Search

BACKGROUND: Acromioclavicular joint arthritis is a common, painful, and often missed diagnosis, and it often accompanies other shoulder conditions such as rotator cuff disease. Whether distal clavicle resection is important to perform in patients undergoing surgery for rotator cuff tears and concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis is controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of distal clavicle resection on (1) outcome scores; (2) shoulder ROM, joint pain or tenderness, and joint instability; and (3) risk of reoperation among patients treated surgically for rotator cuff tears who had concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to find RCTs that met our eligibility criteria, which, in summary, (1) compared rotator cuff repair plus distal clavicle resection with isolated rotator cuff repair for patients who sustained a full- or partial-thickness rotator cuff tear and concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis; and (2) the followup period was at least 2 years. Two reviewers screened the studies, extracted the data and evaluated the methodological quality, and performed data analysis. Statistical heterogeneity among studies was quantitatively evaluated with the I(2) index. No heterogeneity was detected (I(2) = 0%; p = 0.75) in terms of acromioclavicular joint pain or tenderness, Constant score, forward flexion, external rotation, and risk of reoperation, so fixed-effect models were used in these endpoints. Heterogeneity was moderate for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score (I(2) = 53%; p = 0.12) and low for the visual analog scale (VAS) score (I(2) = 35%; p = 0.22), so random-effect models were used in these endpoints. Subgroup analysis was stratified by the symptom of acromioclavicular joint arthritis. Three RCTs with 208 patients were included. We evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool; in aggregate, the three RCTs included showed low to intermediate risk, although not all parameters of the Cochrane tool could be assessed for all studies. RESULTS: There was no difference between the distal clavicle resection plus rotator cuff repair group and the isolated rotator cuff repair group in ASES score (mean difference =1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.37 to 6.18; p = 0.56) nor in terms of the VAS score and Constant score. Likewise, we found no difference in ROM of the shoulder (forward flexion, internal rotation, and external rotation) or acromioclavicular joint pain or tenderness between the groups (pooled results of acromioclavicular joint pain or tenderness: risk ratio [RR], 1.59; 95% CI, 0.67-3.78; p = 0.30). Acromioclavicular joint instability was only detected in the rotator cuff repair plus distal clavicle resection group. Finally, we found no difference in the proportion of patients undergoing repeat surgery between the study groups (pooled results of risk of reoperation for the rotator cuff repair plus distal clavicle resection and isolated rotator cuff repair: one of 52 versus two of 78; RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.11–6.48; p = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Distal clavicle resection in patients with rotator cuff tears did not result in better clinical outcome scores or shoulder ROM and was not associated with a lower risk of reoperation. Distal clavicle resection might cause acromioclavicular joint instability in patients with rotator cuff tears and concomitant asymptomatic acromioclavicular joint arthritis. Arthroscopic distal clavicle resection is not recommended in patients with rotator cuff tears and concomitant acromioclavicular joint arthritis. Additional well-designed RCTs with more participants, long-term followup, and data on patient-reported outcomes are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Interleukin-8 (IL-8) is an angiogenic chemokine that plays a potent role in both development and progression of many human malignancies. However, there are no data about the role of IL-8 polymorphism in development of osteosarcoma. A hospital-based case-control study was conducted among 190 patients with osteosarcoma and 190 healthy controls to investigate the possible association between the IL-8 -251 A/T and +781 C/T polymorphisms, respectively, and the risk of osteosarcoma. Significant differences of genotype distribution were observed between osteosarcoma cases and controls at the IL-8 -251T/A genotypes. Compared with the IL-8 -251T/A homozygote TT, the heterozygous TA genotype was associated with significantly increased risk for osteosarcoma (odds ratio (OR) = 2.16, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = (1.38-4.52), P = 0.021); the AA genotype was associated with increased risk for osteosarcoma (OR = 1.94, 95 % CI = 1.31-3.83, P = 0.018). TA and AA combined variants were associated with increased risk for osteosarcoma compared with the TT genotype (OR = 1.72, 95 % CI = 1.45-4.41, P = 0.023). Moreover, the genotype AA of IL-8 -251T/A carried a higher risk of osteosarcoma metastasis and later Enneking stages, compared with the TT genotype. However, the genotype and allele frequencies of IL-8 +781 C/T polymorphisms in osteosarcoma patients were not significantly different from controls. Our results showed that the IL-8 -251 A/T genotype was associated with increased risk for development and metastasis of osteosarcoma in Chinese Han population.

Clavicle fractures may occur in all age groups, and 70%–80% of clavicle fractures occur in the midshaft. Many methods for treating midshaft clavicular fractures have been reported and remain controversial. To provide some guidance for clinical treatment, 30 artificial polymethyl methacrylate models of the clavicle were sewn obliquely at the midshaft to simulate the most common type of clavicular fractures, and the fracture models were divided into five groups randomly and were fixed as follows: the reconstruction plates were placed at the superior position of the fracture model (R-S group), the reconstruction plates were placed at the anteroinferior position of the fracture model (R-AI group), the locking plates were placed at the superior position (L-S group), the locking plates were placed at the anteroinferior position (L-AI group); and the control models were unfixed (control group). The strain gauges were attached to the bone surface near the fracture fragments, and then, the biomechanical properties of the specimens were measured using the compression test, torsion test and three-point bending test. The results showed that plate fixation can provide a stable construct to help with fracture healing and is the preferred method in the treatment of clavicle fractures. The locking plate provides the best biomechanical stability when placed at the anteroinferior position, and this surgical method can reduce the operation time and postoperative complications; thus, it would be a better choice in clinical practice.

Spinal fusion surgery has been widely applied in clinical treatment, and the spinal fusion rate has improved markedly. However, its postoperative complications, especially adjacent segment degeneration, have increasingly attracted the attention of spinal surgeons. The most common pathological condition at adjacent segments is hypertrophic degenerative arthritis of the facet joint. To study the stress distribution changes at the adjacent facet joint after lumbar fusion with pedicle screw fixation, human cadaver lumbar spines were used in the present study, and electrical resistance strain gauges were attached on L1–L4 articular processes parallel or perpendicular to the articular surface of facet joints. Subsequently, electrical resistance strain gauge data were measured using anYJ-33 static resistance strain indicator with three types of models: the intact model, the laminectomy model, and the fusion model with pedicle screw fixation. The strain changes in the measurement sites indirectly reflect the stress changes. Significant differences in strain were observed between the normal and laminectomy state at all facet joints. Significant differences in strain were observed between the normal and the pedicle screw fixation fusion state at the L1/2 and L3/4 facet joints. The increased stress on the facet joints after lumbar fusion with pedicle screw fixation may be the cause of adjacent segment degeneration.

Objective To compare the biomechanical properties of four types of internal fixation (proximal femoral nail [PFN], dynamic hip screw [DHS], dynamic condylar screw [DCS], and proximal femoral locking plate [PFLP]) for different types of subtrochanteric fractures. Methods Thirty-two antiseptic femurs were randomly divided into four groups. After internal fixation had been implanted, different types of subtrochanteric fracture models were produced and each tested under vertical, torsional and vertical damage loads. Results The stiffness ratio of PFN in each fracture model and failure load were the highest in the four groups; however, the torsional stiffness ratio was the lowest. Tension strain ratios of DHS and DCS on the lateral side became compression strain ratios with restoration of the medial fragment. The stiffness ratio of DHS was lower than PFLP in each fracture model, torsional stiffness ratio was the highest in fracture models II to V and the failure load was lower only than PFN. The stiffness ratio and failure load of DCS were both the lowest, torsional stiffness ratio was similar to PFLP's in fracture models II to V. The stiffness ratio of PFLP was only lower than PFN's in each fracture model, but the failure load was lower than DHS's. Conclusion Four types of internal fixation achieve better stabilities for type I subtrochanteric fractures. PFN and PFLP produce reliable stability in type IIIA subtrochanteric fractures. If the medial buttress is restored, DCS can be considered. For type IV subtrochanteric fractures, only PFN provides stable fixation. PFLP is suitable for comminuted fractures with large fragments.

Study design Methodological systematic review. Objective To identify the risk factors for new vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) in patients after percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and to grade the evidence according to the quality of included studies. Summary of background data PVP is an effective procedure for the treatment of VCFs. A major concern after PVP in patients with osteoporosis is the occurrence of new VCFs in the untreated vertebrae. The risk factors for new VCFs after PVP reported thus far remain controversial. These risk factors have neither been well identified or summarized. This systematic review was performed to identify the risk factors for new VCFs after PVP. Methods Noninterventional studies evaluating the risk factors for new VCFs of patients with osteoporosis after PVP were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, and OVID databases (all up to November 2012). Only observational studies with eligible data were included. Quality of included studies was assessed by a modified quality assessment tool, which was previously designed for observational study. The effects of studies were combined with the study quality score using a model of best-evidence synthesis. Results Twenty-four observational studies involving 3789 patients were included. These articles were published between 2004 and 2012. According to the quality assessment criteria for included studies, 8 studies were deemed as high-quality studies, 6 as moderate-quality studies, and 10 as low-quality studies. There were strong evidences of 3 risk factors, including lower bone mineral density, lower body mass index, intradiscal cement leakage, and vertebral height restoration. We also identified 6 moderate-evidence factors including lower body mass index, number of pre-existing vertebral fractures, thoracolumbar junction in initial VCFs, cement distraction, older age, and number of treated vertebrae. Thirteen factors were classified into the limited-evidence risk factors. Conclusion Although there is no conclusive evidence for new VCFs of patients with osteoporosis after PVP procedure, these data provide evidence to guide the surgeon and develop optimal preventions for new VCFs after PVP. Special attention should be paid to the 3 strong-evidence risk factors. Further studies were still required to evaluate the effects of the earlier mentioned risk factors. Level of evidence 2.