ABSTRACT
Osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation has been used to treat a wide spectrum of cartilage deficiencies in the knee, including spontaneous necrosis of the knee. Studies reporting outcomes after OCA transplantation have shown reliable improvement in pain and return to activities of daily living. We describe a single-plug, press-fit technique for OCA transplantation with concomitant high tibial osteotomy to treat femoral condyle chondral defects in a varus knee. Pearls and pitfalls of this technique are presented; attention should be paid to correction of concomitant joint pathology and malalignment to facilitate osseointegration and survivorship of the allograft plug into host bone. Appropriate surgical timing and prompt allograft implantation help to maximize chondrocyte viability.
ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. OBJECTIVES: To compare early postoperative radiological and clinical outcomes between 2-level minimally invasive (MIS) trans-psoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: Fifty three consecutive patients undergoing 2-level lumbar interbody fusion from L3-L5 for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis were enrolled. Twenty four patients underwent LLIF and 29 underwent TLIF. RESULTS: Operative time and length of stay were similar between LLIF and TLIF (272.8 ± 82.4 vs 256.1 ± 59.4 minutes; 5.5 ± 2.8 vs 4.7 ± 3.3 days, P > .05), whereas blood loss was lower for LLIF (229.0 ± 125.6 vs 302.4 ± 97.1mls, P = .026). Neurological deficits were more common in LLIF (9 vs 3, P = .025), whereas persistent deficits were rare for both (1 vs 1, P = 1). For both groups, all patient reported outcomes visual analogue scale (VAS back pain, VAS leg pain, ODI, SF-36 physical) improved from preoperative to 2-years postoperative (P < .05), with both groups showing no significant differences in extent of improvement for any outcome. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion demonstrated superior restoration of disc height (L3-L4: 4.1 ± 2.4 vs 1.2 ± 1.9 mm, P < .001; L4-L5: 4.6 ± 2.4 vs .8 ± 2.8 mm, P < .001), foraminal height (FH) (L3-L4: 3.5 ± 3.6 vs 1.0 ± 3.6 mm, P = .014; L4-L5: 3.0 ± 3.5 vs -.1 ± 4.4 mm, P = .0080), segmental lordosis (4.1 ± 6.4 vs -2.1 ± 8.1°, P = .005), lumbar lordosis (LL) (4.1 ± 7.0 vs -2.3 ± 12.6°, P = .026) and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch (-4.1 ± 7.0 vs 2.3 ± 12.6°, P = .019) at 2-years follow-up. CONCLUSION: The superior radiological outcomes demonstrated by 2-level trans-psoas LLIF did not translate into difference in clinical outcomes compared to 2-level TLIF at the 2-years follow-up, suggesting both approaches are reasonable for 2-level lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Personal mobility devices (PMDs), such as electronic scooters or motorised bicycles, are efficient modes of transportation. Their recent popularity has also resulted in an increase in PMD-related injuries. We aimed to characterise and compare the nature of injuries sustained by PMD users and bicycle riders. Methods: This retrospective study compared injury patterns among PMD and bicycle users. 140 patients were admitted between November 2013 and September 2018. Parameters studied included patients' demographics (e.g. age, gender and body mass index), type of PMD, nature of injury, surgical intervention required, duration of hospitalisation and time off work. Results: Of 140 patients, 46 (32.9%) patients required treatment at the department of orthopaedic surgery. 19 patients were PMD users while 27 were bicycle riders. 16 (84.2%) patients with PMD-related injuries were men. PMD users were significantly younger (mean age 45 ± 15 years) when compared to bicycle riders (mean age 56 ± 17 years; P <0.05). A quarter (n = 5, 26.3%) of PMD users sustained open fractures and over half (n = 10, 52.6%) required surgical intervention. Among 27 bicycle users, 7.4% (n = 2) of patients sustained open fractures and 70.4% (n = 19) required surgical intervention. Both groups had comparable inpatient stay duration and time off work. Conclusion: PMD-related orthopaedic traumas are high-energy injuries, with higher rates of open fractures, when compared to bicycle injuries. In addition, PMD users are significantly younger and of economically viable age. Prolonged hospitalisation and time off work have socioeconomic implications. Caution should be exercised when using PMDs.
