[Women's role in Orthopedic Training programs: What Proportion Do They Represent Today?] / Las mujeres y la residencia de ortopedia y traumatología en Argentina: ¿Qué proporción representan hoy?

Introduction: The objective of the study was to analyze all orthopedics residency programs of Argentina and determine:1)The proportion of females; 2) Social and demographics differences between genders: 3) The factors that influence positively or negatively in female decision to choose orthopedics. Method: An observational and descriptive study was carried out in two phases. First phase: analyze the database of the "Argentine Orthopedic Association during the period 2016-2017. Second phase: a survey was developed and sent to all the orthopedic residents focus on demographics, social and job preferences questions. Results and conclusion: A total of 933 residents were included for analysis. 121 (13%) were female and 812 (87%) were male. We got back 259 survey responses. We found statistically significant differences in terms of marriage or in union: female (16%) vs male (42 %) (p< 0.001); paternity (23.3%) vs maternity (4.5%) (p< 0.001). We observed that female mainly prefer pediatrics, foot and ankle and hand, while the primary choice of men is arthroplasty and arthroscopy. Focus on women analysis, the three main reasons that led them to choose the orthopedics residency program were: avidity for manual work (59%), personal desire (56%) and positive experience in orthopedics during the university (56%). The negative factors that influence female to choose an orthopedic training program are mainly related with the idea of physical demand and a male predominant work environment. In Argentina, women represent only 13% of all the orthopedics residents and this number is similar to other international reports.

Introducción: El objetivo del estudio fue analizar las residencias ortopedia y traumatología en Argentina y determinar: 1) La proporción de mujeres; 2) Diferencias sociales y demográficas entre géneros: 3) Los factores que influyen positiva o negativamente en las mujeres al elegir ortopedia. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional y descriptivo en dos fases. Primera fase: se analizó la base de datos de la "Asociación Argentina de Ortopedia y Traumatología¨ durante el período 2016-2017. Segunda fase: se desarrolló una encuesta, enfocada en cuestiones demográficas, sociales y laborales, y se envió a todos los residentes de ortopedia. Resultados y conclusión: Se incluyeron 933 residentes,121 (13%) eran mujeres y 812 (87%) eran hombres. Recibimos 259 (28%) respuestas de la encuesta. En las características demográficas encontramos diferencias estadísticamente significativas en términos de matrimonio o convivencia: mujeres (16%) vs hombres (42%) (p <0,001); paternidad (23.3%) vs maternidad (4.5%) (p <0.001). Observamos que las mujeres prefieren principalmente ortopedia infantil, pie y el tobillo y mano, mientras que la elección primaria de los hombres es la artroplastia y la artroscopia. Focalizándonos en las mujeres, las tres razones principales para elegir esta residencia fueron: gusto por el trabajo manual (59%), deseo personal (56%) y experiencia positiva en ortopedia durante la universidad (56%). Dentro de los factores disuasivos se relacionan principalmente con la idea de la gran demanda física y un ambiente de trabajo predominantemente masculino. En Argentina, las mujeres representan solo el 13% de todos los residentes de ortopedia y este número es similar a otros informes internacionales.

Does Osteoarticular Allograft Reconstruction Achieve Long-term Survivorship after En Bloc Resection of Grade 3 Giant Cell Tumor of Bone?

BACKGROUND: En bloc resection of benign tumors is only indicated in aggressive lesions with substantial destruction of the affected bone. Few reports have evaluated the long-term outcome of Grade 3 giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB; defined as severe bone destruction and soft tissue extension) treated with en bloc resection and reconstruction with a massive allograft. We recently reported that patients with benign tumors achieved better allograft reconstruction survivorship compared with those treated for a malignant bone tumor. In light of that finding, we wondered whether osteoarticular allografts would be a viable long-term alternative for Grade 3 GCTB, which could be important in some countries because of greater availability and lower costs compared with endoprostheses. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We analyzed a group of patients with Grade 3 GCTBs treated with en bloc resection and osteoarticular allograft reconstruction in terms of (1) survivorship free from allograft removal at 10 years; (2) survivorship free from reoperation for any reason at 10 years, (3) functional results as measured by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score, (4) assessment of arthrosis at the knee. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all patients with a Grade 3 GCTB treated between 1980 and 2007. Only patients treated with en bloc resection and reconstruction with massive osteoarticular allografts were included in the analysis. The indication for osteoarticular reconstruction during that time included severe bone destruction with intraarticular compromise of the tumor, intraarticular fracture because of tumor growth, the presence of inadequate remaining subchondral bone to resist normal loading (for the distal femur or proximal tibia), and the preservation of a soft-tissue component (ligaments or meniscus) for articular stability. During the period, 75 patients were treated with en bloc resection. Patients treated with intralesional curettage (n = 7), reconstruction with an endoprosthesis (n = 2), intercalary arthrodesis (n = 13), or unicondylar reconstruction (n = 14) were excluded. Of the original 75 treated with en bloc resection, 52% (39) were treated with osteoarticular allograft reconstruction, and no patient was lost to follow-up before 2 years or had substantial missing data. However, of the 39 patients, another 21% (8) have not been seen in the last 5 years, but these were included here because they reached the 10-year minimum surveillance period before being lost. Twenty-three of those 39 patients were previously reported by our group and 16 new patients (treated between 1980-1985) were included in this series (eight distal radius, six distal femur, two proximal tibias), extending the follow-up period and including more patients for analysis. The median (range) follow-up duration was 26 years (10 to 34). We assessed survivorship using a Kaplan-Meier analysis, we drew MSTS scores retrospectively from patients´ medical records, and we graded arthrosis using the Ahlbäck scale for the knee (which was by far the most common joint involved, n = 31, and so it was the joint we assessed for the presence of arthrosis). RESULTS: The survivorship free from allograft removal was 85% at 10 years (95% CI 74 to 96). The allograft survivorship free from reoperation for any reason at 10 years was 72% (95% CI 59 to 87). The median (range) MSTS score was 28 points (19 to 30). The grade of arthrosis in the knee at last follow-up was analyzed in 20 patients and classified in nine as Ahlbäck Type 4, in six as Type 3, in three as Type 2 and in two as Type 5. CONCLUSIONS: Osteoarticular allograft reconstruction after a Grade 3 GCTB en bloc resection showed excellent long-term survivorship. We believe these results compare favorably with other studies on endoprosthetic reconstruction and head-to-head studies of these approaches should be performed; these would need to be multicenter trials. In the meantime, in locations where endoprostheses are unavailable or too expensive, we believe our results support the use of osteoarticular allografts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.