Megaprosthesis use in Paprosky III/IV femoral defects in non-oncological patients: analysis of survival, clinical, and functional outcomes after an average follow-up of five years.

PURPOSE: To determine the survival and patient-reported outcomes in non-oncological patients treated with proximal femoral resection (PFR) using MEG for femoral reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 16 patients. Demographic variables and complications developed were analyzed. Clinical-functional outcomes were measured using the modified Harris score (mHSS), numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score. MEG survival was estimated using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: Average follow-up was 5 years (range, 1-9). The 75% of patients were overweight and women with an average age of 74.2 ± 5.9-years (BMI of 28.5 ± 4.2 kg/m2). The main cause of MEG was periprosthetic infection (43.7%). The 50% of patients had post-surgical complications regarding with MEG, being the most frequent seromas and MEG dislocation. Implant survival was 93.4% and 80.9% at 3 and 7 years of follow-up, respectively. The functional results at the end of the follow-up with respect to the pre-surgical state improved from 9.5 ± 2.6 to 3 ± 0.9 mean NPRS and 26.5 ± 6.8 to 69.5 ± 13.5 mean mHHS, p < 0.001, respectively. The mean MSTS score was 68.1% that these results were considered excellent. CONCLUSIONS: The MEG for reconstruct III-IV femoral defects is a good therapeutic option that offers an acceptable clinical-functional result. Short-term and medium-term survival was greater than 80%. The most frequent complications are seromas and MEG dislocation. The use of constrained liner and abductor system reconstruction is essential to prevent the dislocation.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties: does the type of tibial component selected influence implant survival?

INTRODUCTION: Few information has been published on the survival of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and fixed-bearing tibial components. The aim of this study is to analyze if UKA survival varies according to UKA model used and to analyze the possible risk factors for UKA revision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study analyzing 301 UKAs (ACCURIS, all-polyethylene tibial component, 152; Triathlon PKR, metal-backed tibial component, 149) was performed. Demographic parameters as well as implant survival and cause of prosthetic revision were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, the log-rank test and the Cox multiple regression were used for the analysis. RESULTS: Average follow-up was 8.1 ± 3.08-years. Average age was 68.1 ± 8.6-years; 70.4% of subjects were women. The ACCURIS UKA group had a UKA revision rate higher compared to the Triathlon PKR group (16/152, 10.6% vs 5/149, 3.4%, respectively; p < 0.001). The main cause of prosthetic revision was aseptic loosening (5/21, 23.8%). All aseptic loosening cases and tibial component collapse were reported with the ACCURIS UKA group. Overall UKA survival was 98.01% (95% CI 95.62-99.1) at 1-year, 94.27% (95% CI 90.95-96.4) at 5-years and 92.38% (95% CI 88.48-94.99) at 10-years' follow-up. There were no differences in the Kaplan-Meier survival curves regarding operated side or affected tibiofemoral compartment (log-rank test = 0.614 and 0.763, respectively). However, Kaplan-Meier survival curve according to UKA model used was different (log-rank test = 0.033). The metal-backed component appeared to be a protector factor for UKA revision when adjusted for age, sex, operated side, and affected tibiofemoral compartment (Hazard Ratio 0.32, p = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Fixed-bearing UKAs showed excellent mid- and long-term survival rates. Aseptic loosening is the main cause of implant failure. PKR group (metal-backed component) seem to be a protector factor to UKA revision when it was compared with ACCURIS UKA group (all-polyethylene tibial component).

Análisis de las cesáreas en Uruguay por tipo de centro hospitalario / An analysis of caesarean sections in Uruguay by type of hospital

Objetivo: Analizar comparativamente la incidencia de las cesáreas en los subsistemas de salud de Uruguay y en relación con los estándares de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) considerando las características médico-obstétricas de los partos, en especial la clasificación de Robson. Método: Se emplean 190.847 nacimientos registrados en el Sistema Informático Perinatal de Uruguay entre 2009 y 2014 por tipo de subsector sanitario. Mediante modelos logit se analiza la probabilidad de cesárea considerando la clasificación de Robson, otros factores de riesgo y las características de las madres. Se comparan las tasas de cesárea predichas por los distintos subsectores sanitarios para una población común. Asimismo, se contraponen las tasas de cesáreas observadas en cada subsistema con las que, hipotéticamente, se encontrarían si los hospitales siguiesen las pautas de la muestra de hospitales de referencia de la OMS. Resultados: El subsector privado, en términos generales, presenta una incidencia de cesáreas mucho más elevada que el público, incluso después de considerar las características médico-obstétricas de los nacimientos. Las tasas de cesáreas en Uruguay están más de un 75% por encima del valor que cabría esperar de acuerdo con el modelo de la OMS. Conclusiones: La incidencia de cesáreas en Uruguay es muy alta respecto a los estándares definidos por la OMS, en especial en el subsector privado. Este hecho no se explica por las características clínicas de los nacimientos.

Objective: To analyse on a comparative basis the incidence of caesarean sections among the different health care systems in Uruguay and with respect to the World Health Organization's (WHO) standards, taking into account the medical-obstetric characteristics of the births, particularly, the Robson classification. Methods: We examine 190,847 births registered by the Perinatal Information System in Uruguay between 2009 and 2014 by type of health care system. Using logit models, we analyse the probability of caesarean section taking into account the Robson classification, other risk factors and the mothers' characteristics. We compared the caesarean rates predicted by the different subsystems for a common population. Furthermore, we contrast the caesarean rates observed in each subsystem with the rates that resulted if the Uruguayan hospitals followed the guidelines of the sample of WHO reference hospitals. Results: Private health systems in Uruguay exhibit a much higher incidence of caesarean sections than public ones, even after considering the medical-obstetric characteristics of the births. Caesarean rates are more than 75% higher than those observed if the WHO standards are applied. Conclusions: Uruguay has a very high incidence of caesarean sections with respect to WHO standards, particularly, in the private sector. This fact is unrelated to the clinical characteristics of the births.