Metacarpophalangeal hyperextension in trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: Relationship to first metacarpal head shape, and clinical impact.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the shape of the first metacarpal head influences metacarpophalangeal hyperextension, and to evaluate the influence of metacarpophalangeal hyperextension on hand pain and function in patients with trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. METHODS: 362 patients with painful basal thumb osteoarthritis were evaluated over a 2-year period. Pain rating on a visual analog scale, trapeziometacarpal and metacarpophalangeal motion, and grip and pinch strength were evaluated. The shape of the metacarpal head was assessed on strict lateral radiographs using the "A/r" ratio. RESULTS: Round metacarpal heads had significantly greater and more frequent metacarpophalangeal hyperextension than flat heads (28° vs. 8°, and 78% vs. 29%). Metacarpophalangeal hyperextension adversely impacted trapeziometacarpal motion in antepulsion (27° vs. 32°), abduction (25° vs. 30°) and pinch strength (3.6 vs. 4.6 KgF). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that the shape of the metacarpal head influences metacarpophalangeal hyperextension in trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. Metacarpophalangeal hyperextension adversely impacted pinch strength and trapeziometacarpal motion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Retrospective case series.

Intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures: percutaneous nailing in the lateral position through the Neviaser approach is a reliable technique.

BACKGROUND: Displaced humeral shaft fractures are frequently treated by osteosynthesis in the active patient. We aimed to evaluate the results of intramedullary nailing (IMN) in the lateral position with the Neviaser approach and to compare them with those from IMN nailing in the standard position and conventional approach. METHODS: In the retrospectively evaluated, single-center study, we compared 20 cases of long IMN for fractures of the proximal or middle third of the humerus shaft (Multilock; Synthes Laboratory) in the lateral position with the percutaneous Neviaser approach with 52 cases of IMN in the standard position. The mean age of patients was 62 ± 21 years. Clinical outcomes were analyzed: Constant score, subjective shoulder evaluation score and range of motion. Radiographically, entry point at the proximal part of the humerus, the healing rate and the possible association between the critical shoulder angle (CSA) and the correct positioning of the nail were assessed. RESULTS: With a mean follow-up of 26 ± 2 months, the healing rate was 89% (64/72) in the overall series, (eight patients in non-union), with no difference between the two groups. The overall mean active anterior elevation (AAE) was 125 ± 22°, mean external rotation (ER1) was 35 ± 17°, and mean internal rotation (IR) was at L3. The mean Constant score was 58 ± 23 and subjective shoulder evaluation score 73 ± 12%. ranges of motion were better in the lateral than standard position group (AAE 133 ± 17 vs. 122 ± 23, P = .03; ER1 47 ± 13 vs. 30 ± 16, P < .001; IR T12 vs. L5, P = .02). The nail was less often protruding in the lateral than standard position group (1/20 [5%] vs. 20/52 [38.5%], P = .002). The nail was better positioned from the anteroposterior view (nail centered: 16/20 [75%] vs. 26/52 [50%], P = .047) and lateral view (nail centered: 18/20 [90%] vs. 34/52 [65.4%], P = .02) in the lateral than standard position group. We found no association between nail position, type of approach and CSA. CONCLUSIONS: In the short-term follow-up, osteosynthesis of humeral shaft fractures by using long IMN in the lateral position with the Neviaser approach is a reliable technique. The positioning of the nail, in particular its entry point, and the clinical results were better with the lateral position and Neviaser approach than with the standard position and conventional approach. Further studies with a larger number of patients, assessment of the learning curve, and analysis of the impact of this technique on comorbidities (unchanged cerebral perfusion) are needed to fully validate this technique.

Prospective study of 90 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs for isolated distal supraspinatus tear, assessing the impact of cardiovascular risk factors on tendon healing.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular risk factors have been shown to be relevant to onset of rotator cuff tear, but their influence on healing remains to be determined. OBJECTIVE: To assess the individual and cumulative impact of cardiovascular risk factors on tendon healing after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A single-center prospective study included 90 patients undergoing arthroscopic repair of isolated distal supraspinatus tendon tear. Only isolated full-thickness tears without anteroposterior extension, retraction (Patte stage ≤ 2) or fatty involution were included. Tendon healing was assessed on ultrasound according to the 5 types of the Sugaya classification. Clinical and functional assessment at 12 months used Constant score. Cardiovascular comorbidities were screened for in the preoperative anesthesiology consultation and control consultation: smoking, high blood pressure, dyslipidemia, diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular history, and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. RESULTS: Ninety patients with a mean age of 59.6±6.95 years were included for analysis. 77.7% of cuffs showed healing on ultrasound, without signs of retear (stage 1-3), 16.6% showed partial retear (stage 4) and 6.6% showed no healing, with tendon retraction (stage 5). Mean Constant score improved by 37.5 points (p=0.001), for a global score of 78 at 12 months. Multivariate analysis identified several significant cardiovascular factors for poor healing: active smoking (p=0.002), dyslipidemia (p=0.006), high blood pressure (p≤0.001) and obesity (p=0.02). Cumulative comorbidity was associated with poor tendon healing, with significant impact as of 2 cardiovascular risk factors. Constant score decreased significantly according to healing stage (p≤0.001). CONCLUSION: The present study confirmed the involvement of cardiovascular risk factors in bone-tendon healing disorder, with significant impact as of 2 factors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; low-power prospective clinical series.

Restoration of elbow extension and construction of a "key grip" in people with tetraplegia. Comparative study of a surgical plan in one or two stages.

AIM: We report the comparative results of functional upper extremity surgery plans in patients with tetraplegia, including restoration of elbow extension and construction of a key grip in a "one-stage" or "two-stage" operation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A series of 36 patients with tetraplegia, with a total of 45 operated upper limbs, was analyzed retrospectively with a mean follow-up of 23 months (13-39 months). We evaluated the analytical strength of elbow extension using the MRC (Medical Research Council) score, the strength of the key grip (kg/F) as well as the autonomy of the patients using functional scores; Lamb (/100) and QIF (Quadriplegia Index of Function) (/100). RESULTS: Sixteen upper limbs were included in the "one-stage" group and 29 in the "two-stage" group. The groups were comparable preoperatively. Elbow extension strength was 3.6/5 in the one-stage group versus 3.7/5, p=0.74. Grip strength was 1.8kg/F in the one-stage group versus 1.3kg/F, p=0.22. Regarding the functional scores, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups for the Lamb score (p=0.46) and the QIF (p=0.42). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of the frequency of complications for the elbow (p=0.49) and for the hand (p=0.17). The total duration of the one-stage surgery plan averaged 7.5 months compared to 24.7 months for the two-stage plan, p<0.01. The mean follow-up for the one-stage group was 21 months versus 24 months for the two-stage group. CONCLUSION: The results of both plans are similar and indicate that the "one-stage" plan is a reliable option. This all-in-one surgical option reduces postoperative follow-up and dropout rates for patients during the plan timeframe. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; retrospective clinical series.