Operative treatment of Mason Type III radial head fractures - A comparative analysis using PROMIS.

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of operatively treated Mason Type III radial head fractures. Additionally, this project seeks to assess efficacy of PROMIS in evaluating post-operative outcomes for this patient population. Methods: A total of 143 patients who underwent operative treated Mason Type III radial head fractures were analyzed retrospectively. PROMIS physical function (PF), PROMIS upper extremity (UE), PROMIS pain interference (PI), demographic variables, and range of motion were collected and analyzed over 12-month follow-up. Results: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) was performed on 89 patients, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) was performed on 47 patients, and radial head excision was performed on 7 patients. Among the RHA patients, PROMIS PF, PI and UE demonstrated a change of -1.33 (p < 0.05), -1.48 (p < 0.05), and 2.23 (p < 0.05) respectively from injury to 12-months. Among the ORIF patients, PROMIS PF, PI and UE demonstrated a change of 3.22 (p < 0.05), -1.56 (p < 0.05), and 2.09 (p < 0.05) respectively from injury to 12-months. At the pre-operative and 12-month visits, the RHA group demonstrated lower PROMIS PF scores 34.75 vs 38.02 (p < 0.05) and 33.42 vs 41.24 (p < 0.05) respectively. Ther was no difference in PROMIS PI, UE, or elbow range of motion between the two groups at 6- or 12-month follow-up (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Comparing the RHA and ORIF groups, there was no difference in PROMIS PI or UE scores nor was there a clinically significant improvement at the 6- or 12-month mark. The ORIF group demonstrated improved PROMIS PF at all follow-up periods and did show a clinically significant improvement. Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) correlated only with PROMIS UE at 6- and 12- months for both groups.

An Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in Non-operative Posterolateral Elbow Dislocations.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of our study is to analyze the outcomes of traumatic posterolateral elbow dislocations using patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). We hypothesized that physical function (PF) and upper extremity (UE) scores in PROMIS will significantly improve over six months of follow-up and correlate with a positive change in the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS). METHODS: This is a seven-year retrospective study of 165 consecutive adult patients with traumatic posterolateral elbow dislocations. Demographic information, PROMIS PF, PROMIS UE, PROMIS pain interference (PI), PROMIS depression, and PASS were recorded over six months of follow-up. RESULTS: At the time of injury, mean PROMIS scores were PF 41.24 (SD 11.16), UE 34.27 (SD 11.87), PI 60.44 (SD 8.07), and depression 49.82 (SD 10.42). At six months, the mean PROMIS scores were PF 39.71 (SD 9.71), UE 33.95 (SD 9.09), PI 57.35 (SD 8.59), and depression 51.43 (SD 10.62). The overall six-month changes in PROMIS scores were PF -1.53, UE -0.32, PI -3.09, and depression +1.61. At the 6-month follow-up, 41.7% responded positively on the PASS, which correlated only with PROMIS PI. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who improved from negative to positive response on PASS, the PROMIS PF, UE, and depression scores did not significantly improve. Only PROMIS PI correlated with PASS at the six-month follow-up; PROMIS PI significantly improved among simple posterolateral elbow dislocation patients at both short-term and long-term follow-up points. PROMIS PF, UE, and depression did not significantly differ between time of injury and short-term and long-term follow-up points.

Non-operative Treatment of Mason Type I Radial Head Fractures: A Comparative Analysis Using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS).

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of Mason type I radial head fractures. This information will help to provide physicians with a critical decision-making tool when considering non-operative intervention and evaluate Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) as a potentially valuable measure to track outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 527 patients undergoing non-operative intervention. Demographic information, physical exam measurements, patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), and Pain Interference (PI) scores were analyzed over 12 months. RESULTS: At the initial outpatient post-injury visit (within one week of injury), the average PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression were 42.04 (SD: 6.3), 35.31 (SD: 7.3), 59.18 (SD: 9.2), and 48.68 (SD: 6.8), respectively. The average change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores from the time of injury to six weeks were -0.23 (p=0.7), 1.43 (p=0.03), -2.1 (p=0.01), and -0.99 (p=0.1). The average change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores from the time of injury to six months was -0.56 (p=0.56), 1.84 (p<0.001), -1.84 (p<0.001), and -0.13 (p=0.68). Among patients initially reporting "not acceptable" on PASS and reporting "acceptable" at the six-month visit, the average PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores were 42.14, 38.91, 56.91, and 47.51 respectively. This represents an average difference of 1.11 (p=0.07), 2.82 (p<0.01), -1.19 (p=0.04), and -1.7 (p=0.01) respectively. CONCLUSION: PROMIS UE and PI significantly improved among Mason I radial head fractures treated non-operatively at both six-week and six-month follow-up points but did not meet the mean clinically important difference (MCID) PROMIS PF did not significantly differ between the time of injury, six-week or six-month follow-up points. Only PROMIS UE correlated with PASS at six-week and six-month follow-up. Among patients who improved from negative to positive responses on PASS, PROMIS UE, and PI significantly improved.

Eponyms Describing Soft Tissue Pathologies in Orthopedic Hand Surgery.

Orthopedic surgery literature utilizes numerous eponyms, and they have become commonplace among orthopedic surgeons and the general public alike. These eponyms can have important historical implications and their history is often overlooked by the physicians using such terms. This paper seeks to specifically explore the origins of eponyms in orthopedic soft tissue diseases involving the upper extremity. Shedding light onto the origin of these eponyms can provide greater respect and understanding of their use in orthopedic surgery today.

Outcome of patients on heart transplant list treated with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: Insights from the TRans-Atlantic registry on VAd and TrAnsplant (TRAViATA).

BACKGROUND: Geographic variations in management and outcomes of individuals supported by continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVAD) between the United States (US) and Europe (EU) is largely unknown. METHODS: We created a retrospective, multinational registry of 524 patients who received a CF-LVAD (either HVAD or Heartmate II) between January 2008 and April 2017. Follow up spanned from date of CF-LVAD implant to post-HTx period with a median follow up of 44.8 months. RESULTS: The cohort included 299 (57.1%) EU and 225 (42.9%) US patients. Although the US cohort was significantly older with a higher prevalence of comorbidities, survival was similar between the cohorts (US 63.1%, EU 68.4% at 5 years, unadjusted log-rank test p = 0.43).Multivariate analyses suggested that older age, higher body mass index, elevated creatinine, use of temporary mechanical circulatory support prior CF-LVAD, and implantation of HVAD were associated with increased mortality. Among CF-LVAD patients undergoing HTx, the median time on CF-LVAD support was shorter in the US, meanwhile US donors were younger. Finally, the pattern of adverse events (stroke, gastrointestinal bleedings, late right ventricular failure, and driveline infection) during support differed significantly between US and EU. CONCLUSIONS: Although waitlisted patients in the US on CF-LVAD have higher risk comorbid conditions, the overall outcome is similar in US and EU. Geographic variations with regards to donor characteristics, duration of CF-LVAD support prior to transplant, and adverse events on support can explain the disparity in the utilization of mechanical bridge to transplant strategy between US and EU.

Three-Dimensional Printing: A Catalyst for a Changing Orthopaedic Landscape.

Three-dimensional (3D) printing is an emerging tool in provider and patient education, surgical planning, and the design and implementation of medical devices and implants. Recent decreases in the cost of 3D printers along with advances in and cost reduction of printable materials have elevated 3D printing within the medical device industry. The advantages of 3D printing over traditional means of implant manufacturing lie in its ability to use a wide array of materials, its fine control of the macro- and microarchitecture, and its unprecedented customizability. Barriers to the widespread adoption of 3D-printed implants include questions of implant durability, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for patient-specific implants, and insurance coverage of those implants.