BACKGROUND: Currently, an algorithmic approach for deciding treatment options according to the Vancouver classification is widely used for treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip arthroplasty. However, this treatment algorithm based on the Vancouver classification lacks consideration of patient physiology and surgeon's experience (judgment), which are also important for deciding treatment options. The purpose of this study was to assess the treatment results and discuss the treatment options using a case series. METHODS: Eighteen consecutive cases with periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty were retrospectively reviewed. A locking compression plate system was used for osteosynthesis during the study period. The fracture type was determined by the Vancouver classification. The treatment algorithm based on the Vancouver classification was generally applied, but was modified in some cases according to the surgeon's judgment. The reasons for modification of the treatment algorithm were investigated. Mobility status, ambulatory status, and social status were assessed before the fracture and at the latest follow-up. Radiological results including bony union and stem stability were also evaluated. RESULTS: Thirteen cases were treated by osteosynthesis, two by revision arthroplasty and three by conservative treatment. Four cases of type B2 fractures with a loose stem, in which revision arthroplasty is recommended according to the Vancouver classification, were treated by other options. Of these, three were treated by osteosynthesis and one was treated conservatively. The reasons why the three cases were treated by osteosynthesis were technical difficulty associated with performance of revision arthroplasty owing to severe central migration of an Austin-Moore implant in one case and subsequent severe hip contracture and low activity in two cases. The reasons for the conservative treatment in the remaining case were low activity, low-grade pain, previous wiring around the fracture and light weight. All patients obtained primary bony union and almost fully regained their prior activities. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest reaching a decision regarding treatment methods of periprosthetic femoral fractures by following the algorithmic approach of the Vancouver classification in addition to the assessment of each patient's hip joint pathology, physical status and activity, especially for type B2 fractures. The customized treatments demonstrated favorable overall results.
Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Algorithms ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/*adverse effects ; Female ; Femoral Fractures/classification/etiology/radiography/*surgery ; Hemiarthroplasty/adverse effects ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Periprosthetic Fractures/classification/etiology/radiography/*surgery ; Retrospective Studies

BACKGROUND: Recently, various femoral head fixation devices (HFDs) for trochanteric fractures have become available. However, there are some cases in which femoral head rotation with excessive sliding of the HFD is observed and it is often followed by cutout. The purpose of this study is to compare the ability of the three types of HFDs to prevent femoral head rotation. METHODS: Between July 2005 and December 2009, 206 patients aged over 60 years with trochanteric fractures who had undergone surgical treatment using a short femoral nail in our institution were enrolled into the study. We used the gamma 3 nail (GMN) as the screw-type HFD in 66 cases, the gliding nail (GLN) as a non-cylindrical blade in 76 cases, and the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) as a cylindrical blade in 64 cases. The sliding length of HFDs and the occurrence of femoral head rotation were evaluated by assessing radiographs as the main outcome, and the results were compared among these devices. RESULTS: A comparison of the degree of sliding in the GMN group showed that femoral head rotation was observed significantly more frequently in cases with rotation. Further, it appeared that femoral head rotation occurred more frequently in comminuted fractures. However, no significant differences between the sliding lengths of the different HFDs were observed among three groups. Femoral head rotation was observed in 15 cases of GMN (22.7%), 0 case of GLN, and 5 case of PFNA (7.8%). Significant differences with regard to the occurrence of femoral head rotation were observed among the three groups. Furthermore, significant differences were also observed between GLN and PFNA with respect to the occurrence of femoral head rotation. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to stabilize femoral head appears to be greater with blade-type materials than with screw-type materials. Furthermore, we believe that a non-cylindrical blade is preferable to a cylindrical blade for the surgical treatment of comminuted, unstable trochanteric fractures in order to prevent femoral head rotation and cut-out.
Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Female ; Femur Head/*surgery ; Hip Fractures/*surgery ; Humans ; Internal Fixators/*statistics & numerical data ; Male ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology ; Range of Motion, Articular/physiology ; Retrospective Studies

Background: To evaluate the clinical outcomes and second-look arthroscopic findings after intra-articular adipose-derived regenerative cell (ADRC) injection as treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: ADRCs were administered to 11 patients (19 knees; mean age, 61.7 years) with knee OA. Subcutaneous adipose tissue was harvested by liposuction from both thighs, and arthroscopic lavage was performed, followed by ADRC injection (mean dose, 1.40 × 10 7 cells) into the synovial fluid. Outcome measures included the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Lysholm score, and visual analog scale score. Arthroscopic examinations were performed to assess the International Cartilage Repair Society cartilage injury grade preoperatively and overall repair postoperatively. Noninvasive assessments were performed at baseline and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups; arthroscopic assessments were performed at baseline and at 6 months. Results: All outcome measures significantly improved after treatment. This improvement was evident 1 month after treatment and was sustained until the 6-month follow-up. Data from second-look arthroscopy showed better repair in low-grade cartilage lesions than in lesions with a greater degree of damage. No patients demonstrated worsening of Kellgren-Lawrence grade, and none underwent total knee arthroplasty during this period. Conclusions Clinical outcomes were improved in patients with knee OA after ADRC administration. Cartilage regeneration was more effective in smaller damaged lesions than in bigger lesions.

BACKGROUND: In daily clinical practice, it is essential to properly evaluate the postoperative sliding distance of various femoral head fixation devices (HFD) for trochanteric fractures. Although it is necessary to develop an accurate and reproducible method that is unaffected by inconsistent postoperative limb position on radiography, few studies have examined which method is optimal. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to prospectively compare the accuracy and reproducibility of our four original methods in the measurement of sliding distance of the HFD. METHODS: Radiographs of plastic simulated bone implanted with Japanese proximal femoral nail antirotation were taken in five limb postures: neutral, flexion, minute internal rotation, greater external rotation, and flexion with external rotation. Orthopedic surgeons performed five measurements of the sliding distance of the HFD in each of the flowing four methods: nail axis reference (NAR), modified NAR, inner edge reference, and nail tip reference. We also assessed two clinical cases by using these methods and evaluated the intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The measured values were consistent in the NAR method regardless of limb posture, with an even smaller error when using the modified NAR method. The standard deviation (SD) was high in the nail tip reference method and extremely low in the modified NAR method. In the two clinical cases, the SD was the lowest in the modified NAR method, similar to the results using plastic simulated bone. The intraclass correlation coefficients showed the highest value in the modified NAR method. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the modified NAR method should be the most recommended based on its accuracy, reproducibility, and usefulness.
*Bone Nails ; *Dimensional Measurement Accuracy ; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary/instrumentation/*methods ; Hip Fractures/*surgery ; Prospective Studies ; Reproducibility of Results

Objective: Spine surgeons are often at risk of radiation exposure due to intraoperative fluoroscopy, leading to health concerns such as carcinogenesis. This is due to the increasing use of percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) in spinal surgeries, resulting from the widespread adoption of minimally invasive spine stabilization. This study aimed to elucidate the effectiveness of smart glasses (SG) in PPS insertion under fluoroscopy. Methods: SG were used as an alternative screen for fluoroscopic images. Operators A (2-year experience in spine surgery) and B (9-year experience) inserted the PPS into the bilateral L1–5 pedicles of the lumbar model bone under fluoroscopic guidance, repeating this procedure twice with and without SG (groups SG and N-SG, respectively). Each vertebral body’s insertion time, radiation dose, and radiation exposure time were measured, and the deviation in screw trajectories was evaluated. Results: The groups SG and N-SG showed no significant difference in insertion time for the overall procedure and each operator. However, group SG had a significantly shorter radiation exposure time than group N-SG for the overall procedure (109.1 ± 43.5 seconds vs. 150.9 ± 38.7 seconds; p = 0.003) and operator A (100.0 ± 29.0 seconds vs. 157.9 ± 42.8 seconds; p = 0.003). The radiation dose was also significantly lower in group SG than in group N-SG for the overall procedure (1.3 ± 0.6 mGy vs. 1.7 ± 0.5 mGy; p = 0.023) and operator A (1.2 ± 0.4 mGy vs. 1.8 ± 0.5 mGy; p = 0.013). The 2 groups showed no significant difference in screw deviation. Conclusion The application of SG in fluoroscopic imaging for PPS insertion holds potential as a useful method for reducing radiation exposure.

Objective: To elucidate the patient characteristics and outcomes of emergency surgery for spinal metastases and identify risk factors for emergency surgery. Methods: We prospectively analyzed 216 patients with spinal metastases who underwent palliative surgery from 2015 to 2020. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Barthel index, EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ5D), and neurological function were assessed at surgery and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors for emergency surgery. Results: In total, 146 patients underwent nonemergency surgery and 70 patients underwent emergency surgery within 48 hours of diagnosis of a surgical indication. After propensity score matching, we compared 61 patients each who underwent nonemergency and emergency surgery. Regardless of matching, the median performance status and the mean Barthel index and EQ5D score showed a tendency toward worse outcomes in the emergency than nonemergency group both preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively, although the surgery greatly improved these values in both groups. The median survival time tended to be shorter in the emergency than nonemergency group. The multivariate analysis showed that lesions located at T3–10 (p = 0.002; odds ratio [OR], 2.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48–5.75) and Frankel grades A–C (p < 0.001; OR, 4.91; 95% CI, 2.45–9.86) were independent risk factors for emergency surgery. Conclusion Among patients with spinal metastases, preoperative and postoperative subjective health values and postoperative survival are poorer in emergency than nonemergency surgery. Close attention to patients with T3–10 metastases is required to avoid poor outcomes after emergency surgery.

Objective: Spine surgeons are often at risk of radiation exposure due to intraoperative fluoroscopy, leading to health concerns such as carcinogenesis. This is due to the increasing use of percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) in spinal surgeries, resulting from the widespread adoption of minimally invasive spine stabilization. This study aimed to elucidate the effectiveness of smart glasses (SG) in PPS insertion under fluoroscopy. Methods: SG were used as an alternative screen for fluoroscopic images. Operators A (2-year experience in spine surgery) and B (9-year experience) inserted the PPS into the bilateral L1–5 pedicles of the lumbar model bone under fluoroscopic guidance, repeating this procedure twice with and without SG (groups SG and N-SG, respectively). Each vertebral body’s insertion time, radiation dose, and radiation exposure time were measured, and the deviation in screw trajectories was evaluated. Results: The groups SG and N-SG showed no significant difference in insertion time for the overall procedure and each operator. However, group SG had a significantly shorter radiation exposure time than group N-SG for the overall procedure (109.1 ± 43.5 seconds vs. 150.9 ± 38.7 seconds; p = 0.003) and operator A (100.0 ± 29.0 seconds vs. 157.9 ± 42.8 seconds; p = 0.003). The radiation dose was also significantly lower in group SG than in group N-SG for the overall procedure (1.3 ± 0.6 mGy vs. 1.7 ± 0.5 mGy; p = 0.023) and operator A (1.2 ± 0.4 mGy vs. 1.8 ± 0.5 mGy; p = 0.013). The 2 groups showed no significant difference in screw deviation. Conclusion The application of SG in fluoroscopic imaging for PPS insertion holds potential as a useful method for reducing radiation exposure.

Objective: To elucidate the patient characteristics and outcomes of emergency surgery for spinal metastases and identify risk factors for emergency surgery. Methods: We prospectively analyzed 216 patients with spinal metastases who underwent palliative surgery from 2015 to 2020. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Barthel index, EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ5D), and neurological function were assessed at surgery and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors for emergency surgery. Results: In total, 146 patients underwent nonemergency surgery and 70 patients underwent emergency surgery within 48 hours of diagnosis of a surgical indication. After propensity score matching, we compared 61 patients each who underwent nonemergency and emergency surgery. Regardless of matching, the median performance status and the mean Barthel index and EQ5D score showed a tendency toward worse outcomes in the emergency than nonemergency group both preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively, although the surgery greatly improved these values in both groups. The median survival time tended to be shorter in the emergency than nonemergency group. The multivariate analysis showed that lesions located at T3–10 (p = 0.002; odds ratio [OR], 2.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48–5.75) and Frankel grades A–C (p < 0.001; OR, 4.91; 95% CI, 2.45–9.86) were independent risk factors for emergency surgery. Conclusion Among patients with spinal metastases, preoperative and postoperative subjective health values and postoperative survival are poorer in emergency than nonemergency surgery. Close attention to patients with T3–10 metastases is required to avoid poor outcomes after emergency surgery.

Objective: Spine surgeons are often at risk of radiation exposure due to intraoperative fluoroscopy, leading to health concerns such as carcinogenesis. This is due to the increasing use of percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) in spinal surgeries, resulting from the widespread adoption of minimally invasive spine stabilization. This study aimed to elucidate the effectiveness of smart glasses (SG) in PPS insertion under fluoroscopy. Methods: SG were used as an alternative screen for fluoroscopic images. Operators A (2-year experience in spine surgery) and B (9-year experience) inserted the PPS into the bilateral L1–5 pedicles of the lumbar model bone under fluoroscopic guidance, repeating this procedure twice with and without SG (groups SG and N-SG, respectively). Each vertebral body’s insertion time, radiation dose, and radiation exposure time were measured, and the deviation in screw trajectories was evaluated. Results: The groups SG and N-SG showed no significant difference in insertion time for the overall procedure and each operator. However, group SG had a significantly shorter radiation exposure time than group N-SG for the overall procedure (109.1 ± 43.5 seconds vs. 150.9 ± 38.7 seconds; p = 0.003) and operator A (100.0 ± 29.0 seconds vs. 157.9 ± 42.8 seconds; p = 0.003). The radiation dose was also significantly lower in group SG than in group N-SG for the overall procedure (1.3 ± 0.6 mGy vs. 1.7 ± 0.5 mGy; p = 0.023) and operator A (1.2 ± 0.4 mGy vs. 1.8 ± 0.5 mGy; p = 0.013). The 2 groups showed no significant difference in screw deviation. Conclusion The application of SG in fluoroscopic imaging for PPS insertion holds potential as a useful method for reducing radiation exposure.

Objective: To elucidate the patient characteristics and outcomes of emergency surgery for spinal metastases and identify risk factors for emergency surgery. Methods: We prospectively analyzed 216 patients with spinal metastases who underwent palliative surgery from 2015 to 2020. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Barthel index, EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ5D), and neurological function were assessed at surgery and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors for emergency surgery. Results: In total, 146 patients underwent nonemergency surgery and 70 patients underwent emergency surgery within 48 hours of diagnosis of a surgical indication. After propensity score matching, we compared 61 patients each who underwent nonemergency and emergency surgery. Regardless of matching, the median performance status and the mean Barthel index and EQ5D score showed a tendency toward worse outcomes in the emergency than nonemergency group both preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively, although the surgery greatly improved these values in both groups. The median survival time tended to be shorter in the emergency than nonemergency group. The multivariate analysis showed that lesions located at T3–10 (p = 0.002; odds ratio [OR], 2.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48–5.75) and Frankel grades A–C (p < 0.001; OR, 4.91; 95% CI, 2.45–9.86) were independent risk factors for emergency surgery. Conclusion Among patients with spinal metastases, preoperative and postoperative subjective health values and postoperative survival are poorer in emergency than nonemergency surgery. Close attention to patients with T3–10 metastases is required to avoid poor outcomes after emergency surgery.