Interimplant femoral fracture: analysis of risk factors.

Interimplant fractures present a significant challenge for orthopedic surgeons. Despite a noticeable rise in these cases in recent years, our understanding of this specific fracture type remains limited. This study aims to analyze and identify the primary risk factors associated with interimplant femoral fractures. We conducted a retrospective analysis involving 20 patients with interimplant femoral fracture (case group) and 18 patients who had both proximal and distal femoral implants but did not experience interimplant fractures (control group). Our analysis focused on demographic factors (age, sex, BMI) and radiographic parameters (implant types, gap between implants, cortical thickness, femoral canal area) to identify potential risk factors. In the case group, all patients were females, whereas in the control group, 16 patients were female and 2 were males. The mean age in the case group was 88 [Formula: see text] 9 years and in the control group was 87 [Formula: see text] 12 years. None of the demographic differences reached statistical significance. The mean cortical thickness in the case group was 6 [Formula: see text] 2.25 mm, whereas in the control group, it was 9 [Formula: see text] 1.75 mm (p-value < 0.001). The median gap between the proximal and distal tips of the implants measured 194 [Formula: see text] 126 mm in the case group and 66 [Formula: see text] 78 mm in the control group (p-value < 0.001). Additionally, the mean femoral canal area was 284 [Formula: see text] 102 mm2 in the case group and 227 [Formula: see text] 26 mm2 in the control group (p-value < 0.010). Our data indicate that a small cortical thickness, a wide femoral canal area, and having a hip arthroplasty despite a gap between the implants exceeding 110 mm are factors that elevate the risk of interimplant femoral fracture. Notably, osteoporosis therapy emerges as a protective factor against these fractures.

Management of pediatric forearm fractures: what is the best therapeutic choice? A narrative review of the literature.

PURPOSE: This narrative review intends to summarize the most important and relevant data on diagnosis and treatment of pediatric forearm fractures and to describe the characteristics and advantage of each therapeutic option. METHODS: We conducted a literature research considering peer-reviewed papers (mainly clinical trials or scientific reviews) using the string "forearm fracture AND epidemiology" or "forearm fracture AND diagnosis or " forearm fracture AND treatment" or "forearm fracture AND casting" or "forearm fracture AND surgery". Studies were identified by searching electronic databases (MEDLINE and PubMed) till April 2020 and reference lists of retrieved articles. Only English-language articles were included in the review. RESULTS: Conservative management with cast immobilization is a safe and successful treatment option in pediatric forearm fractures. Surgical indication is recommended when an acceptable reduction cannot be obtained with closed reduction and casting. Surgical treatment options are intramedullary nail, plating and hybrid fixation. CONCLUSIONS: There is not a unique consensus about fracture management and treatment. Further studies are necessary to create univocal guidelines about optimal treatment, considering new techniques and available technologies.

Outcomes of neck modularity in total hip arthroplasty: an Italian perspective.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of clinical outcomes and complications of modular neck THA among Italian cohorts. METHODS: Only reviewed publications focused on Italian cohort patients in English language were considered for inclusion. Studies were included if they involved patients who underwent total hip replacement surgery with modular necks, and reported aetiology or survival rate or bone stability or clinical scores or complications. RESULTS: The studies included in our search reported data on 3714 patients and 3856 hips. Most of the studies were from high-volume surgery centres. The most frequent diagnosis was osteoarthritis that occurred in 2910 cases (75.9%). The average survival rate and average bone stability were 97.20% and 99.37%, respectively. The average HHS improved from 42.1 prior to surgery to 89.52 after surgery. Studies included in our search reported 40 complications. The most frequently reported complication was dislocation (40%). CONCLUSION: This review showed excellent survival rate and bone stability and good clinical outcomes in Italian cohort patients treated with modular neck THA, and these clinical results are comparable with international cohort rates. This review suggests that modular implants represent a very satisfying choice when practised by expert orthopaedic joint surgeons.

Failed back surgery syndrome: a new strategy by the epidural injection of MESNA.

PURPOSE: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of MESNA (sodium 2-mercaptoethanesulfonate) injection into the epidural space in the FBSS. METHODS: We designed a prospective phase II longitudinal study. Six consecutive patients were enrolled. Patients underwent one peridural injection per week for 3 weeks. NRS and ODI were investigated before and 48 h after injections, and at 1 week, 1 month and 2 months after the last procedures. Opioids intake is investigated before procedures and 1 week, 1 month and 3 months after the last procedures. Lumbosacral MRI is performed before the first procedure, at the end and 3 months after the last procedures. RESULTS: From baseline, at 3 months, NRS in standing, sitting and lying position improved, respectively, of 34.29, 30.56 and 26.47%; ODI improved of 20.3%; the average decrease in morphine intake was 20.54%. No difference in MR images was found. Conclusions Our preliminary results suggest that MESNA might be an efficacy alternative to common practice.