RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Managing persistent elbow instability and chronic dislocations presents challenges despite traditional treatments. Supplementary methods like immobilization and various fixations, though common, can carry high complication rates. This study assesses the efficacy of bridge plating in treating complex elbow instability through a retrospective review of patients. Data on characteristics, treatment duration, range of motion, complications, and evaluation scores were analyzed, providing insights into outcomes complications associated with bridge plating. RESULTS: Eleven patients were reviewed at an average follow-up of 80 ± 68 weeks. postoperatively. The average age was 53±14 years and there were 5 females and 6 males. The average BMI was 38. Bridge plating was used for a spectrum of complex elbow injuries. The average time from injury to bridge plating in acute cases was 29±19 days and 344±381 days in chronic cases. The average duration of bridge plating was 121 ± 72 days. At the time of plate removal, mean intraoperative elbow motion was extension 58±12°, flexion 107±14°, supination 66±23° and pronation 60±26°. At the latest follow-up visit, average elbow motion was extension 37±22°, Flexion 127± 17°, supination 72±15° and pronation 63±18°. There were 6 complications (55%); heterotopic ossification, ulnar neuropathy, wound failure over the plate in a thin patient, an ulnar shaft peri-prosthetic fracture due to a seizure induced fall, and elbow subluxation despite bridge plate fixation. One patient sustained a fracture of a 3.5mm locking bridge plate. One patient required a contracture release for persistent stiffness. Four of these complications can be directly attributed to the use of the bridge plate (36%). At final follow-up, the average patient rated elbow evaluation score was 34, with 0 indicating no pain and disability. The average single assessment numeric evaluation score was 66% for the 8 patients who had this available, with 100% being the best possible attainable score. CONCLUSION: Bridge plating effectively maintains joint reduction in selected complex elbow instability cases. However, patients with bridge plates often require a second surgery for removal and experience high rates of general complications due to the complexity of their condition.
RESUMO
Background and Objective: Crucial to the success of any total or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is the stability of the glenoid component fixation. Instability can lead to early implant failure and unsatisfactory results. Patients often present with varying forms of glenoid bone loss (GBL) in both the primary and revision settings, which can be a challenge for the treating surgeon. Severe cases of GBL can increase the risk of potential complications and diminish implant longevity. The use of the reverse total shoulder replacement has been particularly helpful when addressing significant glenoid bony defects. Various approaches have been proposed to deal with GBL, all of which require an individualized assessment of the specifics of the defect in order to provide maximal fixation and thereby optimize the longevity of the shoulder arthroplasty. This article aims to review the recent literature on GBL in shoulder arthroplasty to provide guidance when considering treatment based on the best available evidence. Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AccessMedicine, ClinicalKey, DynaMed, and Micromedex were queried for publications utilizing the following keywords: "glenoid bone loss" AND "glenoid bone deficiency" AND "shoulder arthroplasty" AND "classification". The search was restricted to research published between 2004 and 2023. There were no restrictions on study type or language. Key Content and Findings: GBL should be critically evaluated prior to undertaking total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The treating surgeon should be aware of various methods of addressing bone defects. Conclusions: The use of TSA is increasing to address various shoulder pathologies. Addressing glenoid bone defects is of critical importance to maximize the longevity and outcome of TSA.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Opioid overprescription is a problem in orthopaedic surgery. Arthroscopic surgery, given its minimally invasive nature, represents an opportunity to minimize opioid prescription and consumption by using effective pain management adjuncts. Thus, the primary question posed in this study was which noninvasive pain management modalities can effectively manage pain and reduce opioid intake after arthroscopic surgery. METHODS: The databases PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched on August 10, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating noninvasive pain management strategies in arthroscopy patients were evaluated. Eligible studies were selected through a systematic screening process. Meta-analysis was performed for pain scores and opioid consumption at time points which had sufficient data available. RESULTS: Twenty-one RCTs were included, with a total of 2,148 patients undergoing shoulder, knee, and hip arthroscopy. Meta-analysis comparing nonopioid, oral analgesic regimens, with or without patient education components, with the standard of care or placebo demonstrated no difference in pain scores at 24 hours, 4 to 7 days, or 14 days postoperatively. Nonopioid regimens also resulted in significantly lower opioid consumption in the first 24 hours postoperatively (mean difference, -37.02 mg oral morphine equivalents, 95% confidence interval, -74.01 to -0.03). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), cryotherapy, and zolpidem were also found to effectively manage pain and reduce opioid use in a limited number of studies. CONCLUSIONS: A range of noninvasive pain management strategies exist to manage pain and reduce opioid use after arthroscopic procedures. The strongest evidence base supports the use of multimodal nonopioid oral analgesics, with some studies incorporating patient education components. Some evidence supports the efficacy of TENS, cryotherapy, and nonbenzodiazepine sleeping aids. Direction from governing bodies is an important next step to incorporate these adjuncts into routine clinical practice to manage pain and reduce the amount of opioids prescribed and consumed after arthroscopic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of the levels of evidence.
