M. Fard-Aghaie, M. Citak, J. Correia, C. Haasper, T. Gehrke, D. Kendoff
{"title":"Initial Misdiagnosis of a Traumatic Ceramic Femoral Head Fracture","authors":"M. Fard-Aghaie, M. Citak, J. Correia, C. Haasper, T. Gehrke, D. Kendoff","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I4.47","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I4.47","url":null,"abstract":"A destructive ceramic head fracture was diagnosed 1 year after a serious motorcycle accident in a patient who had undergone primary THA 7 years earlier. Introduction In the 1970s, Boutin implemented ceramic in modern total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although initial fracture rates of 13.4 % for ceramic heads were described before the 1990s, the inferior rate of wear and friction when compared with metallic heads and the optimized tribology wre promising in THA [1-3]. Gradual improvements in processing of the material led to a significant reduction of the fracture rate to below 0.1 % [3]. Thus, alumina ceramic heads have currently become the standard material in THA with ceramic bearing surfaces. Nevertheless, multiple case reports have been published describing ceramic head fractures [4-11]. The causes of fractures are diverse and vary from traumatic events [5,9,12,13] to impingement between the neck and the liner rim [7]. Spontaneous fractures without any history of trauma have also been described [4,6,8,10,11]. However, only two reports describing delayed fractures of ceramic heads were found [12,13]. In this report, we present a 24-year old patient who underwent primary THA at our institution and was a victim of high-energy trauma 7 years later. Initial radiographs were misinterpreted in a non-designated total joint clinic at the time of primary admission (after the accident). A destructive ceramic head fracture was diagnosed more than 1 year after initial trauma at our institution, with major destruction of the ceramic head and the remaining THA. This was followed by an extensive revision. Based on this experience, the general question of adequate radiographic diagnosis after trauma to a THA, especially one with partial or full ceramic bearing surfaces, will be further discussed in this report.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67686290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Successful Closed Reduction of a Dislocated Constrained Total Hip Arthroplasty","authors":"M. Sonohata, Warit Waewsawangwong, S. Goodman","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I4.48","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I4.48","url":null,"abstract":"This case report and literature review examines whether closed reduction is a viable option to manage hip dislocation when the patient has a constrained liner. Introduction Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA) ranges from less than 1% to 6% of primary cases [1] and from 15% to 30% of revision cases [2]. Unfortunately, the success rate of non-operative treatment of dislocation after THA can be unreliable, and a third of such patients have recurrences [1]. Surgical procedures used to treat instability and dislocation include: •Tightening the abductor musculature •Removing sources of impingement •Repositioning malaligned components •Using acetabular liners with elevated rims Such treatments fail in 30% to 50% of patients, however [3]. The use of constrained liners, which relies on a locking mechanism to capture the femoral head, has been developed to help manage this problem [4]. Despite such efforts, patients continue to be at high risk for instability, and 3% to 18% experience recurrent dislocation even after constrained components have been implanted [5,6]. Generally, open surgical reduction is thought to be the only available treatment for such cases. However, this compromises the integrity of the joint and exposes the patient to the additional risk of surgery [7]. Several authors have reported closed reduction for dislocation of a constrained liner [7-13]. Constrained acetabular liners are currently available in various designs, with differences in the locking mechanisms. To our knowledge, ours is the first reported case of a successful closed reduction of a dislocated constrained THA using a Trilogy Acetabular System Constrained liner (Zimmer, Inc, Warsaw, Indiana, USA). The study protocol adhered to the ethics guidelines of the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki, and the study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Stanford University.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67686418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R. Hillock, J. Keggi, R. Kennon, E. McPherson, T. Clyburn, D. Brazil, H. S. T. McTighe
{"title":"Stage II Osteointegration Implant (OI) Skin Coupling Procedure (Continuation from Case Report September 2013)","authors":"R. Hillock, J. Keggi, R. Kennon, E. McPherson, T. Clyburn, D. Brazil, H. S. T. McTighe","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I4.51","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I4.51","url":null,"abstract":"Patient’s over health was unchanged following stage I procedure, 8/17/2013, 123 days post surgery. The patient had been followed closely since the time of the stage I procedure. The patient was 65 years of age at the time of the Stage II procedure, 12/18/2013. Her wounds at the residual limb had completely healed without any problems by 14 days after the Stage I surgery. Her pain medication requirement was completely resolved by day 21 after the Stage I surgery. She had worn a stump shrinking compressive stalking for the majority of the time leading up to the Stage II procedure; the patient reported that the pressure on the residual limb was comforting. The scar was tender over the lateral aspect of the residual limb with a positive Tinel’s Sign [1] and no palpable mass or swelling. A planning full length standing radiograph of both limbs on a long image cassette was obtained (see figure 1). All imaging studies showed the femoral implant positioned as it had been on the day of the Stage I procedure with progressive evidence of boney in-growth as demonstrated by the plain film images.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"110 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67686967","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"From ICJR East (the Combined 14th Annual ISK and European Knee Associates Conference) October 4 - 6, 2013 • New York, NY","authors":"T. Mctighe","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I3.65","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I3.65","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67686248","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Esq. Jack Diamond, Esq. Jeana Singleton, Esq. Samantha Prokop
{"title":"Revenue Enhancement Strategies For Orthopedic Surgeons","authors":"Esq. Jack Diamond, Esq. Jeana Singleton, Esq. Samantha Prokop","doi":"10.15438/rr.v3i2.40","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/rr.v3i2.40","url":null,"abstract":"A s payers continue to reduce payments, and as quality monitoring, reporting, performance, and other expectations rise, savvy surgeons are looking for ways to increase revenue and ensure that their businesses are in a position to thrive financially. This article is intended as an overview for orthopedic surgeons regarding various revenue enhancement strategies. In this ever-changing reimbursement environment, a penny saved is a penny earned. There exist within current federal regulations several opportunities for surgeons to increase efficiency, quality, and patient satisfaction while simultaneously increasing revenue. If not structured in a compliant manner, however, these arrangements can prove to be fatal in a strict regulatory environment including violations of the Stark law, anti-kickback statute, False Claims Act, and imposition of civil monetary penalties as well as the risk of criminal conviction. In determining which strategy might be best for your practice, it is first important to determine your appetite for risk. The proposed strategies below must be carefully arranged to meet statutory and regulatory requirements. As such, it is crucial that in order to take advantage of these strategies, you consult experienced healthcare legal counsel, and stay informed about ever-changing healthcare laws and regulations.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67685918","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Lower Limb Joint Replacement in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis - Perioperative management considerations for patients with RA who need a total hip, knee, or ankle replacement","authors":"N. Clement, S. Breusch, L. Biant","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I2.34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I2.34","url":null,"abstract":"Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic systemic connective tissue disease, and it is the third most common indication for lower limb joint replacement in Northern Europe and North America. [1] The etiology of the disease remains unclear, but there are strong associations with human leukocyte antigens (DRB1). [2] The prognosis is poor, with 80% of patients being disabled 20 years from primary diagnosis. [3] The medical treatment of RA has improved during the last 25 years, which is reflected by a 40% decrease in the rate of hip and knee surgery since a peak that was observed in the mid 1990s. [4] Anemia, raised erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and a high disease activity score have all been identified as risk factors for the need for large joint arthroplasty. [5] Seventeen percent of patients with RA undergo an orthopaedic intervention within 5 years of initial diagnosis. [5] More than one third of patients will need a major joint replacement, of which the majority will receive a total hip or knee replacement (THR, TKR). [4] This review article summarizes factors involved in the perioperative management of major lower limb arthroplasty surgery for patients with RA.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67685232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R. Hillock, J. Keggi, R. Kennon, E. McPherson, T. Clyburn, D. Brazil, H. S. T. McTighe
{"title":"A Global Collaboration - Osteointegration Implant (OI) for Transfemoral Amputation Case Report (First Reported Case in U.S.)","authors":"R. Hillock, J. Keggi, R. Kennon, E. McPherson, T. Clyburn, D. Brazil, H. S. T. McTighe","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I2.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I2.39","url":null,"abstract":"Most investigators credit Branemark (1965) in Sweden with the idea of a percutaneous, osteointegrated prosthesis which has been successful in dental implantation. [1] In 1997, R. Branemark reported on the first femoral intramedullary percutaneous device using a 12 cm screw-type device for a patient with an above-knee amputation. [2] In 1999, ESKA produced the Endo-Exo Femurprosthesis (EEFP) which was first implanted into the femoral canal of a young motorcyclist who lost his leg in an accident and subsequently used for a number of patients in Germany. There have been variations in the design, including some types to allow proximal fixation to other devices such as a hip replacement, but commonly the device is a modular, noncemented device that fits within the intramedullary canal of the femur and has a hardpoint attachment that exits through the skin. [3]Three of our co-authors (JK,RK, & TC) have been to Germany, studied this procedure and reviewed historical outcomes. The original device utilized a spongiosa surface of casted cobalt chrome that allows for a porous surface for bone ingrowth.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67685853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Knee replacement survival rates with all- polyethylene or metal-backed tibial components – what do the Registries say?","authors":"B. Bmbs, Fracs David Campbell Bmbs","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I2.41","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I2.41","url":null,"abstract":"Background: With increasing numbers of primary total knee arthroplasty and ongoing economic pressure the use of all-polyethylene tibial components maybe an alternative option to achieve cost savings without an adverse impact on outcomes Methods: A search of all publically available joint replacement registry data investigated the performance of all-polyethylene tibial components compared to metal backed modular tibial components. Results: All-polyethylene tibial components were used in 0.47% of Australian and 1.2% of England and Wales national register reported knees. 2.6% of Norwegian fixed platform knees were all-polyethylene. Large institutional registers from the United States of America reported usage rates of 4%, 8.3% and 8.9%. Revision rates for all-polyethylene implants were comparable or better than modular components in all registries. Only one registry had sufficient data on patients aged less than 65 years who report a hazard ratio of 0.26. Conclusion: In patients 65 years and older all polyethylene tibial components have similar rates of revision compared to metal backed. There is insufficient data in younger patients.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67686006","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Lionberger, J. Liao, M. Eggers, Bs Sahar Bawkher
{"title":"Delayed Administration of Risedronate Does Not Restore Bone Loss In Patients Following Total Hip Arthroplasty - A randomized, double blinded clinical study","authors":"D. Lionberger, J. Liao, M. Eggers, Bs Sahar Bawkher","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I2.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I2.32","url":null,"abstract":"Background : Periprosthetic bone loss after total hip arthroplasty (THA) increases the risk of serious post-operative complications. Previous studies have reported the beneficial effect of risedronate therapy to improve periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) around new implants. The current study is to evaluate the effect of risedronate treatment in enhancing mature well fixed THA implants one year or more after implantation. Methods and Results : A total of 32 osteoarthritic patients received total hip replacement surgeries and were enrolled from the primary investigator’s clinical practice between February and September 2007. All eligible patients who met the inclusion criteria underwent total hip arthroplasty for reasons other than low traumatic hip fracture due to osteoporosis with normal or osteopenic lumbar spine BMD scores. Subjects received oral risedronate or a placebo with daily calcium plus Vitamin D. DEXA BMD scanning and bone-specific biomarkers, NTx and ALK phosphatase were collected at 6 and 12 months post-surgery. The result showed that risedronate did not increase BMD values of operative femur nor levels in NTx or ALK phosphatase. Conclusions : This study suggests that risedronate treatment is not effective in preventing periprosthetic bone loss nor enhancing existing density in well fixed osteointegrated following total hip arthroplasty. Key words : risedronate, bisphosphonate therapy, total hip arthroplasty","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67685064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"An Alternative Conservative Approach to Hip Reconstruction","authors":"C. Waller, H. S. T. McTighe","doi":"10.15438/RR.V3I2.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.V3I2.33","url":null,"abstract":"Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) has been a very effective surgical procedure, with improvements in design and clinical outcomes since the days of Sir John Charnley. [1-4] However, many implant femoral hip designs and surgical approaches have not been considered conservative for bone preservation. Insertion of a femoral stem in THA does alter the physiological loading of the femur. Often these altered loading conditions can and do lead to bone reaction (stress shielding) and loss of proximal bone. Proximal stress shielding occurs regardless of fixation method (cement, cementless). [5,6] This stress shielding and bone loss can lead to implant loosening and or breakage of the implant. In an attempt to reduce these boney changes some designers have advocated the conservative concept of “Neck Replacement” THA. [7-9] This paper is a review of past, present and future development within this narrow classification of Neck Replacement Arthroplasty with highlighted focus on the Silent™ Implant. Key Words: total hip arthroplasty, tissue-sparing, neck-preserving, and conservative approach.","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67685160","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}