist tumors, and 60 -70% originate dorsally from the scapholunate interval. Ossification of these lesions is exceedingly rare, with only one such lesion located in the finger reported in the literature. We present a case of an ossified dorsal wrist ganglion in a 68-year-old woman.
https://abjs.mums.ac.ir/article_6303_d2c5249437233f2efc27d77bcd977c98.pdf
2016-10-01
399
401
10.22038/abjs.2016.6303
Bone cyst
Hand bone ganglion
Ossified ganglion cyst
Juana
Medina
rivlin.md@gmail.com
1
Ortopedia y traumatología, Fundación Santa Fe de
Bogotá, Bogotá, D.C., Cundinamarca, Colombia, USA
AUTHOR
Michael
Rivlin
mish.md@gmail.com
2
Rothman Institute of Orthopedics, Thomas Jefferson
University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
AUTHOR
Joanna
Chan
joanna.chen@rothmaninstitute.com
3
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine,
Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA
AUTHOR
Pedro
Beredjiklian
pedro.beredjiklian@rothmaninstitute.com
4
Rothman Institute of Orthopedics, Thomas Jefferson
University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
LEAD_AUTHOR
1. Nahra ME, Bucchieri JS. Ganglion cysts and other
1
tumor related conditions of the hand and wrist. Hand
2
Clin. 2004; 20(3):249-60.
3
2. Nguyen V, Choi J, Davis KW. Imaging of Wrist Masses.
4
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2004; 33(4):147-60.
5
3. Guitton TG, van Leerdam RH, Ring D. Necessity of
6
Routine Pathological Examination after Surgical
7
Excision of Wrist Ganglions. J Hand Surg Am. 2010;
8
35(6):905-8.
9
4. Kachooei AR, Nota SP, Menendez ME, Dyer GS, Ring
10
D. Factors associated with operative treatment of
11
de Quervain tendinopathy. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2015;
12
3(3):198-203.
13
5. Tophoj K, Henriques U. Ganglion of the wrist--a
14
structure developed from the joint. Acta Orthop
15
Scand. 1971; 42(3):244-50.
16
6. Johnson WC, Graham JH, Helwig EB. Cutaneous
17
myxoid cyst: a clinico-pathological and histochemical
18
study. JAMA. 1965; 191(1):15-20.
19
7. Moradi A, Kachooei AR, Mudgal CS. Acute calcium
20
deposits in the hand and wrist. J Hand Surg Am.
21
2014; 39(9):1854-7.
22
8. Tehranzadeh J, Anavim A, Lin F. Radiographically
23
ossified ganglion cyst of finger in a swimmer. Skeletal
24
Radiol. 1998; 27(12):705-7.
25