Spherical varus rotational osteotomy of the femur using a navigation system as extra-articular surgery for extensive osteonecrosis of femoral head: a case control study.

BACKGROUND: Curved varus osteotomy (CVO) is an effective femoral head-preserving surgical procedure for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) classified as type B or C1 according to the Japanese Investigation Committee (JIC) classification; it reportedly provides better postoperative outcomes than transtrochanteric rotational osteotomy (TRO). We have developed a new procedure called spherical varus rotational osteotomy (SVRO) in which osteotomy of the femur into a spherical shape is followed by varus and anterior rotation using navigation to increase indications and improve postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Nine joints of eight patients who underwent SVRO and could be followed up for > 1 year were included in the study. Disease types determined preoperatively according to the JIC classification were type C1 for four joints and type C2 for five joints. Preoperative disease JIC classification stages were 3a for eight joints and 1 for one joint. SVRO was performed using OrthoMap® 3D Navigation software, and the following variables were measured: surgery time, intraoperative blood loss, difference between preoperative and postoperative angles of anteversion, postoperative lower limb length discrepancy, and postoperative intact area occupancy. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ) was used for clinical evaluation. Visual Analog Scale and JHEQ scores were evaluated preoperatively and at the final follow-up. RESULTS: The measurement results were as follows: surgery time, 130 min; blood loss, 200 ml; angle of varus, 20°; angle of anterior rotation, 30°; preoperative angle of anteversion, 15°; postoperative angle of anteversion, 22°; lower limb shortening, 11 mm; preoperative intact area occupancy, 0%; and postoperative intact area occupancy, 74.2%. There were no cases of progression in the postoperative stages or re-collapse. CONCLUSION: SVRO allows for the repositioning of the exterior and posterior intact areas, providing a broader intact region postoperatively. This technique is particularly beneficial for young patients with ONFH and extensive necrosis and is a less invasive alternative to TRO. This procedure has been shown to be effective in achieving favorable outcomes in patients with extensive necrosis who would have otherwise required rotational osteotomy, depending on the necrosis location. Further longitudinal studies are necessary to validate these findings and establish long-term benefits.

Risk factors of unintentional piecemeal resection in endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps ≥ 10 mm.

This study aimed to investigate the lesion and endoscopist factors associated with unintentional endoscopic piecemeal mucosal resection (uniEPMR) of colorectal lesions ≥ 10 mm. uniEPMR was defined from the medical record as anything other than a preoperatively planned EPMR. Factors leading to uniEPMR were identified by retrospective univariate and multivariate analyses of lesions ≥ 10 mm (adenoma including sessile serrated lesion and carcinoma) that were treated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) at three hospitals. Additionally, a questionnaire survey was conducted to determine the number of cases treated by each endoscopist. A learning curve (LC) was created for each lesion size based on the number of experienced cases and the percentage of uniEPMR. Of 2557 lesions, 327 lesions underwent uniEPMR. The recurrence rate of uniEPMR was 2.8%. Multivariate analysis showed that lesion diameter ≥ 30 mm (odds ratio 11.83, 95% confidence interval 6.80-20.60, p < 0.0001) was the most associated risk factor leading to uniEPMR. In the LC analysis, the proportion of uniEPMR decreased for lesion sizes of 10-19 mm until 160 cases. The proportion of uniEPMR decreased with the number of experienced cases in the 20-29 mm range, while there was no correlation between the number of experienced cases and the proportion of uniEPMR ≥ 30 mm. These results suggest that 160 cases seem to be the minimum number of cases needed to be proficient in en bloc EMR. Additionally, while lesion sizes of 10-29 mm are considered suitable for EMR, lesion sizes ≥ 30 mm are not applicable for en bloc EMR from the perspective of both lesion and endoscopist factors.