Cement augmentation for proximal humerus fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies

INTRODUCTION

It is unclear if elderly patients treated with plate osteosynthesis for proximal humerus fractures benefit from cement augmentation. This meta-analysis aims to compare cement augmentation to no augmentation regarding healing, complications, and functional results.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized clinical trials and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. The primary outcome is overall complication rate. Stratified analyses were performed for types of complication (implant-related or systemic). Secondary outcomes include re-interventions, hospital stay, operation time, functional scores, and general quality of life.

RESULTS

Five observational studies and one randomized controlled trial with a total of 541 patients were included. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the augmented group (15.6% versus 25.4%, OR 0.54 (95%CI 0.33-0.87)). This was caused by a reduction of implant-related complications (10.4% vs. 19.9%, OR 0.49 (95%CI 0.28, 0.88)). No difference in humeral head necrosis was found. Data on re-intervention, hospital stay, and operation time was limited but did not show significant differences. No impact on functional scores and general quality of life was detected.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that cement augmentation may reduce overall complications, mainly by preventing implant-related complications. No difference was detected regarding need for re-intervention, functional scores, general quality of life, and hospital stay. This is the first meta-analysis on this topic. It remains to be seen whether conclusions will hold when more and better-quality data becomes available.

Let's Agree to Disagree on Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Distal Radius Fractures in Older People: Protocol for a Prospective International Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Distal radius fractures are the most frequently encountered fractures in Western societies, typically affecting patients aged 50 years and older. Although this is a common injury, the best treatment for these fractures in older patients is still under debate.

OBJECTIVE

This prospective study aims to compare the outcome of operatively and nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures in the older population. Only patients with distal radius fractures for which equipoise regarding the optimal treatment exists will be included.

METHODS

This prospective international multicenter observational cohort study will be designed as a natural experiment. Natural experiments are observational studies in which treatment allocation is determined by factors outside the control of the investigators but also (largely) independent of patient characteristics. Patients aged 65 years and older with an acute distal radius fracture will be considered for inclusion. Treatment allocation (operative vs nonoperative) will be based on the local preferences of the treating hospital either in Switzerland or the Netherlands. Hence, the process governing treatment allocation resembles that of randomization. Patients will be identified after treatment has been initiated. Based on the radiographs and baseline information of the patient, an expert panel of 6 certified trauma surgeons from 2 regions will provide their treatment recommendation. Only patients for whom the experts disagree on treatment recommendations will ultimately be included in the study (ie, for whom there is a clinical equipoise). For these patients, both operative and nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures are viable, and treatment choice is predominantly determined by personal or local preference. The primary outcome will be the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes will include the Physical Activity Score for the Elderly, the EQ questionnaire, pain, the living situation, range of motion, complications, and radiological outcomes. By including outcomes such as living situation and the Physical Activity Score for the Elderly, which are not relevant for younger cohorts, valuable information to tailor treatment to the needs of the older population can be gained. According to the sample size collection, which was based on the minimal important clinical difference of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation, 92 patients will have to be included, with at least 46 patients in each treatment group.

RESULTS

Enrollment began in July 2023 and is expected to continue until summer 2024. The final follow-up will be 2 years after the last patient is included.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many trials on this topic have previously been published, there remains an ongoing debate regarding the optimal treatment for distal radius fractures in older patients. This observational study, which will use a fairly new methodological study design, will provide further information on treatment outcomes for older patients with distal radius fractures for which to date equipoise exists regarding the optimal treatment.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/52917.

[Distal radius fracture-tactic and approach]

OBJECTIVE

The aim of surgical treatment is fracture healing with restored alignment, rotation, and joint surface. Stable fixation allows for functional postoperative aftercare.

INDICATIONS

Displaced intra- and extra-articular fractures which either could not be adequately reduced or in which a secondary displacement is to expected due to instability criteria. The following factors are considered instability criteria: age > 60 years, female, initial dorsal displacement > 20°, dorsal comminution, radial shortening > 5 mm, palmar displacement.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

The only absolute contraindication is if the patient is deemed unfit for surgery due to concerns regarding anesthesia. Old age is a relative contraindication, as it is currently debated whether older patients benefit from the operation.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

The surgical technique is guided by the fracture pattern. Palmar plating is most commonly performed. If the joint surface needs to be visualized, a dorsal approach (in combination with another approach or alone) or arthroscopically assisted fixation should be chosen.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

In general, a functional postoperative regime can be carried out after plate fixation with mobilization without weightbearing. Short-term splinting can provide pain relief. Concomitant ligamentous injuries and fixations, which are not stable enough for functional aftercare (such as k‑wires) require a longer period of immobilization.

RESULTS

Provided the fracture is reduced correctly, osteosynthesis improves functional outcome. The complication rate ranges between 9 and 15% with the most common complication being tendon irritation/rupture and plate removal. Whether surgical treatment holds the same benefits for patients > 65 years as for younger patients is currently under debate.

Outcomes of acute perilunate injuries-a systematic review

PURPOSE

The objective of this systematic review was to perform epidemiological as well as clinical, radiological and patient-reported outcome analysis of surgically treated perilunate dislocations and fracture dislocations (PLDs and PLFDs) based on the so far largest pooled patient population to date.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This systematic review was written according to the updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. A comprehensive literature search of Pubmed, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases was performed. All studies reporting on complications, radiological, functional and/or patient-reported outcomes of surgically treated acute PLDs and PLFDs with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies encompassing 550 patients with 553 operatively treated acute perilunate injuries (106 PLDs and 447 PLFDs) were included. The overall postoperative complication rate was 15.0% with secondary reduction loss representing the main contributing factor (10.1%). The overall reoperation rate was 10.4% and the incidence of salvage procedures was 2.8%. The risk for secondary reduction loss was higher for PLD than for PLFD injuries (24.2% vs. 7.0%, relative risk [RR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-7.5). There was a higher overall complication rate for the combined dorsopalmar approach when compared to the isolated dorsal approach (17.4% vs. 8.4%, RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-1.0, number needed to treat [NNT] 11.2) and for open surgery versus arthroscopic surgery (17.4% vs. 4.8%, RR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.9, NNT 8.0). A significant correlation was found between radiological osteoarthritis (rOA) and follow-up duration of the individual studies, while functional and patient-rated outcomes were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of surgical technique, PLFDs appear to be less susceptible to secondary reduction loss than PLDs. Whenever possible, less invasive (e.g. arthroscopic) surgery should be performed to minimize postoperative complications. The rate of rOA is high and increases significantly with follow-up duration. Interestingly, rOA does not seem to correlate with reduced wrist function nor patient dissatisfaction and the need for salvage surgery is surprisingly rare.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of level IV studies.

A natural experiment study: Low-profile double plating versus single plating techniques in midshaft clavicle fractures-Study protocol

BACKGROUND

Single plate osteosynthesis is commonly employed when performing surgical stabilization of midshaft clavicle fractures. In recent years, a smaller structural low-profile double plating technique has been described as a possible solution for the high removal rates associated with single plating. A previous meta-analysis has demonstrated that low-profile double plating attains the same healing rates as single plating without a higher chance of fracture-related infections. This meta-analysis, however, was based on relatively small studies. Therefore, a multicentre prospective natural experiment was designed using natural variation in treatment regimens and geographical location of the trauma as treatment allocation mechanism to compare both treatments on a larger scale. This manuscript describes its protocol.

MATERIAL & METHODS

Patients (≥16 years) with primary midshaft clavicle fractures that are eligible for operative treatment will be included. Treatment allocation will be determined by the geographical location of the accident and local hospital providing treatment. In two centres, single plating is the treatment of choice for these patients. In two others, low-profile double plating has become the standard treatment. For the low-profile double plating group, one superiorly positioned VariAx 2.0mm and one anterior VariAx 2.4mm or 2.7mm plate will be used. For the single plating group, the standard locally available implant will be used. A total of 336 patients will be included. The primary outcome of interest is re-intervention. Secondary outcomes include complications, operative time, length of incision, functional scores (DASH, EQ-5D-DL, VAS-Pain/Satisfaction) and cost-effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

This study will determine whether low-profile double plating has significant clinical and cost-effective benefits over single plating techniques in midshaft clavicle fractures. The study will also give insight in the performance of a natural experiment study design for orthopedic trauma research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study has been registered on ClincialTrials.gov, identifier NCT05579873.

Intraoperative imaging in hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative fluoroscopy (IFC) is gaining popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA), with the aim to achieve better component positioning and therefore eventually reduced revision rates. This meta-analysis investigated the benefit of IFC by comparing it to intraoperative assessment alone. The primary outcome was component positioning and the secondary outcomes included complications and revision rates.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Effect estimates for radiographic cup position, offset/leg length difference and outliers from a safe zone were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as a weighted odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

RESULTS

A total of 10 observational studies involving 1,394 patients were included. No randomized trials were found. IFC showed no significant reduction in acetabular cup position (inclination and anteversion), offset, leg-length discrepancies, revision (none reported) or overall complication rates.

CONCLUSION

The current meta-analysis found no differences in cup positioning, offset, leg length discrepancy, the incidence of complications or revision surgery. It should be acknowledged that the included studies were generally performed by experienced surgeons. The benefit of intraoperative fluoroscopy might become more evident at an early phase of the learning curve for this procedure. Therefore, its role has yet to be defined.

Natural experiments for orthopaedic trauma research: An introduction

Natural experiments are observational studies of medical treatments in which treatment allocation is determined by factors outside the control of the investigators, arguably resembling experimental randomisation. Natural experiments in the field of orthopaedic trauma research are scarce. However, they have great potential due to the process governing treatment allocation and the existence of opposing treatment strategies between hospitals or between regions as a result of local education, conviction, or cultural and socio-economic factors. Here, the possibilities and opportunities of natural experiments in the orthopaedic trauma field are discussed. Potential solutions are presented to improve the validity of natural experiments and how to assess the credibility of such studies. Above all, it is meant to spark a discussion about its role within the field of orthopaedic trauma research.

Primary Closure or Secondary Wound Healing of Pin Sites After External Fixator Removal: A Single-Center Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this single-center randomized controlled trial was to compare primary wound closure using a suture with secondary wound healing of pin sites after removal of temporary external fixation.

METHODS

This noninferiority trial included all patients who were treated with a temporary external fixator on an upper or lower extremity at 1 institution. The primary outcome was pin-site infection. Secondary outcomes were measured at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks and included all other complications, time to pin-site wound healing (in weeks), the most satisfactory pin site as rated by the patient, the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The most proximal pin site was randomly allocated (1:1) to either primary closure or secondary wound healing, and the other pin sites were treated alternately.

RESULTS

Seventy patients, providing 241 pin sites, were included between January 1, 2019, and March 1, 2020. A total of 123 pin sites were treated with primary closure and 118, with secondary wound healing. The median age was 55 years (interquartile range, 46 to 67 years), 44% were male, and the median duration of the external fixation was 6 days (interquartile range, 4 to 8 days). There were no pin-site infections in either group. Wound healing was significantly faster in the primary closure group (median of 2 versus 6 weeks, p = 0.013). The VSS and patient satisfaction showed no differences between groups. There was 1 case of fracture-related infection not related to any pin site.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary closure of temporary external fixator pin sites did not result in higher infection rates compared with secondary wound healing, and pin sites healed significantly faster after primary closure. Primary closure should therefore be considered in patients treated with a temporary external fixator.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Rib fractures in the elderly population: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multiple rib fractures are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in elderly patients. There is growing interest in surgical stabilization in this subgroup of patients. This systematic review compares conservative treatment to surgical fixation in elderly patients (older than 60 years) with multiple rib fractures. The primary outcome is mortality. Secondary outcomes include hospital and intensive care length of stay (HLOS and ILOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV) and pneumonia rates.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched for comparative studies reporting on conservative versus operative treatment for rib fractures in patients older than 60 years. Both observational studies and randomised clinical trials were considered.

RESULTS

Five observational studies (n = 2583) were included. Mortality was lower in operatively treated patients compared to conservative treatment (4% vs. 8%). Pneumonia rate and DMV were similar (5/6% and 5.8/6.5 days) for either treatment modality. Overall ILOS and HLOS of stay were longer in operatively treated patients (6.5 ILOS and 12.7 HLOS vs. 2.7 ILOS and 6.5 ILOS). There were only minimal reports on perioperative complications. Notably, the median number of rib fractures (8.4 vs. 5) and the percentage of flail chest were higher in operatively treated patients (47% vs. 39%).

CONCLUSION

It remains unknown to what extent conservative and operative treatment contribute individually to reducing morbidity and mortality in the elderly with multiple rib fractures. To date, the quality of evidence is rather low, thus well-performed comparative observational studies or randomised controlled trials considering all confounders are needed to determine whether operative treatment can improve a patient's outcome.

How to assess applicability and methodological quality of comparative studies of operative interventions in orthopedic trauma surgery

PURPOSE

It is challenging to generate and subsequently implement high-quality evidence in surgical practice. A first step would be to grade the strengths and weaknesses of surgical evidence and appraise risk of bias and applicability. Here, we described items that are common to different risk-of-bias tools. We explained how these could be used to assess comparative operative intervention studies in orthopedic trauma surgery, and how these relate to applicability of results.

METHODS

We extracted information from the Cochrane risk-of-bias-2 (RoB-2) tool, Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions tool (ROBINS-I), and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria and derived a concisely formulated set of items with signaling questions tailored to operative interventions in orthopedic trauma surgery.

RESULTS

The established set contained nine items: population, intervention, comparator, outcome, confounding, missing data and selection bias, intervention status, outcome assessment, and pre-specification of analysis. Each item can be assessed using signaling questions and was explained using good practice examples of operative intervention studies in orthopedic trauma surgery.

CONCLUSION

The set of items will be useful to form a first judgment on studies, for example when including them in a systematic review. Existing risk of bias tools can be used for further evaluation of methodological quality. Additionally, the proposed set of items and signaling questions might be a helpful starting point for peer reviewers and clinical readers.

Routine x-rays after the osteosynthesis of distal radius and ankle fractures—a prospective randomized controlled trial on the necessity of routine imaging

BACKGROUND

The utility of routine x-rays after the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures and ankle fractures is questionable. We performed a trial to determine whether such x-rays are justified in patients who have undergone standardized imaging with C-arm fluoroscopy during surgery.

METHODS

Patients requiring surgery for a distal radius fracture or an ankle fracture were candidates for inclusion in this prospective, randomized, controlled, non-blinded trial. Standardized intraoperative images were obtained with C-arm fluoroscopy and stored at the end of the operation. The next day, patients in the control group underwent imaging with a standard postoperative x-ray, while those in the intervention group did not. The primary endpoint was a change in the treatment plan, defined as additional imaging or a second operation. The secondary endpoints included the range of motion, pain as rated on the Visual Analog Scale, and a functional outcome analysis (PRWE/FAOS).

RESULTS

316 patients were included in the trial (163 in the control group, 153 in the intervention group), of whom 202 (64%) had radius fractures and 114 (36%) had ankle fractures. The treatment plan changed in twelve patients (3.8%; four in the control group and eight in the intervention group), seven of whom (2.2%; three in the control group and four in the intervention group) underwent a second operation. The frequency of changes in the treatment plan and of reoperations was comparable in the two groups (p = 0.36). On follow-up at six weeks and one year, the results with respect to functional outcomes and pain were comparable.

CONCLUSION

In this trial, routine postoperative x-rays after the osteosynthesis of distal radial fractures and ankle fractures did not improve the care of patients who had undergone standardized intraoperative imaging.

Low-profile dual mini-fragment plating of diaphyseal clavicle fractures. A biomechanical comparative testing

BACKGROUND

Implant removal rates after clavicle plating are high. Recently, low-profile dual mini-fragment plate constructs have revealed lower implant removal rates following fixation of diaphyseal clavicle fractures. However, they have not been subject to a biomechanical investigation.

AIMS

To: (1) investigate thebiomechanical competence of different dual plate designs and (2) compare them against single superoanterior plating.

METHODS

Twelve artificial clavicles with a simulated AO/OTA 15.2C unstable diaphyseal clavicle fracture were assigned to 2 groups and instrumented with dual titanium mandible plates as follows: Group 1 - 2.5 mm anterior plus 2.0 mm superior (2.5/2.0); Group 2 - 2.0 mm anterior plus 2.0 mm superior (2.0/2.0). Specimens were cyclically tested to failure under craniocaudal cantilever bending superimposed with torsion around the shaft axis and compared to previous published data acquired using 6 locking superoanterior plates tested under the same conditions (Group 3).

FINDINGS

Initial stiffness was highest in Group 1 followed by Group 2 and Group 3, being significantly different between Group 1 and Group 3 (p = 0.020). Displacement after 5000 cycles was biggest in Group 3, followed by Group 2 and Group 1, with significant differences between Group 3 and both Group 1 and Group 2 (p ≤ 0.027). Cycles to failure were highest in Group 3 followed by Group 1 and Group 2, being significantly different between Group 2 and Group 3 (p = 0.004).

INTERPRETATION

Low-profile 2.0/2.0 dual plates demonstrated similar initial stiffness compared with single 3.5 mm locking plates, however, they revealed significantly lower resistance to failure. Moreover, low-profile 2.5/2.0 dual plates demonstrated significantly higher initial stiffness and similar resistance to failure compared with single 3.5 mm locking plates and can therefore be considered as their useful alternative for diaphyseal clavicle fracture fixation.

RIA versus iliac crest bone graft harvesting: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Reamer-Irrigator-Aspirator (RIA) of long bones is increasingly being used as an alternative to iliac crest harvesting for bone-grafts. This meta-analysis compares both harvesting techniques with regard to donor site morbidity, healing potency and implantation site morbidity.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as weighted odds ratio (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI).

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies were included. RIA carries a lower risk for chronic pain (0% versus 14.2%, OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 - 0.35) and infection (1% versus 5.9%, OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09- 0.9) at the donor site compared to iliac crest harvesting. Iliac crest bone-harvesting has an inherent additional risk of neuropraxia of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve and numbness of the scar which is not encountered in RIA harvesting. Risk for other reported complications such as hematoma and iatrogenic fractures appear equal in both groups. The clinical healing potential of both bone grafts, in terms of union rate (OR 1.53, 95%CI 0.62 - 3.75) at the implantation site and time-to-union (MD 0.44 months, 95%CI -1.72 - 0.83), seems equal.

CONCLUSION

The main difference between RIA and iliac crest bone graft harvesting is the considerable higher risk of chronic pain of the pelvic procedure. Although risk for infection was also higher for the iliac crest group, the absolute difference is relatively small. Evidence suggests an equal healing potential of the grafts themselves irrespective of harvesting method.

MIPO vs. intra-medullary nailing for extra-articular distal tibia fractures and the efficacy of intra-operative alignment control: a retrospective cohort of 135 patients

INTRODUCTION

Definitive treatment of distal extra-articular fractures of the tibia is challenging and both minimal invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) are considered to be feasible surgical modalities with their own implant-specific merits and demerits. This retrospective study was designed to compare MIPO versus IMN in terms of fracture healing, complications, functional and radiological outcomes and to assess the efficacy of intra-operative alignment control to reduce the rate of malalignment after definitive fixation of distal extra-articular fractures of the tibia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All consecutive adult patients with extra-articular distal meta- or diaphyseal tibia fractures that were treated between January 2012 and September 2019 either with MIPO or IMN were included. Outcome measures included fracture healing, complications (infection, malalignment, subsequent surgeries), functional and radiological outcomes. Intra-operative alignment control encompassed bilateral draping of the lower extremities.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included out of which 72 patients (53%) were treated with MIPO and 63 patients (47%) underwent IMN. There was a significantly higher incidence of non-union for fractures treated with IMN (13 (22%) vs. 4 (6%), p = 0.04). There was no significant difference between both groups in terms of rotational malalignment (3% vs. 10%) and angular malalignment (4% vs. 5%). A significantly higher rate of infection was found after MIPO after correction of significant differences in baseline characteristics. No differences were found in subsequent surgeries or functional outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Both MIPO and IMN are reliable surgical techniques. IMN is associated with higher rates of non-union, whereas MIPO results in a higher risk for infection. The incidence of malalignment was surprisingly low endorsing the utility of the intra-operative alignment control.

Difference in Pain, Complication Rates, and Clinical Outcomes After Suprapatellar Versus Infrapatellar Nailing for Tibia Fractures? A Systematic Review of 1447 Patients

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of suprapatellar (SP)-nailing versus infrapatellar (IP)-nailing of tibia fractures in anterior knee pain, complications (retropatellar chondropathy, infection, and malalignment) and physical functioning and quality of life. A clinical question-driven and thorough systematic review of current literature is provided.

DATA SOURCE

PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2020 relating to SP and IP-nailing of tibia fractures. The study is performed in concordance with PRISMA-guidelines.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective observational studies reporting on outcomes of interest.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extraction was performed independently by 2 assessors. Methodological quality and risk of bias was assessed according to the guidelines of the McMaster Critical Appraisal.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Continuous variables are presented as means with SD and dichotomous variables as frequency and percentages. The weighted mean, standardized weighted mean differences, and 95% confidence interval were calculated. A pooled analysis could not be performed because of differences in outcome measures, time-points, and heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with 1447 patients were analyzed. The weighted incidence of anterior knee pain was 29% after SP-nailing and 39% after IP-nailing, without reported significance. There was a significant lower rate of malalignment after the SP-approach (4% vs. 26%) with small absolute differences in all planes. No substantial differences were observed in retropatellar chondropathy, infection, physical functioning, and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review does not reveal superiority of either technique in any of the respective outcomes of interest. Definitive choice should depend on the surgeon's experience and available resources.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Arthroscopy versus mini-arthrotomy approach for matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation in the knee: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (mACI) can be performed in a full arthroscopic or mini-open fashion. A systematic review was conducted to investigate whether arthroscopy provides better surgical outcomes compared with the mini-open approach for mACI in the knee at midterm follow-up.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was performed in May 2021. All the prospective studies reporting outcomes after mACI chondral defects of the knee were accessed. Only studies that clearly stated the surgical approach (arthroscopic or mini-open) were included. Only studies reporting a follow-up longer than 12 months were eligible. Studies reporting data from combined surgeries were not eligible, nor were those combining mACI with less committed cells (e.g., mesenchymal stem cells).

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included, and 770 patients were retrieved: 421 in the arthroscopy group, 349 in the mini-open. The mean follow-up was 44.3 (12-60) months. No difference between the two groups was found in terms of mean duration of symptoms, age, body mass index (BMI), gender, defect size (P > 0.1). No difference was found in terms of Tegner Score (P = 0.3), Lysholm Score (P = 0.2), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score (P = 0.1). No difference was found in the rate of failures (P = 0.2) and revisions (P = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopy and mini-arthrotomy approaches for mACI in knee achieve similar outcomes at midterm follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, systematic review of prospective studies.

Cement augmentation for trochanteric femur fractures: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and observational studies

Introduction

To date, it is unclear what the clinical benefit of cement augmentation in fixation for trochanteric fractures is. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare cement augmentation to no augmentation in fixation of trochanteric femur fractures in the elderly patients (>65 years) following low energy trauma.

Methods

PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing both treatments. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. Subgroup analysis was performed stratified by study design (RCTs and observational studies). The primary outcome is overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes include re-operation rate, mortality, operation duration, hospital stay, general quality of life, radiologic measures and functional hip scores.

Results

A total of four RCT’s (437 patients) and three observational studies (293 patients) were included. The effect estimates of RCTs were equal to those obtained from observational studies. Cement augmentation has a significantly lower overall complication rate (28.3% versus 47.2%) with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.3 (95%CI 0.1–0.7). The occurrence of device/fracture related complications was the largest contributing factor to this higher overall complication rate in the non-augmented group (19.9% versus 6.0%, OR 0.2, 95%CI 0.1–0.6). Cement augmentation also carries a lower risk for re-interventions (OR 0.2, 95%CI 0.1–0.7) and shortens the hospital stay with 2 days (95%CI -2.2 to -0.5 days). The mean operation time was 7 minutes longer in the augmented group (95%CI 1.3–12.9). Radiological scores (lag screw/blade sliding mean difference -3.1mm, 95%CI -4.6 to -1.7, varus deviation mean difference -6.15°, 95%CI; -7.4 to -4.9) and functional scores (standardized mean difference 0.31, 95%CI 0.0–0.6) were in favor of cement augmentation. Mortality was equal in both groups (OR 0.7, 95%CI 0.4–1.3) and cement related complications were rare.

Conclusion

Cement augmentation in fixation of trochanteric femoral fractures leads to fewer complications, re-operations and shorter hospital stay at the expense of a slightly longer operation duration. Cementation related complications occur rarely and mortality is equal between treatment groups. Based on these results, cement augmentation should be considered for trochanteric fractures in elderly patients.

MIPO versus nailing for humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomised clinical trials and observational studies

PURPOSE

There is no consensus on the optimal operative technique for humeral shaft fractures. This meta-analysis aims to compare minimal-invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with nail fixation for humeral shaft fractures regarding healing, complications and functional results.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing MIPO with nailing for humeral shaft fractures. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as weighted odds ratio (OR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Analyses were repeated stratified by study design (RCTs and observational studies).

RESULTS

A total of 2 RCTs (87 patients) and 5 observational studies (595 patients) were included. The effects estimated in observational studies and RCTs were similar in direction and magnitude for all outcomes except operation duration. MIPO has a lower risk for non-union (RD 7%; OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.5) and re-intervention (RD 13%; OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8). Functional shoulder (SMD 1.0, 95% CI 0.2-1.8) and elbow scores (SMD 0.4, 95% CI 0-0.8) were better among patients treated with MIPO. The risk for radial nerve palsy following surgery was equal (RD 2%; OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.2) and nerve function recovered spontaneously in all patients in both groups. No difference was detected with regard to infection, time to union and operation duration.

CONCLUSION

MIPO has a considerable lower risk for non-union and re-intervention, leads to better shoulder function and, to a lesser extent, better elbow function compared to nailing. Although nailing appears to be a viable option, the evidence suggests that MIPO should be the preferred treatment of choice. The learning curve of minimal-invasive plating should, however, be taken into account when interpreting these results.

Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis: An update of practise

Since its conception in 1989, minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) has gained widespread popularity. It has been studied in over forty countries with most of the publications originating from Asia, Europe and North America. This review aims to describe the scientific path of MIPO from the very beginning to where it stands in current day times; study the pattern and contributing factors influencing its global spread. Finally, the up to date evidence is discussed with regard to several anatomical regions in which MIPO is mostly used. In the meantime, MIPO treads steadily towards accomplishing the same or better outcomes for more and more indications with the goal to leave a smaller surgical footprint to allow for undisturbed bone healing.

Conservative vs. operative treatment for humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized clinical trials and observational studies

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to compare conservative vs. operative treatment for humeral shaft fractures in terms of the nonunion rate, reintervention rate, permanent radial nerve palsy rate, and functional outcomes. Secondarily, effect estimates from observational studies were compared with estimates of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The PubMed/Medline, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases were searched for both RCTs and observational studies comparing conservative with operative treatment for humeral shaft fractures.

RESULTS

A total of 2 RCTs (150 patients) and 10 observational studies (1262 patients) were included. The pooled nonunion rate of all studies was higher in patients treated conservatively (15.3%) vs. operatively (6.4%) (risk difference, 8%; odds ratio [OR], 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-4.5; I² = 0%). The reintervention rate was also higher for conservative treatment (14.3%) than for operative treatment (8.9%) (risk difference, 6%; OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.5; I² = 30%). The higher reintervention rate was predominantly attributable to the higher nonunion rate in patients treated conservatively. The permanent radial nerve palsy rate was equal in both groups (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2-1.9; I² = 18%). There appeared to be no difference in mean time to union and mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores between the treatment groups. No difference was found between effect estimates form observational studies and RCTs.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows that satisfactory results can be achieved with both conservative and operative management; however, operative treatment reduces the risk of nonunion compared with conservative treatment, with comparable reintervention rates (for indications other than nonunion). Furthermore, operative treatment results in a similar permanent radial nerve palsy rate, despite its inherent additional surgery-related risks. No difference in mean time-to-union and short-term functional results was detected.

Elective resection for ongoing diverticular disease significantly improves quality of life

BACKGROUND

Although the risks of elective resection for diverticular disease are well studied, studies on subjective improvement are scarce. This study aims to investigate subjective improvement.

METHODS

All patients who underwent elective resection for recurring or persisting complaints after an episode of diverticulitis were identified from an in-hospital database. Patients with at least 1 year of follow-up were sent visual analogue scales (VAS) to grade their quality of life (QoL) and the degree of discomfort caused by abdominal pain, abnormal defecation and fatigue before and after resection.

RESULTS

One hundred and five patients responded to the questionnaire (response rate 76.6%). The median follow-up was 33 (15-53) months. Elective resection improved general QoL (median VAS improvement 40) and reduced discomfort caused by abdominal pain (median VAS improvement 60) in up to 89.3 and 87.5% of patients, respectively. The effects of elective resection are less profound for discomfort caused by abnormal defecation (77.1%, median VAS improvement 33) and fatigue (75.2%, median VAS improvement 30).

CONCLUSION

Elective resection of the sigmoid for persisting or recurring symptoms after an episode of diverticulitis improves general QoL and discomfort caused by abdominal pain, abnormal defecation and fatigue in the vast majority of patients.

Diverticulitis in young versus elderly patients: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare patients younger and older than 50 years with diverticulitis with regard to complications, disease recurrence and to the need for surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane databases were searched for longitudinal cohort studies comparing patients younger and older than 50 years with diverticulitis.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included with a total of 4.751 (male:female 1:0.66) patients younger and 18.328 (male:female 1:1.67) older than 50 years of age. The risk of developing at least one recurrent episode was significantly higher among patients younger than 50 years (pooled RR 1.73; 95% CI 1.40-2.13) with an estimated cumulative risk of 30% compared with 17.3% in older patients. The risk of requiring surgery during hospitalization for a primary episode of diverticulitis was equal in both age groups (pooled RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.74-1.32) and estimated at approximately 20%. Patients younger than 50 years more frequently required urgent surgery during hospitalization for a subsequent recurrent episode (pooled RR 1.46; 95% CI 1.29-1.66); the cumulative risk was 7.3% in younger and 4.9% in patients older than 50 years.

CONCLUSION

Patients younger than 50 years only differ substantially in risk for recurrent disease from patients older than 50 years of age. Although the relative risk for requiring urgent surgery for recurrent disease was higher in younger patient, one should consider that the absolute risk difference is relatively small (7.3% vs. 4.9%).

Endoscopic evaluation of the colon after an episode of diverticulitis: a call for a more selective approach

PURPOSE

Routine colonic evaluation is advised after an episode of diverticulitis to exclude colorectal cancer. In the recent years, the possible relation between diverticulitis and colorectal cancer has been subject of debate. The aim of this study is to evaluate the benefit of routine colonic endoscopy after an episode of diverticulitis.

METHODS

Records of all consecutive patients presenting with a radiologically confirmed episode of diverticulitis between 2007 and 2010 were retrieved from an in-hospital database. Patients who subsequently underwent colonic evaluation were included. The endoscopic detection rate of hyperplastic polyps, adenomas and advanced colonic neoplasia was assessed. Findings were categorized on the basis of the most advanced lesion identified.

RESULTS

Three hundred and seven patients presented with a radiologically confirmed primary episode of diverticulitis. Two hundred and five patients underwent colonic evaluation. Hyperplastic polyps were found in15 (6.8 %), adenomas in 18 (8.8 %) and advanced neoplastic lesions in 7 (3.4 %) patients. Only two patients had a colorectal malignancy.

CONCLUSION

There appears to be no benefit in performing routine colonic evaluation after an episode of diverticulitis as the incidence of colorectal cancer is almost equal to that of the general population. A more selective approach might therefore be justified. Potentially, only patients with persisting abdominal complaints after an episode of diverticulitis should be offered colonic evaluation to definitively exclude causal pathology.

[Dutch College of General Practitioners' practice guideline 'Diverticulitis' from a surgical perspective]

Diverticulitis is a common disease which, in the Netherlands, leads to approximately 13,500 hospitalizations annually. This figure represents merely 12% of actual cases encountered by general practitioners. The combined factors of older age, pain in the left lower abdomen which increases on movement, an elevated C-reactive protein level, the absence of vomiting and a prior episode of diverticulitis are highly predictive for this clinical diagnosis. This prediction model has been developed in secondary care centres. Its diagnostic value has yet to be proven in general practice.

DIRECT trial. Diverticulitis recurrences or continuing symptoms: Operative versus conservative treatment. A multicenter randomised clinical trial

Background

Persisting abdominal complaints are common after an episode of diverticulitis treated conservatively. Furthermore, some patients develop frequent recurrences. These two groups of patients suffer greatly from their disease, as shown by impaired health related quality of life and increased costs due to multiple specialist consultations, pain medication and productivity losses.

Both conservative and operative management of patients with persisting abdominal complaints after an episode of diverticulitis and/or frequently recurring diverticulitis are applied. However, direct comparison by a randomised controlled trial is necessary to determine which is superior in relieving symptoms, optimising health related quality of life, minimising costs and preventing diverticulitis recurrences against acceptable morbidity and mortality associated with surgery or the occurrence of a complicated recurrence after conservative management.

We, therefore, constructed a randomised clinical trial comparing these two treatment strategies.

Methods/design

The DIRECT trial is a multicenter randomised clinical trial. Patients (18-75 years) presenting themselves with persisting abdominal complaints after an episode of diverticulitis and/or three or more recurrences within 2 years will be included and randomised. Patients randomised for conservative treatment are treated according to the current daily practice (antibiotics, analgetics and/or expectant management). Patients randomised for elective resection will undergo an elective resection of the affected colon segment. Preferably, a laparoscopic approach is used.

The primary outcome is health related quality of life measured by the Gastro-intestinal Quality of Life Index, Short-Form 36, EQ-5D and a visual analogue scale for pain quantification. Secondary endpoints are morbidity, mortality and total costs. The total follow-up will be three years.

Discussion

Considering the high incidence and the multicenter design of this study, it may be assumed that the number of patients needed for this study (n = 214), may be gathered within one and a half year.

Depending on the expertise and available equipment, we prefer to perform a laparoscopic resection on patients randomised for elective surgery. Should this be impossible, an open technique may be used as this also reflects the current situation.

Trial Registration

(Trial register number: NTR1478)

[Treatment for diverticulitis not thoroughly researched]

In the Netherlands approximately 14,000 patients are referred to hospital for diverticular disease each year. Overall controversy persists about four aspects of treatment of the different stages of diverticulitis, i.e. the role of antibiotics in the treatment of mild diverticulitis, the question of whether elective surgical resection is justified in recurrent diverticulitis or in persisting abdominal symptoms after an episode of diverticulitis, the question of whether patients with purulent peritonitis due to perforation may be treated with laparoscopic peritoneal lavage instead of Hartmann's procedure, and finally, whether resection with a primary anastomosis is a feasible and safe alternative to Hartmann's procedure in the surgical treatment of Hinchey III or IV diverticulitis. These questions will be addressed in four upcoming Dutch randomised trials.