Acromioclavicular joint dislocation with loop double endobutton fixation assisted by orthopaedic surgery robot positioning system.

OBJECTIVE: Acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation is a common orthopedic injury that can significantly impair shoulder function and reduce quality of life. Effective treatment methods are essential to restore function and alleviate pain. To investigate the short-term clinical efficacy of the minimally invasive closed-loop double endobutton fixation assisted by orthopaedic surgery robot positioning system (TiRobot) in the treatment of AC joint dislocation, and to evaluate its feasibility and safety. METHODS: The clinical data of 19 patients with AC joint dislocation who underwent treatment with closed-loop double Endobutton fixation assisted by TiRobot between May 2020 and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, the Constant Murley Score (CMS), and shoulder abduction range of motion were assessed and compared preoperatively and at the last follow-up. Computed tomography (CT) parameters of the acromioclavicular joint, including acromioclavicular distance (ACD), the distance between the upper and lower Endobutton (DED), the horizontal distance between the anterior edge of the distal clavicle and the anterior edge of the acromion (DACC), the diameter of the clavicular tunnel (DCT), and coracoid tunnel diameter (DC), were compared at 2 days, and 1 month after surgery, as well as at the last follow-up, along with the evaluation of intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: The postoperative VAS, CMS, and shoulder-abduction range of motion were significantly improved compared with the preoperative (all, P<0.05). The statistical analysis showed no significant difference in the CT image parameters of the acromioclavicular joint at 2 days and 1 month after surgery(all, P>0.05). Comparisons of DCT and DC revealed statistically significant differences between the last follow-up and 1 month after surgery (P<0.05), and no statistically significant difference was found in ACD, DED, and DACC(all, P>0.05). There were no complications such as infection or vascular or neurological damage, no cases of rostral or clavicle fractures, loss of reduction, heterotopic ossification, shoulder stiffness, and no loosening or breaking of internal fixations. CONCLUSION: Closed-loop double endobutton internal fixation assisted by TiRobot is an ideal method for the treatment of acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation. This method has the advantages of relatively simple operation, more accurate localization of bone tunnel during operation, less surgical trauma, and good recovery of shoulder function.

Effects of teriparatide compared with risedronate in the treatment of osteoporosis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effects and safety of teriparatide with risedronate in the treatment of osteoporosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library database were systematically reviewed for studies published up to February 24, 2019. Eligible studies that compared the effects of teriparatide with risedronate in osteoporosis were included in this meta-analysis. The outcomes included percentage change in bone mineral density (BMD) of lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, the incidence of clinical fractures, serum bone markers, and adverse events. A random-effects or fixed-effects model was used to pool the estimate, according to the heterogeneity among the included studies. RESULTS: Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with risedronate, teriparatide was associated with a significant increase in lumbar spine BMD [weight mean difference (WMD)=4.24, 95%CI: 3.11, 5.36; P < .001], femoral neck BMD (WMD=2.28, 95%CI: 1.39, 3.18; P < .001), and total hip BMD (WMD = 1.19, 95%CI: 0.47, 1.91; P = .001). Moreover, patients in teriparatide group had significantly lower incidences of clinical fracture (risk ratio [RR] = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.32, 0.72; P < .001), new vertebral fracture (RR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.32, 0.63; P < .001), and non-vertebral fracture (RR = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.40, 0.98; P = .042) than those in risedronate group. There were significant differences between the 2 groups in serum change, including P1NP (WMD = 122.34, 95%CI: 68.89, 175.99; P < .001), CTx (WMD = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.29, 0.96; P < .001), and iPTH (WMD = -13.18, 95%CI: -15.04, -11.33; P < .001). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the 2 groups (RR = 0.93, 95%CI: 0.69, 1.25; P = .610). CONCLUSION: This study suggested that teriparatide was more effective than risedronate for increasing the BMD in lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, as well as reducing the incidences of clinical fracture, new vertebral fracture and non-vertebral fracture. There was no significant difference in incidence of adverse events between the 2 drugs. Considering the potential limitations in the present study, further large-scale, well-performed randomized trials are needed to verify our findings.