Biomechanical comparison of tension band suture fixation and tension band wiring in olecranon fractures.

PURPOSE: Traditional tension band wire fixation (TBWF) of olecranon fractures is associated with high revision rates due to implant-related complications. The purpose of the study was to compare the strength of fixation in olecranon fractures between TBWF and an all-suture based technique. METHODS: A transverse fracture was created in 20 paired fresh-frozen human cadaveric elbows. Fractures were randomly (alternating right-left) assigned for fixation with either tension band suture fixation (TBSF) or TBWF. The elbow was fixed in 90° of flexion and underwent cycling loading by pulling the triceps tendon to 300 N for 200 cycles. Fracture displacement was optically recorded using digital image correlation (DIC). Finally, load-to-failure was assessed by a monotonic pull to 1000 N and failure mechanism was recorded. RESULTS: Two specimens in the TBSF group were excluded from the cycling loading analysis due to technical difficulties with the DIC. After cyclic loading, median (min-max) fracture displacement was 0.28 mm (0.10-0.44) in the TBSF group and 0.18 mm (0.00-1.48) in the TBWF group (p = 0.315). No difference was found between the two groups in the repeated measures analysis of variance (p = 0.329). In the load-to-failure test, 6/10 specimens failed in the TBSF group (median load-to-failure 791 N) vs. 8/10 in the TBWF group (median load-to-failure 747 N). The TBSF constructs failed due to fracture of the dorsal cortex, suture breakage or triceps failure. The TBWF constructs failed due to breakage of the wire. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in fixation strength between the TBWF and TBSF constructs. Our findings suggest TBSF to be a feasible alternative to TBWF and we hypothesize that a non-metallic implant may have fewer implant-related complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic science study.

Daytime and scheduled surgery for major dysvascular lower extremity amputation.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing a major dysvascular lower extremity amputation (LEA) often have a poor outcome with a high risk of complications and mortality despite improvements in care and perioperative programmes. We evaluated whether scheduled surgery would reduce the failure rate in patients with a major LEA. METHODS: A total of 328 consecutive patients undergoing a major LEA from 2016 to 2019 were enrolled at a single centre. Early failure was defined as re-amputation or revision within 30 days of the index amputation. In 2018, a new regime comprising two scheduled surgery days was implemented. The risk of failure comparing the two cohorts (2016-2017, n = 165 versus 2018-2019, n = 163) was calculated for amputation on scheduled versus non-scheduled days and for other potentially influencing factors. RESULTS: The median (25-75% quartiles) age of all patients was 74 (66-83) years, 91% had an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade ≥ 3 and 92% had atherosclerosis or diabetes mellitus. The index amputee levels were 36% below-knee, 60% transfemoral and 4% bilateral transfemoral. In the intervention cohort, 59% were amputated on the scheduled days versus 36% in the control group (p less-than 0.001). Correspondingly, more patients (72.4% versus 57.6%, p = 0.005) were amputated during daytime and the 30-day failure rate was reduced to 11.0% (n = 18) versus 16.4% (n = 27) (p = 0.2). Risk of failure on scheduled days in the intervention group was 8.3% versus 14.9% on any other day (p = 0.2). Correspondingly, daytime surgery reduced the risk of failure (6.8% versus 22.2%, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Daytime and scheduled surgery for major LEA may possibly reduce early risk of failure. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.

Suture tension band fixation vs. metallic tension band wiring for patella fractures - A biomechanical study on 19 human cadaveric patellae.

PURPOSE: Traditional tension band fixation of patella fracture is associated with high reoperation rates. The purpose of the study was to assess strength of fixation in patella fractures treated with either a non-metallic all suture-based technique or traditional metallic tension band wiring. METHODS: Ten paired human cadaveric specimens were included. A transverse fracture was created, reduced and fixated with a non-metallic or metallic approach. Non-metallic fixation was done according to a previously published technique, metallic fixation was done according to AO description. Specimens were fixed in 90° of flexion and underwent 200 cycles of loading by pulling the Quadriceps tendon to 300 Newton. Fracture displacement was optically monitored. Primary outcome was fracture displacement after 200 cycles compared to the first cycle. Subsequently, load-to-failure was assessed by a monotonic pull to 1000 N. RESULTS: For cyclic loading analysis, one specimen from each group was excluded due to machine synchronization, resulting in a total population of 18 specimens. Median (min-max) fracture displacement was 0.65 mm (0.06-1.3) in the non-metallic group and 0.68 mm (0-1.23), (p=0.931) in the metallic group. No difference in displacement was found between the two groups in the repeated measures analysis of variance (p=0.5524). For load-to-failure analysis one specimen was excluded due to machine synchronization, resulting a total population of 19 specimens. 2/9 specimens failed in the non-metallic group (at 979 and 635 N) and 2/10 failed in the metallic group (745 and 654 N). CONCLUSION: Non-metallic technique is a biomechanically viable alternative to traditional tension band fixation and it can hopefully lead to fewer implant-related complications.

The Noergaard technique is a non-traumatic method for reduction of anterior shoulder dislocation.

INTRODUCTION: In this article, we describe the Noergaard technique for reduction of anterior shoulder dislocation. This is an atraumatic reduction method proven successful through several years of practice. We describe and evaluate the results of this technique through a retrospective analysis of patients admitted and treated for anterior shoulder dislocation at the emergency department (ED) of Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark, in a one-year period. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of all patients admitted with anterior shoulder dislocation (n = 151) at the ED. In the Noergaard technique, the patient is placed standing, bent over forwards in front of the rail on a hospital bed, resting the forehead on the back of the non-affected forearm, which is placed on the rail. The affected arm should now be relaxed and stretched, hanging straight down towards the floor. The patient is then instructed to relax as much as possible and make pendular and circular motions with the affected arm hanging down. RESULTS: Reduction was primarily attempted in 67 patients using the Noergaard technique. Successful reduction was achieved in a total of 52 patients (77%). CONCLUSIONS: The Noergaard technique seems to be a safe and atraumatic reduction technique that involves no physical manipulation of the affected limb. Based on our results and experience, we recommend the use of this technique as first line of treatment in anterior shoulder dislocations. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03649373).

Are There Differences in Micromotion on Radiostereometric Analysis Between Bicruciate and Cruciate-retaining Designs in TKA? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Bicruciate-retaining TKA has been proposed to improve clinical outcomes by maintaining intrinsic ACL function. However, because the unique design of the bicruciate-retaining tibial component precludes a tibial stem, fixation may be compromised. A radiostereometric analysis permits an evaluation of early migration of tibial components in this setting, but to our knowledge, no such analysis has been performed. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We performed a randomized controlled trial using a radiostereometric analysis and asked, at 2 years: (1) Is there a difference in tibial implant migration between the bicruciate-retaining and cruciate-retaining TKA designs? In a secondary analysis, we asked: (2) Is there a difference in patient-reported outcomes (Oxford Knee Score [OKS] and Forgotten Joint Score [FJS] between the bicruciate-retaining and cruciate-retaining TKA designs? (3) What is the frequency of reoperations and revisions for the bicruciate-retaining and cruciate-retaining TKA designs? METHODS: This parallel-group trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01966848) randomized 50 patients with an intact ACL who were eligible to undergo TKA to receive either a bicruciate-retaining or cruciate-retaining TKA. Patients were blinded to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the maximum total point motion (MTPM) of the tibial component measured with model-based radiostereometric analysis (RSA) at 2 years postoperatively. The MTPM is a translation vector defined as the point in the RSA model that has the greatest combined translation in x-, y- and z-directions. A 1-year postoperative mean MTPM value of 1.6 mm has been suggested as a threshold for unacceptable increased risk of aseptic loosening after both 5 and 10 years. The repeatability of the MTPM was found to be 0.26 mm in our study. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively with the OKS (scale of 0-48, worst-best) and FJS (scale of 0-100, worst-best). Baseline characteristics did not differ between groups. At 2 years postoperatively, RSA images were available for 22 patients who underwent bicruciate-retaining and 23 patients who underwent cruciate-retaining TKA, while patient-reported outcome measures were available for 24 patients in each group. The study was powered to detect a 0.2-mm difference in MTPM between groups (SD = 0.2, significance level = 5%, power = 80%). RESULTS: With the numbers available, we found no difference in MTPM between the bicruciate-retaining and cruciate-retaining groups. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) MTPM was 0.52 mm (0.35 to 1.02) and 0.42 mm (0.34 to 0.70) in the bicruciate-retaining and cruciate-retaining groups, respectively (p = 0.63). There was no difference in the magnitude of improvement in the OKS from preoperatively to 2 years postoperative between the groups (median delta [IQR] for bicruciate-retaining 18 [14 to 23] versus cruciate-retaining 18 [15 to 21], difference of medians 0; p = 0.96). Likewise, there was no difference in the magnitude of improvement in the FJS score from preoperatively to 2 years postoperative between the groups (mean ± SD for bicruciate-retaining 46 ± 32 versus cruciate-retaining 48 ± 16, mean difference, 2; p = 0.80). Three patients in the bicruciate-retaining group underwent arthroscopically assisted manipulation at 3 to 4 months postoperatively, and one patient in the bicruciate-retaining group sustained a tibial island fracture during primary surgery and underwent a revision procedure after 6 months. There were no reoperations or revisions in the cruciate-retaining group. CONCLUSIONS: With the numbers available, we found no differences between the bicruciate-retaining and the cruciate-retaining implants in terms of stable fixation on RSA or patient-reported outcome measure scores at 2 years, and must therefore recommend against the routine clinical use of the bicruciate-retaining device. The complications we observed with the bicruciate-retaining device suggest it has an associated learning curve and the associated risks of novelty with no demonstrable benefit to the patient; it is also likely to be more expensive in most centers. Continued research on this implant should only be performed in the context of controlled trials. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Knee awareness and functionality after simultaneous bilateral vs unilateral total knee arthroplasty.

AIM: To investigate knee awareness and functional outcomes in patients treated with simultaneous bilateral vs unilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Through a database search, we identified 210 patients who had undergone unilateral TKA (UTKA) and 65 patients who had undergone simultaneous bilateral TKA (SBTKA) at our institution between 2010 and 2012. All TKAs were cemented and cruciate retaining. The mean follow-up period was 3.2 (2 to 4) years. All the patients had symptomatic and debilitating unilateral or bilateral osteoarthritis for which all conservative and non-surgical treatments were failed, thus preoperatively the patients had poor functionality. All patients were asked to complete Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) questionnaires. The patients were matched according to age, gender, year of surgery, Kellgren-Lawrence score and pre- and postoperative overall knee alignment. The FJS and OKS questionnaire results of the two groups were then compared. RESULTS: A mixed-effects model was used to analyze differences between SBTKA and UTKA. OKS: The mean difference in the OKS between the patients who had undergone SBTKA and those who had undergone UTKA was 1.5, which was not statistically significant (CI = -0.9:4.0, P-value = 0.228). The mean OKS of the SBTKA patients was 37.6 (SD = 9.0), and the mean OKS of the UTKA patients was 36.1 (SD = 9.9). FJS: The mean difference in the FJS between the patients who had undergone SBTKA and those who had undergone UTKA was 2.3, which was not statistically significant (CI = -6.2:10.8, P-value = 0.593). The mean FJS of the SBTKA patients was 59.9 (SD = 27.5), and the mean FJS of the UTKA patients was 57.5 (SD = 28.8). CONCLUSION: SBTKA and UTKA patients exhibited similar joint functionality and knee awareness. Our results support the use of SBTKA in selected patients suffering from clinically symptomatic bilateral osteoarthritis.

Does post-operative knee awareness differ between knees in bilateral simultaneous total knee arthroplasty? Predictors of high or low knee awareness.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the difference in post-operative knee awareness between knees in patients undergoing bilateral simultaneous total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to assess factors predicting high or low knee awareness. METHODS: This study was conducted on 99 bilateral simultaneous TKAs performed at our institution from 2008 to 2012. All patients received one set of questionnaires [Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS)] for each knee. Based on the FJS, the patients' knees were divided into two groups: "best" and "worst" knees. The median of the absolute difference in FJS and OKS within each patient was calculated. Multivariate linear regression was performed to identify factors affecting FJS. RESULTS: The difference between knees was 1 point (CI 0-5) for the FJS and 1 point (CI 0-2) for the OKS. The FJS for females increased (decreasing awareness) with increasing age. Males had the highest FJS (lowest awareness) at the age of 67. An increase in the FJS (lower knee awareness) of 12.0 points was found for Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grades 3 + 4 compared with K-L grades 1 + 2. A preoperative anatomical alignment of 3° valgus resulted in the lowest FJS (highest knee awareness) with decreasing knee awareness for decreasing tibio-femoral angles. Post-operative alignment did not significantly affect FJS. CONCLUSION: Knee awareness did not differ significantly between the "best" and the "worst" knee. Bilateral simultaneous TKA can be performed without compromising the result in one of the knees. Knee awareness after primary TKA was influenced by age, gender, preoperative knee alignment, and severity of OA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.