Predictors of Recurrence After Corticosteroid Injection for Trigger Digits.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify risk factors for recurrence of trigger digit following corticosteroid injection. METHODS: A retrospective review identified patients 18 years and older who presented to a single fellowship-trained hand surgeon with a symptomatic trigger digit during a 1-year period. Baseline demographic data were recorded. Patients with persistent trigger digit after a single injection were offered a second injection. Patients refusing a second injection were excluded from our analysis. Patients with persistent symptoms after 2 injections were offered surgery. For patients with diabetes mellitus, additional information regarding method of disease control and hemoglobin A1c level was recorded. RESULTS: The overall success of corticosteroid injection was 84% with 16% of patients requiring surgical release. Of the 240 patients successfully treated with injection, 99 (41%) required a second injection. Injections resulted in persistent triggering in 15% of patients with diabetes and 17% of patients without diabetes. A multivariate regression analysis revealed that the 2 strongest risk factors for requiring surgical release were patient age and patients whose fourth digit of the right hand was injected. Diabetes was not a risk factor for persistent triggering after corticosteroid injection. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings can be used to counsel patients prior to their initial injection and suggest that patients with diabetes can be managed with corticosteroid injection with equal efficacy compared with patients without diabetes.

Higher Frequency of Reoperation With a New Bicruciate-retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: With as many as 25% of patients reporting residual knee symptoms after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), alternative implant designs and surgical techniques have been proposed to further reduce these symptoms. There is growing evidence that retention of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) results in more natural knee kinematics; thus, implants with more normal joint mechanics could provide improved physical function postoperatively and reduce the amount of residual symptoms. Advancements in the bicruciate-retaining (BCR) TKA implant design have been made, and based on these, we wished to compare the BCR with a more traditional cruciate-retaining (CR) implant. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Was there a difference in the risk of reoperation after primary TKA between BCR and CR implant designs? (2) Was there a difference in the radiographic findings of radiolucent lines (RLLs) between the implant designs? (3) Was there a difference in patient-reported and clinical outcomes between the two implant designs? METHODS: Between January 2013 and May 2014, two surgeons performed 475 primary TKAs. During this time, 78 (16%) of these were performed with BCR implants and 294 (62%) with CR implants; the remainder were performed with anterior-stabilized or more constrained designs as a result of increased deformity and/or ligamentous deficiencies. During this period, the general indications for BCR TKA were arthritic knees with only slight to moderate deformity and sufficient ligamentous integrity of both the ACL and posterior cruciate ligament. The indications for CR TKA were similar other than these patients presented with a deficient ACL. A total of 66 (85%) of the BCR and 237 (81%) of the CR TKAs were available for followup at a minimum of 12 months or when reoperation occurred before 12 months (mean, 18 months; range, 2-32 months). With the numbers available, there were no differences between the groups in terms of age and sex, but the patients undergoing CR TKA had a greater mean body mass index (33 ± 7 versus 31 ± 5 kg/m2, p = 0.032). The frequency of early reoperation was compared between the groups as were radiographic evidence of RLL, patient-reported outcomes, and knee range of motion (ROM). RESULTS: Knees in the BCR group had a higher frequency of all-cause revision (5% [three of 66] versus 1.3% [three of 237]; hazard ratio (HR), 7.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-44.80; p = 0.028). Knees in the BCR group had a higher frequency of irrigation and débridement with component retention (HR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02-0.28; p < 0.001). No differences were found between groups for subsequent manipulation (HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.08-1.42; p = 0.137). The proportion of RLLs was greater in the BCR group (HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.62-5.32; p < 0.001) compared with the CR group. There were no differences between the groups in terms of the Physical Function Computerized Adaptive Test scores, Global10 scores or knee ROM outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary short-term findings suggest the BCR implant has inferior survivorship and concerning radiographic findings when compared with a conventional CR implant with respect to complications after primary TKA. These findings raise concerns about the new BCR design; however, further randomized trials are necessary to determine superiority between alternative implant designs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Airborne Exposure of Methyl Methacrylate During Simulated Total Hip Arthroplasty and Fabrication of Antibiotic Beads.

As the use of cement remains prevalent in orthopedic surgery, so do concerns over the safety of its active ingredient, methyl methacrylate (MMA). The Occupational Health and Safety Agency (OSHA) limits the airborne exposure to 100 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8 hour period. We measured MMA exposure to operating room personnel during simulated total hip arthroplasty (THA), antibiotic bead fabrication and simulated spill of MMA. Cumulative and peak exposures during simulated THA and antibiotic bead fabrication did not exceed OSHA limits of 100ppm. Vacuum mixing and greater distance from the vapor source reduced measured MMA exposure. Spilled MMA led to prolonged and elevated MMA levels. MMA levels returned to a negligible level in all scenarios by 20 minutes after mixing.

Predicting the outcome of revision carpal tunnel release.

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that the result of steroid injection in the carpal tunnel in a patient with recurrent carpal tunnel symptoms would serve as a good predictor of the outcome of later carpal tunnel release (CTR). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who underwent revision CTR for recurrent or persistent carpal tunnel syndrome over a 2-year period at our institution. A total of 28 wrists in 23 patients met inclusion criteria. We evaluated patients to determine whether preoperative factors or the result of injection predicted the outcome of revision CTR. We used a multivariate logistic regression analysis to predict surgical success when multiple preoperative findings were considered. RESULTS: Of the 23 wrists that had relief from injection, 20 had symptom improvement with surgery. Although they did not reach statistical significance, the sensitivity and positive predictive value for injection alone predicted outcome of revision CTR in 87%. No patient characteristic or physical examination finding predicted successful revision CTR. Multivariate logistic regression analysis combining preoperative injection results with physical examination findings (numbness and/or motor weakness in median nerve distribution, positive Durkin test, and positive Phalen test) provided a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 80%. CONCLUSIONS: In a small group of patients with recurrent carpal tunnel syndrome, cortisone injection into the carpal tunnel was not, by itself, a statistically significant predictor of successful revision surgery. However, relief from injection as a diagnostic test for predicting successful revision CTR was found to have both a high sensitivity and a positive predictive value. Coupled with the components of the physical examination, injection provides a good screening test to establish surgical success with revision CTR. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic III.

Hip dislocation: are hip precautions necessary in anterior approaches?

BACKGROUND: In 2005, we reported removal of functional restriction after primary THA performed through the anterolateral approach did not increase the incidence of dislocation. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: To develop a current practice guideline, we evaluated the incidence of early dislocation after primary THA after implementation of a no-restriction protocol. METHODS: Between January 2005 and December 2007, 2532 patients (2764 hips; 1541 women, 1223 men; mean age, 63.2 years [28-98 years]) underwent primary THA at our institution. Bilateral THA was performed in 232 patients (464 hips). The direct anterior or anterolateral approach was used in all patients. Femoral head size was 28, 32, or 36 mm. Patients were given no traditional functional restrictions postoperatively, such as use of elevated seats, abduction pillows, and restriction from driving. All patients received standard care at the judgment of the attending surgeon. One hundred forty-six patients missed followup appointments despite efforts to be contacted by telephone. The remaining 2386 of 2532 patients (94%) had a minimum followup of 6 months (mean, 14.2 months; range, 6-34 months). RESULTS: Four known dislocations occurred in the followed cohort of 2386 patients with 2612 hips (0.15%) at a mean of 5 days (3-12 days) postoperatively, none related to high-impact trauma. One dislocation occurred in a patient with a history of developmental dysplasia of the hip, two dislocations occurred while at the toilet (one with a previous hip fracture treated with a modular system), and one dislocation was idiopathic. CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed a low incidence of dislocation after primary THA in the absence of early postoperative restrictions. We conclude a no-restriction protocol does not increase the incidence of early dislocation after primary THA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.