Ensayo clínico comparando el uso de tornillos y del sistema TighRope® Knotless en el tratamiento de las lesiones agudas de la sindesmosis / A randomized clinical trial comparing screws and the TighRope® Knotless system in the treatment of acute injuries of syndesmosis

Antecedentes y objetivo: Clásicamente el tratamiento de las lesiones agudas de la sindesmosis se ha realizado mediante tornillos. Hace unos años aparecieron implantes más flexibles que han evolucionado hasta el moderno TighRope® Knotless. El objetivo del presente estudio es comparar los resultados de ambos implantes. Material y métodos: Desde abril de 2019 hasta septiembre de 2020 reclutamos 68 pacientes diagnosticados de lesión aguda de la sindesmosis que fueron aleatorizados para tratamiento quirúrgico con tornillo o con TighRope® Knotless. Realizamos control posquirúrgico con tomografía axial computarizada, y a los 3, 6 y 12 meses se recogieron datos del rango articular, valores de escalas funcionales y se realizaron estudios de radiología simple. Resultados: Los pacientes tratados con tornillos no presentaban diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la escala AOFAS frente al grupo tratado con TighRope® Knotless a los 3 meses (83,1 vs. 81,80; p=1,03), ni a los 6 meses (88,27 vs. 88; p=0,26) ni a los 12 meses (93,03 vs. 92,10; p=0,93). Igualmente recogimos resultados similares en la escala de Olerud-Molander a los 3 meses (65 vs. 61,50; p=3,5), 6 meses (82,33 vs. 80,67; p=1,67) y 12 meses (92,67 vs. 90; p=2,67). Tampoco hubo diferencias en la tasa de malreducción posquirúrgica (ningún caso en ambos grupos), pérdida de reducción (3 en el grupo tratado con tornillo frente a 4 del grupo del TighRope® Knotless, p=0,54) o complicaciones (p=1). Conclusiones: El tratamiento de las lesiones agudas de la sindesmosis con tornillos o con TighRope® Knotless es similar tanto en resultados clínicos como radiológicos.(AU)

Background and aim: Classically acute syndesmosis injuries have been treated using screws. A few years ago more flexible implants appeared evolving to current TighRope® Knotless. The primary aim of this study is to compare clinical and radiographic outcome of both implants. Material and methods: From April 2019 to September 2020 68 patients diagnosed with acute syndesmosis injury were randomized to use screws or TighRope® Knotless. Syndesmosis reduction was assessed using bilateral CT potsoperatively. Outcomes were clinically and radiologically assessed at three, six, and twelve months after surgery. Results: No significant differences were identified in the AOFAS Scale between groups at three months (83.1 vs. 81.80; P=1.03), nor at six (88.27 vs. 88; P=.26) or at twelve (93.03 vs. 92.10; P=,93). There were also no differences in Olerud-Molander scale at three (65 vs. 61.50; P=3.5), six (82.33 vs. 80.67; P=1.67) and twelve months (92.67 vs. 90; P=2.67). Likewise, there were no differences in rate of postoperative malreduction (no cases in both groups), loss of reduction (three cases in screw group vs. four in TighRope® Knotless group, P=.54) or complications (P=1). Conclusions: Treatment of acute syndesmosis injuries with screws or the TighRope® Knotless implant is similar in both clinical and radiological results.(AU)

[Translated article] A randomised clinical trial comparing screws and the TighRope® Knotless system in the treatment of acute injuries of syndesmosis / Ensayo clínico comparando el uso de tornillos y del sistema TighRope® Knotless en el tratamiento de las lesiones agudas de la sindesmosis

Antecedentes y objetivo: Clásicamente el tratamiento de las lesiones agudas de la sindesmosis se ha realizado mediante tornillos. Hace unos años aparecieron implantes más flexibles que han evolucionado hasta el moderno TighRope® Knotless. El objetivo del presente estudio es comparar los resultados de ambos implantes. Material y métodos: Desde abril de 2019 hasta septiembre de 2020 reclutamos 68 pacientes diagnosticados de lesión aguda de la sindesmosis que fueron aleatorizados para tratamiento quirúrgico con tornillo o con TighRope® Knotless. Realizamos control posquirúrgico con tomografía axial computarizada, y a los 3, 6 y 12 meses se recogieron datos del rango articular, valores de escalas funcionales y se realizaron estudios de radiología simple. Resultados: Los pacientes tratados con tornillos no presentaban diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la escala AOFAS frente al grupo tratado con TighRope® Knotless a los 3 meses (83,1 vs. 81,80; p=1,03), ni a los 6 meses (88,27 vs. 88; p=0,26) ni a los 12 meses (93,03 vs. 92,10; p=0,93). Igualmente recogimos resultados similares en la escala de Olerud-Molander a los 3 meses (65 vs. 61,50; p=3,5), 6 meses (82,33 vs. 80,67; p=1,67) y 12 meses (92,67 vs. 90; p=2,67). Tampoco hubo diferencias en la tasa de malreducción posquirúrgica (ningún caso en ambos grupos), pérdida de reducción (3 en el grupo tratado con tornillo frente a 4 del grupo del TighRope® Knotless, p=0,54) o complicaciones (p=1). Conclusiones: El tratamiento de las lesiones agudas de la sindesmosis con tornillos o con TighRope® Knotless es similar tanto en resultados clínicos como radiológicos.(AU)

Background and aim: Classically acute syndesmosis injuries have been treated using screws. A few years ago more flexible implants appeared evolving to current TighRope® Knotless. The primary aim of this study is to compare clinical and radiographic outcome of both implants. Material and methods: From April 2019 to September 2020 68 patients diagnosed with acute syndesmosis injury were randomized to use screws or TighRope® Knotless. Syndesmosis reduction was assessed using bilateral CT potsoperatively. Outcomes were clinically and radiologically assessed at three, six, and twelve months after surgery. Results: No significant differences were identified in the AOFAS Scale between groups at three months (83.1 vs. 81.80; P=1.03), nor at six (88.27 vs. 88; P=.26) or at twelve (93.03 vs. 92.10; P=,93). There were also no differences in Olerud-Molander scale at three (65 vs. 61.50; P=3.5), six (82.33 vs. 80.67; P=1.67) and twelve months (92.67 vs. 90; P=2.67). Likewise, there were no differences in rate of postoperative malreduction (no cases in both groups), loss of reduction (three cases in screw group vs. four in TighRope® Knotless group, P=.54) or complications (P=1). Conclusions: Treatment of acute syndesmosis injuries with screws or the TighRope® Knotless implant is similar in both clinical and radiological results.(AU)

[Translated article] A randomised clinical trial comparing screws and the TighRope® Knotless system in the treatment of acute injuries of syndesmosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Classically acute syndesmosis injuries have been treated using screws. A few years ago more flexible implants appeared evolving to current TighRope® Knotless. The primary aim of this study is to compare clinical and radiographic outcome of both implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From April 2019 to September 2020 68 patients diagnosed with acute syndesmosis injury were randomised to use screws or TighRope® Knotless. Syndesmosis reduction was assessed using bilateral CT potsoperatively. Outcomes were clinically and radiologically assessed at three, six, and twelve months after surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences were identified in the AOFAS Scale between groups at three months (83.1 vs. 81.80; P=1.03), nor at six (88.27 vs. 88; P=.26) or at twelve (93.03 vs. 92.10; P=.93). There were also no differences in Olerud-Molander scale at three (65 vs. 61.50; P=3.5), six (82.33 vs. 80.67; P=1.67) and twelve months (92.67 vs. 90; P=2.67). Likewise, there were no differences in rate of postoperative malreduction (no cases in both groups), loss of reduction (three cases in screw group vs. four in TighRope® Knotless group, P=.54) or complications (P=1). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of acute syndesmosis injuries with screws or the TighRope® Knotless implant is similar in both clinical and radiological results.

A randomized clinical trial comparing screws and the TighRope® Knotless system in the treatment of acute injuries of syndesmosis. / Ensayo clínico comparando el uso de tornillos y del sistema TighRope® Knotless en el tratamiento de las lesiones agudas de la sindesmosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Classically acute syndesmosis injuries have been treated using screws. A few years ago more flexible implants appeared evolving to current TighRope® Knotless. The primary aim of this study is to compare clinical and radiographic outcome of both implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From April 2019 to September 2020 68 patients diagnosed with acute syndesmosis injury were randomized to use screws or TighRope® Knotless. Syndesmosis reduction was assessed using bilateral CT potsoperatively. Outcomes were clinically and radiologically assessed at three, six, and twelve months after surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences were identified in the AOFAS Scale between groups at three months (83.1 vs. 81.80; P=1.03), nor at six (88.27 vs. 88; P=.26) or at twelve (93.03 vs. 92.10; P=,93). There were also no differences in Olerud-Molander scale at three (65 vs. 61.50; P=3.5), six (82.33 vs. 80.67; P=1.67) and twelve months (92.67 vs. 90; P=2.67). Likewise, there were no differences in rate of postoperative malreduction (no cases in both groups), loss of reduction (three cases in screw group vs. four in TighRope® Knotless group, P=.54) or complications (P=1). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of acute syndesmosis injuries with screws or the TighRope® Knotless implant is similar in both clinical and radiological results.

Artroplastia de cabeza radial mediante prótesis metálicas en fracturas no reconstruibles. Nuestra experiencia / Radial Head Arthroplasty using metallic prosthesis in unreconstructible fractures. Our experience

Objetivo: Analizar los resultados obtenidos con la atroplastia de cabeza radial mediante prótesis metálicas en fracturas no reconstruibles. Material y métodos: Estudio observacional en 9 pacientes con fractura conminuta de la cabeza radial tratadas con prótesis metálicas. Se evaluaron retrospectivamente mediante el Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) y el cuestionario DASH. También evaluamos la presencia de dolor, los arcos de movilidad, los hallazgos radiográficos y la aparición de complicaciones. El seguimiento medio fue de dieciocho (5-42) meses. Resultados: Tras un seguimiento medio de dieciocho meses (5-42) se obtuvieron cuatro resultados excelentes, tres buenos, uno regular y uno malo según la escala MEPI. El arco de movilidad fue de 110º de flexo-extensión (60º- 145º), 64º de pronación (50º-70º) y 72º de supinación (35º-80º). Aparecen complicaciones en cinco pacientes. Conclusiones: El uso de prótesis metálicas de cabeza radial es una opción terapéutica para casos seleccionados de fracturas conminutas de cabeza radial con una elevada tasa de complicaciones (AU)

Objective: To analyze the outcomes using metallic prosthesis in unreconstructible radial head fractures. Materials and methods: Nine patients with conminuted radial head fractures in which metallic prosthetic arthroplasty was performed were retrospectively evaluated using the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and the DASH questionnaire. The mean follow-up were eighteen (5-42) months. Pain, mobility, X-Rays outcomes and complications were also evaluated. Results: there were four excellent results, three good, one fair and one bad using the MEP score . The average range of motion was 110º of flexo-extension, (60º-145º), 64º of pronation (50º-70º) and 72º of supination (35º-80º). Five complications were observed. Conclusion: The use of radial head metallic prosthesis is an option for the treatment of conminuted radial head fractures in selected cases with a high rate of complications (AU)