The Stability of Fixation of Vancouver B2 Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures: Effect of Implantation Technique.

BACKGROUND: Due to increasing volume of total hip arthroplasties, periprosthetic femoral fractures have become a common complication with increased revision burden and perioperative morbidity. The objective of this study was to evaluate the fixation stability of Vancouver B2 fractures treated with 2 techniques. METHODS: A common B2 fracture was created by reviewing 30 type B2 cases. The fracture was then reproduced in 7 pairs of cadaveric femora. The specimens were divided into 2 groups. In Group I ("reduce-first"), the fragments were reduced first, followed by implantation of a tapered fluted stem. In Group II ("ream-first"), the stem was implanted in the distal femur first, followed by fragment reduction and fixation. Each specimen was loaded in a multiaxial testing frame with 70% of peak load during walking. A motion capture system was used to track the motion of the stem and fragments. RESULTS: The average stem diameter in Group II was 16.1 ± 0.4 mm, versus 15.4 ± 0.5 mm in Group I. The fixation stability was not significantly different in the 2 groups. After the testing, the average stem subsidence was 0.36 ± 0.31 mm and 0.19 ± 0.14 mm (P = .17) and the average rotation was 1.67 ± 1.30° and 0.91 ± 1.11° (P = .16) in Groups I and II, respectively. Compared to the stem, there was less motion of the fragments and there was no difference between the 2 groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: When tapered fluted stems were used in combination with cerclage cables for treatment of Vancouver type B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures, both the "reduce-first" and "ream-first" techniques showed adequate stem and fracture stability.

Use of intraoperative platelet-rich plasma during rotator cuff repair is correlated with increased patient-level charges across multiple categories.

BACKGROUND: As the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as an adjunct in rotator cuff repair (RCR) is debated, the decision to use PRP may be more heavily affected by its cost. We sought to quantify whether augmenting arthroscopic RCR with PRP injections at the time of surgery is correlated with increased patient-level charges. METHODS: All outpatient records reported in Texas from 2010 to 2018 were obtained from the publicly available Texas Healthcare Information Collection database through the Texas Department of State Health Services. All records including a Current Procedural Terminology code for arthroscopic RCR were included. Of the 139,587 records identified within this group, 1662 also contained a Current Procedural Terminology code for intraoperative PRP injection. Patient-level charge data were compared between those who received and those who did not receive concomitant PRP injection during the same outpatient surgical encounter. Subgroup analyses were performed across surgical facilities and insurance types. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare charges between PRP and non-PRP cases. Linear regression was used to predict the change in billed charges according to standard charge categories. P values less than .05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The total charges for arthroscopic RCR over the 8-year period were $4.66 billion, coming to $33,371 ± $22,118 per case. Cases that included PRP injection were found to have significantly greater overall charges than cases that did not ($54,452 ± $33,637 vs. $33,117 ± $21,818; P < .001). Linear regression indicated that concomitant PRP injections predicted an increase in combined total charges by $22,027 (95% confidence interval, $20,425-$23,628; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: PRP utilization at the time of rotator cuff surgery is correlated with increased patient-level charges overall, which occur across all charge subcategories and persist across surgical facility, surgeon volume, and insurance type. Detailed cost analysis is recommended to explore this charge correlation, and future cost-benefit analyses of PRP use in RCR should explore costs beyond that solely associated with PRP preparation, as these may have previously been overlooked.

Human Amniotic Allograft in Hand Surgery.

Amnion epithelial and mesenchymal cells have been shown in vitro to contain a variety of regulatory mediators that result in the promotion of cellular proliferation, differentiation, and epithelialization and the inhibition of fibrosis, immune rejection, inflammation, and bacterial invasion. Amniotic membrane-based products are approved for use as human cells, tissues, and cellular- and tissue-based products through Sections 361 or 351 of the Food and Drug Administration. Previously reported clinical applications of human amniotic membranes include nerve repair, tendon injury, joint and cartilage damage, and wound management. Although there is some evidence regarding the use of amniotic allografts in animals, there is a paucity of literature regarding their use in treating pathology of the hand and wrist. Further investigation is necessary to determine their effectiveness and therapeutic value in the upper extremity.