Search

Simple Summary: This study explored the long-term outcomes of patients who underwent hip replacement surgery following the removal of malignant tumors in the hip area. The main focus was to understand how well patients recovered in terms of physical function and quality of life. The study included 30 patients treated between 2010 and 2018, all of whom received interdisciplinary therapy, consisting of both systemic and surgical treatments. The follow-up period averaged a little over three years. The results showed that younger patients tended to have better physical function and overall quality of life after surgery. The study also revealed that complications like implant failure were relatively low, and no amputations were necessary. These findings suggest that this type of surgery, combined with comprehensive interdisciplinary care, can be a safe and effective option for managing hip tumors. Further research is needed to continue improving patient outcomes and tailoring treatments to individual needs. Introduction: Over the past few decades, tumor arthroplasty has evolved into an established therapeutic approach for addressing bone defects following tumor resection in the extremities. As the diagnosis has a significant impact on patients' lives, it is important to give clear expectations for functional recovery. Therefore, we investigated both the functional outcomes and the quality of life (QoL) after tumor arthroplasty for malignant hip tumors. Methods: This retrospective study included patients who had undergone resections of malignant hip tumors with consecutive modular hip arthroplasty between 2010 and 2018. Demographics, tumor entity, and complications stemming from both tumors and treatments were evaluated through the analysis of medical records and perioperative records. The assessment of functional outcomes was conducted with the following patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): the Harris Hip Score (HHS), Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (MSTS), and the Short Form Survey 36 (SF-36). Furthermore, we performed subgroup analysis in two groups: one divided into survivors and non-survivors, as well as younger individuals (<57 years) and older individuals (>57 years). Results: A total of 30 patients were included in the study. At the time of follow-up, 19 patients were deceased. The average duration of follow-up was 3.2 (±2.51) years. The average age at the time of surgery was 60.3 (±15.20) years. Notably, there were no cases of amputation reported (0%). Five cases of implant failure were identified (16.67%). Among these, one was attributed to infection (3.3%), while four resulted from aseptic loosening (13.3%). In terms of functional outcomes, MSTS indicated good results (18 ± 7; range: 7–28; 60%), and the HHS demonstrated moderate outcomes (75.3%). Younger survivors (<57 years) exhibited notably superior results in terms of both the MSTS and physical functioning in the SF-36 (p = 0.03). Conclusion: In summary, this study shows declining tumor arthroplasty-related complications and satisfying functional outcomes as well as QoL. Noteworthy aspects include the relatively low rates of amputation and local tumor recurrences, which significantly favor the selection of appropriate therapeutic options. Moreover, the findings underscore the substantial impact of patients' age on overall functionality and engagement in daily activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients suffering from osteoarthritis particularly complain about pain during day and night as well as loss of function. This consequently leads to impaired quality of life and therefore psychological stress. The surgical therapy of choice is joint replacement. Regarding the outcome after operation, expectations might differ between the patient and the surgeon. This can lead to dissatisfaction on both sides. This study aimed to document patients' expectations of a planned shoulder joint replacement. The results were compared with assessments made by shoulder surgeons. Methods: In total, 50 patients scheduled for operative shoulder joint replacement were included in this study, as well as 10 shoulder surgeons. Patients were requested to fill out questionnaires preoperatively to provide sociodemographic data, PROMS (Patient-Reported Outcome Measures) with regard to the pathology and their expectations about surgery in terms of pain relief, gain of range of motion, strength as well as the impact on activities of daily and professional life and sports. In addition, surgeons were asked what they thought their patients expect. Results: The most important goal to achieve for patients was to relieve daytime pain, followed by improvement of self-care and the ability to reach above shoulder level. The most important factors for patients to achieve after operation were 'pain relief' in first place, 'movement' in second and 'strength' in third. This also applied to shoulder surgeons, who ranked 'pain relief' first, followed by 'movement' and 'strength'. When patients where asked what is most important when it comes to choosing their surgeon, 68% voted for 'surgical skills', 28% for 'age/experience', followed by 'empathy', 'sympathy' and 'appearance'. For surgeons, 'age/experience' obtained rank one, 'surgical skills' was ranked second, followed by 'sympathy', 'empathy' and 'appearance'. Surgeons significantly underrated the factor 'empathy' in favor of 'sympathy'. Conclusions: This study shows that patients' expectations for shoulder joint replacement and surgeons' assessments do not differ significantly. Relief from pain and better shoulder movement were crucial for patients to achieve after operation, which was in line with surgeons' expectations. The most important factor for choosing the surgeon was 'surgical skills' for patients, while surgeons thought they would care more about 'age and experience'. This underlines that patients' expectations should be taken into account within the preoperative medical interview. This might allow an optimization of compliance of the patients and lead to a better satisfaction on both sides. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The glenoid track concept is used to determine preoperatively whether a Hill-Sachs defect is engaging or not. Currently, the glenoid track concept relies on measurements of bony structures as well as on the confines and elasticity of the rotator cuff as a reference point, which varies extensively among individuals and therefore limits the reliability and accuracy of this concept. Purpose: To evaluate the reliability of the global track concept, which determines the angular distance of the Hill-Sachs defect from the center of the articular surface of the humeral head as a new reference point with the help of an automated image analysis software and 3-dimensional analysis of the humeral head. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Computed tomography scans of 100 patients treated for anterior shoulder instability with different sizes of Hill-Sachs defects were evaluated manually by 2 orthopaedic surgeons independently using the software OsiriX as well as automatically by using a dedicated prototype software (ImFusion). Obtained manual and automated measurements included the Hill-Sachs length, Hill-Sachs width, and Hill-Sachs depth of the defect; the Hill-Sachs interval (HSI); and the glenoid width for the glenoid track concept, as well as the angular distance of the Hill-Sachs defect from the center of the articular surface of the humeral head (global track concept). The reliability of the different measurement techniques was compared by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results: There was a significant difference for all obtained parameters comparing manual and automatic measurements. For manually obtained parameters, measurements referring to bony boundaries (glenoid width, Hill-Sachs length, and Hill-Sachs width) showed good to excellent agreement (ICC, 0.86, 0.82, and 0.62, respectively), while measurements referring to soft tissue boundaries (HSI and glenoid track; ICC, 0.56 and 0.53, respectively) or not directly identifiable reference points (center of articular surface and global track) only showed fair reliability (ICC middle excursion, 0.42). When the same parameters were measured with the help of an automated software, good reliability for the glenoid track concept and excellent reliability for the global track concept in the middle excursion were achieved. Conclusion: The present study showed that the more complex global track measurements of humeral defects are more reliable than the current standard HSI and glenoid track measurements. However, this is only true when automated software is used to perform the measurements. Clinical Relevance: Future studies using the new proposed method in combination with an automated software need to be conducted to determine critical threshold values for defects prone to engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) is among the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures. Several factors—including age, sex, and tear severity—have been identified as predictors for outcome after repair. The influence of the tear etiology on functional and structural outcome remains controversial. Purpose: To investigate the influence of tear etiology (degenerative vs traumatic) on functional and structural outcomes in patients with supraspinatus tendon tears. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients undergoing ARCR from 19 centers were prospectively enrolled between June 2020 and November 2021. Full-thickness, nonmassive tears involving the supraspinatus tendon were included. Tears were classified as degenerative (chronic shoulder pain, no history of trauma) or traumatic (acute, traumatic onset, no previous shoulder pain). Range of motion, strength, the Subjective Shoulder Value, the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) were assessed before (baseline) and 6 and 12 months after ARCR. The Subjective Shoulder Value and the OSS were also determined at the 24-month follow-up. Repair integrity after 12 months was documented, as well as additional surgeries up to the 24-month follow-up. Tear groups were compared using mixed models adjusted for potential confounding effects. Results: From a cohort of 973 consecutive patients, 421 patients (degenerative tear, n = 230; traumatic tear, n = 191) met the inclusion criteria. The traumatic tear group had lower mean baseline OSS and CMS scores but significantly greater score changes 12 months after ARCR (OSS, 18 [SD, 8]; CMS, 34 [SD,18] vs degenerative: OSS, 15 [SD, 8]; CMS, 22 [SD, 15]) (P <.001) and significantly higher 12-month overall scores (OSS, 44 [SD, 5]; CMS, 79 [SD, 9] vs degenerative: OSS, 42 [SD, 7]; CMS, 76 [SD, 12]) (P ≤.006). At the 24-month follow-up, neither the OSS (degenerative, 44 [SD, 6]; traumatic, 45 [SD, 6]; P =.346) nor the rates of repair failure (degenerative, 14 [6.1%]; traumatic 12 [6.3%]; P =.934) and additional surgeries (7 [3%]; 7 [3.7%]; P =.723) differed between groups. Conclusion: Patients with degenerative and traumatic full-thickness supraspinatus tendon tears who had ARCR show satisfactory short-term functional results. Although patients with traumatic tears have lower baseline functional scores, they rehabilitate over time and show comparable clinical results 1 year after ARCR. Similarly, degenerative and traumatic rotator cuff tears show comparable structural outcomes, which suggests that degenerated tendons retain healing potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is the standard of care for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis and rotator cuff deficiency. Preoperative RTSA planning based on medical images and patient-specific instruments has been established over the last decade. This study aims to determine the effects of using augmented reality-assisted intraoperative navigation (ARIN) for baseplate positioning in RTSA compared to preoperative planning. It is hypothesized that ARIN will decrease deviation between preoperative planning and postoperative baseplate positioning. Moreover, ARIN will decrease deviation between the (senior) more (>50 RTSAs/yr) and less experienced (junior) surgeon (5-10 RTSAs/yr)., Methods: Preoperative CT scans of 16 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were obtained. Baseplate placements were planned using a validated software. The data were then converted and uploaded to the augmented reality system (NextAR; Medacta International). Each of the 8 RTSAs were implanted by a senior and a junior surgeon, with 4 RTSAs using ARIN and 4 without. A postoperative CT scan was performed in all cases. The scanned scapulae were segmented, and the preoperative scan was laid over the postoperative scapula by the nearest iterative point cloud analysis. The deviation from the planned entry point and trajectory was calculated regarding the inclination, retroversion, medialization (reaming depth) and lateralization, anteroposterior position, and superoinferior position of the baseplate. Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or mean and 95% confidence interval (CI). P values < .05 were considered statistically significant., Results: The use of ARIN yielded a reduction in the absolute difference between planned and obtained inclination from 9° (SD: 4°) to 3° (SD: 2°) (P = .011). Mean difference in planned-obtained inclination between surgeons was 3° in free-hand surgeries (95% CI: -4 to 10; P = .578), whereas this difference reduced to 1° (95% CI: -6 to 7, P = .996) using ARIN. Retroversion, medialization (reaming depth) and lateralization, anteroposterior position, and superoinferior position of the baseplate were not affected by using ARIN. Surgical duration was increased using ARIN for both the senior (10 minutes) and junior (18 minutes) surgeon., Conclusions: The implementation of ARIN leads to greater accuracy of glenoid component placement, specifically with respect to inclination. Further studies have to verify if this increased accuracy is clinically important. Furthermore, ARIN allows less experienced surgeons to achieve a similar level of accuracy in component placement comparable to more experienced surgeons. However, the potential advantages of ARIN in RTSA are counterbalanced by an increase in operative time., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Accurate component placement in shoulder arthroplasty is crucial for avoiding complications, achieving superior biomechanical performance and optimizing functional outcomes. Shoulder and elbow surgeons have explored various methods to improve surgical understanding and precise execution including preoperative planning with 3D computed tomography (CT), patient-specific instrumentation (PSI), intraoperative navigation, and mixed reality (MR). 3D preoperative planning facilitated by CT scans and advanced software, enhances surgical precision, influences decision-making for implant types and approaches, reduces errors in guide pin placement, and contributes to cost-effectiveness. Navigation demonstrates benefits in reducing malpositioning, optimizing baseplate stability, improving humeral cut, and potentially conserving bone stock, although challenges such as varied operating times and costs warrant further investigation. The personalized patient care and enhanced operational efficiency associated with PSI are not only attractive for achieving desired component positions but also hold promise for improved outcomes in complex cases involving glenoid bone loss. Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies play a pivotal role in reshaping shoulder arthroplasty. They offer benefits in preoperative planning, intraoperative guidance, and interactive surgery. Studies demonstrate their effectiveness in AR-guided guidewire placement, providing real-time surgical advice during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Additionally, these technologies show promise in orthopedic training, delivering superior realism and accelerating learning compared to conventional methods.