Outcomes and complications of distal humeral hemiarthroplasty for distal humeral fractures - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty has been performed for a variety of indications with the most common being management of distal humeral fractures. This systematic review evaluates the outcomes and complications of distal humeral hemiarthroplasty for this pathology. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE for studies reporting indications and outcomes of patients undergoing distal humeral hemiarthroplasty. Study screening, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction were performed. Summery statistics were provided. RESULTS: We included 11 studies (N = 163) in this review. In all studies, the indication for distal humeral hemiarthroplasty was the presence of an intraarticular, comminuted, unreconstructable fracture. The mean post-operative MEPS, FullDASH, and QuickDASH (SD) scores were 83.6 (6.1) points, 25.4 (10.3), and 15.7 (7.4) points, respectively. The mean post-operative range of motion (SD) was 106° (11°) in the flexion and extension arc and 153° (19°) in the protonation and supination arc. The overall rate of adverse events and complication was 63%. The rate for major complications was 11%. The mean total revision rate was 4% (0% to 15) and total re-operation rate was 29% (0% to 88%). CONCLUSION: Distal humeral hemiarthroplasty is a suitable option for unreconstructable distal humeral fractures and offers good functional outcomes with acceptable complication rates.

Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot studies in HIV: a systematic review and methodological study.

BACKGROUND: Pilot studies are essential in determining if a larger study is feasible. This is especially true when targeting populations that experience stigma and may be difficult to include in research, such as people with HIV. We sought to describe how pilot studies have been used to inform HIV clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted a methodological study of pilot studies of interventions in people living with HIV published until November 25, 2020, using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL). We extracted data on their nomenclature, primary objective, use of progression criteria, sample size, use of qualitative methods, and other contextual information (region, income, level, type of intervention, study design). RESULTS: Our search retrieved 10,597 studies, of which 248 were eligible. The number of pilot studies increased steadily over time. We found that 179 studies (72.2%) used the terms "pilot" or "feasibility" in their title, 65.3% tested feasibility as a primary objective, only 2% used progression criteria, 23.9% provided a sample size estimation and only 30.2% used qualitative methods. CONCLUSIONS: Pilot studies are increasingly being used to inform HIV research. However, the titles and objectives are not always consistent with piloting. The design and reporting of pilot studies in HIV could be improved.

The efficacy of teriparatide on lumbar spine bone mineral density, vertebral fracture incidence and pain in post-menopausal osteoporotic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Teriparatide has been increasingly utilized in the management of osteoporosis. The efficacy of low and high dose teriparatide on lumbar spine bone mineral density, vertebral fracture incidence and pain is unknown. We sought to determine the efficacy of teriparatide on these patient-important outcomes using a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL) was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluate teriparatide to any comparator for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. The Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria were used by two independent reviewers to assess the strength and quality of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies (n = 6024) were included in this review, with 2855 patients receiving teriparatide and 3169 patients receiving placebo or control treatment. A teriparatide dose of 20 µg/day increased lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.34 standard deviation (SD) units higher (95% CI 0.19-0.48 SDs higher) in comparison to placebo. Relative to anti-resorptive agents, 20 µg/day of teriparatide had a range from 0.14 SD units to 0.96 SD units higher (95% CI, 0.08 SDs lower to 0.36 SDs higher, CI, 0.33-1.59 SDs higher, respectively). 20 µg/day teriparatide had a significant effect on pain severity to placebo or control (SMD 0.80, 95% CI, 1.16-0.43 SDs lower) and also decreased the incidence of vertebral fractures compared to placebo (relative risk 0.31, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.46). Arthralgia and extremity pain incidence were also calculated; there were 15 and 8 fewer events per 1000 patients with the use of 20 µg/day of teriparatide compared to placebo or control, respectively. CONCLUSION: High quality evidence supports the utilization of teriparatide 20 µg/day dose to significantly improve lumbar spine BMD and decrease incidence of vertebral fractures and pain severity relative to all comparators. 40 µg/day dose of teriparatide demonstrated significantly better results with prolonged treatment. This data is valuable for clinicians involved in the care of this growing demographic of patients. Further investigation on the safety and efficacy of teriparatide in higher doses for the long-term treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women should be conducted through high-quality clinical trials.

Efficacy of Electrical Stimulation for Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Spinal fusion is one of the most common procedures performed in spine surgery. As rates of spinal fusion continue to increase, rates of complications such as nonunions continue to increase as well. Current evidence supporting the use of electrical stimulation to promote fusion is inconclusive. This review aimed to determine if postoperative electrical stimulation is more efficacious than no stimulation or placebo in promoting radiographic fusion in patients undergoing spinal fusion. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL and MEDLINE from date of inception to current. Ongoing clinical trials were also identified and reference lists of included studies were manually searched for relevant articles. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Trialists were contacted for any missing or incomplete data. Of 1184 articles screened, 7 studies were eligible for final inclusion (n = 941). A total of 487 patients received postoperative electrical stimulation and 454 patients received control or sham stimulation. All evidence was of moderate quality. Electrical stimulation (pulsed electromagnetic fields, direct current, and capacitive coupling) increased the odds of a successful fusion by 2.5-fold relative to control (OR = 2.53, 95% CI 1.86 to 3.43, p < 0.00001). A test for subgroup interaction by stimulation type, smoking status, and number of levels fused was not significant (p = 0.93, p = 0.82 and p = 0.65, respectively). This systematic review and meta-analysis found moderate-quality evidence supporting the use of postoperative electrical stimulation as an adjunct to spinal fusion surgery. Patients treated with electrical stimulation have significantly greater rates of successful fusion. The level of evidence for this study is therapeutic level I.

The Impact of Evidence in Surgery of the Musculoskeletal System.

There have been a growing number of landmark randomized controlled trials published in the orthopedic literature over the past decade. These large-scale trials have had a substantial impact on informing clinical orthopedic practice globally. This review highlights a selected sample of such pivotal trials, across the subspecialties of trauma, sports medicine, arthroplasty, spine, and the important topic of intimate partner violence.

Interventions for displaced radial head fractures: network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of studies comparing treatments for displaced radial head fractures (RHFs) and perform a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: We searched electronic databases and reviewed the reference lists of included studies and prior systematic reviews. We included RCTs and cohort studies that (1) compared treatments for displaced RHFs in adults and (2) reported a functional outcome or postoperative complications. Data from RCTs were synthesized using a Bayesian network meta-analysis. We compared the proportion of patients categorized as "excellent" or "good" according to the Broberg and Morrey scale and the rate of postoperative complications using odds ratios (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). RESULTS: We included 20 studies (4 RCTs). The evidence from RCTs examined radial head arthroplasty (RHA), open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with metal implants (ORIF-M), and ORIF with biodegradable implants (ORIF-B). The network meta-analysis demonstrated that patients treated with an RHA had greater odds of achieving an "excellent" or "good" score compared with ORIF-M (OR, 22.5; 95% CrI, 2.73-299.58) and ORIF-B (OR, 11.83; 95% CrI, 0.58-324.57). For postoperative complications, RHA patients had a lower odds of experiencing a complication than ORIF-M (OR, 0.15; 95% CrI, 0.01-1.81) and ORIF-B (OR, 0.16; 95% CrI, 0.01-3.06) patients. CONCLUSION: The network meta-analysis of RCTs indicated that RHA results in better function and reduced postoperative complications than ORIF-M and ORIF-B over 2 years in the treatment of displaced RHFs.

Comprehensive Examination of Therapies for Pain in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Pain in Parkinson's disease (PD) is a debilitating symptom with a prevalence of 68%, yet is untreated 50% of the time. What is unclear, however, is which treatment is optimal for minimizing pain severity in PD. Thus, the objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy of a variety of novel, complimentary, and conventional treatments for pain in PD and elucidate which therapy is the most effective. A systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and CENTRAL databases. To identify additional articles, manual searches of reference lists of included trials were also searched. Major neurology conference proceedings occurring between January 2014 and February 2018 were also searched to identify unpublished studies that may be potentially eligible. Twenty-five randomized controlled trials that encompassed medical, surgical, and complementary therapies met our inclusion criteria and exhibited moderate quality evidence. Two reviewers conducted assessments for study eligibility, risk of bias, data extraction, and quality of evidence rating. A conservative random-effects model was used to pool effect estimates of pain severity. The greatest reductions in pain were found with safinamide (Standardized mean difference = -4.83, 95% CI [-5.07 to -4.59], p < 0.0001), followed by cannabinoids and opioids, multidisciplinary team care, catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors, and electrical and Chinese therapies. Moderate effects in reducing pain were in pardoprunox and surgery, while the weakest effects were in dopaminergic agonists and miscellaneous therapies. Safinamide is an important adjunct to standard parkinsonian medication for alleviating pain in PD.

Osteoarthritis Increases Paresthestic and Akathisic Pain, Anxiety Case-ness, and Depression Severity in Patients With Parkinson's Disease.

Objective: Parkinson's disease (PD) patients are known to suffer from pain, anxiety, and depression, but the exact degree of association between the two is unknown. As many PD patients also suffer from physical impairments, this cross-sectional case-control study sets out to compare and determine the case-ness of pain, anxiety and depression in PD patients that suffer with or without symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA). The goal of this study, therefore, was to observe if additional pain associated with comorbid OA in PD patients is correlated with greater depression and anxiety rates. The importance of understanding the burden of pain and increased depression severity of PD and OA patients is so that they may be screened appropriately based on the symptoms, which may increase their overall quality of life. Methods:This cross-sectional case-control study included 3 groups of 34 patients and 78 healthy age and gender-matched control participants. PD patients with symptomatic OA (PD+OA), PD patients without symptomatic OA (PD), patients with symptomatic OA but no PD (OA), and healthy control participants (Control). A PD patient group with Restless Legs Syndrome (PD+RLS) of 27 patients was also included. All participants completed questionnaires to assess for pain, depression, and anxiety. Results:PD+OA and PD patients had worsened depression severity and were more likely to report anxiety and depression case-ness than OA patients. PD+OA patients were more likely to complain about paresthestic and akasthisic pain, but less likely to complain about aching pain compared to PD patients and OA patients. PD+OA patients were more likely to have greater pain severity, and were more likely to report radiating and sharp pain than PD+RLS patients. PD+OA patients were also more likely to report higher depression case-ness than PD+RLS patients. Conclusion:PD with OA seems to be linked with specific pain characteristics (akathisia and paraesthesia) as well as heightened overall pain severity and pain interference in comparison to OA alone, PD alone and PD with RLS. PD is also correlated with depression severity and anxiety case-ness in OA when compared to the OA alone, PD alone and PD with RLS.