Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Cureus ; 15(2): e34754, 2023 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36909086

ABSTRACT

This case report describes a patient with an enlarging and painless lump over the right acromioclavicular joint (ACJ). MRI showed a synovial cyst superior to the ACJ with a concomitant full-thickness tear of the supraspinatus. The patient underwent needle aspiration of the lump, which yielded 100ml of gelatinous fluid with no microbe growth. Despite repeated aspirations, the ACJ cyst continually enlarged beyond its initial size. This case report describes an ACJ cyst that enlarged in size after needle aspiration. The authors suggest surgical alternatives if cyst recurrence is observed after the initial attempt of aspiration.

2.
Knee ; 40: 227-237, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36512894

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Meniscal scaffold implants have gained interestas a therapeutic alternative for irreparable partial meniscal defects and post-meniscectomy syndrome. However, the effect of laterality on outcomes is unclear. This study aimsto assess the hypothesis that lateral meniscal scaffold implants have worse clinical or survival outcomes compared with medial scaffold implants. METHODS: The study was performedaccording to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and registered with PROSPERO. Three databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus) were searched from date of database establishment to 21 January 2022. Human studies reporting clinical or survival outcomedata specific to the medial or lateral meniscal scaffold implant were included. Random-effects model was used to analyse survival outcome data. RESULTS: Ten studies comprising 568 patients (mean age 29.2-40 years, follow up duration 1-14 years) were included. There were 483 medial and 85 lateral meniscal scaffold implants. Amongst two studies directly comparing the survival rate of medial and lateral meniscal scaffolds, there was no significant difference in survival rates between medial and lateral meniscus scaffolds (hazard ratio = 1.24, 95 % confidence interval: 0.51-3.03, P = 0.63). There were no consistent statistically significant differences between medial and lateral meniscal scaffolds in terms of postoperative Visual Analog Scale pain,Tegner Activity, Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome, and Knee Society Scores. CONCLUSION: Despite anatomical and biomechanical differences between the medial and lateral meniscus, there are no significant differences in clinical outcomes or survival rates between medial and lateral meniscal scaffold implants for irreparable partial meniscal defects at short- or mid-term follow up. Lateral meniscal scaffold implants are therefore non-inferior to medial meniscal scaffold implants.


Subject(s)
Menisci, Tibial , Osteoarthritis , Humans , Adult , Menisci, Tibial/surgery , Tissue Scaffolds , Knee Joint/surgery , Meniscectomy , Pain, Postoperative , Arthroscopy
3.
Clin Shoulder Elb ; 25(3): 210-216, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35971606

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), first introduced as a management option for cuff tear arthropathy, is now an accepted treatment for complex proximal humeral fractures. Few studies have identified whether the outcomes of RSA for shoulder trauma are comparable to those of RSA for shoulder arthritis. METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-institution cohort study of all patients who underwent RSA at our institution between January 2013 and December 2019. In total, 49 patients met the inclusion criteria. As outcomes, we evaluated the 1-year American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Constant shoulder scores, postoperative shoulder range of motion, intra- and postoperative complications, and cumulative revision rate. The patients were grouped based on preoperative diagnosis to compare postoperative outcomes across two broad groups. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 32.8 months (interquartile range, 12.6-66.6 months). The 1-year visual analog scale, range of motion, and Constant and ASES functional scores were comparable between RSAs performed to treat shoulder trauma and that performed for arthritis. The overall complication rate was 20.4%, with patients with a preoperative diagnosis of arthritis having significantly more complications than those with a preoperative diagnosis of trauma (34.8% vs. 7.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent RSA due to a proximal humeral fracture or dislocation did not fare worse than those who underwent RSA for arthritis at 1 year, in terms of both functional and radiological outcomes.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...