Exploring Orthopedic Stem-Cell Approaches for Osteoarthritis Management: Current Trends and Future Horizons.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent and debilitating condition characterized by joint degeneration and pain. Current treatment options aim to alleviate symptoms and slow disease progression but lack curative potential. Stem cell therapies have emerged as a promising alternative. This article explores the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations of hip and knee OA, and the evolving role of stem cell therapies in their treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: The global prevalence of OA, with knee OA being the most common form, has fueled the demand for stem cell therapies. Despite limited robust evidence supporting their efficacy, clinical trials investigating stem-cell treatments for OA have reported encouraging radiological and clinical improvements. Stem cell therapies offer potential disease-modifying benefits through immunomodulatory actions, growth factor secretion, and chondrogenic capabilities. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADMSCs) have shown promise in clinical trials for OA treatment, offering potential pain relief and functional improvement. ADMSCs possess advantages such as accessibility and a favorable safety profile, making them a viable option for OA management. Although other stem-cell types, including human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), have been used in OA treatment, ADMSCs have demonstrated superior outcomes. By providing a comprehensive overview of the evolving landscape of stem cell therapies for hip and knee OA, this article highlights the potential of stem-cell treatments to address the limitations of current therapies. However, further research is required to establish their long-term efficacy, identify optimal stem-cell types, and develop standardized protocols.

Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-Based Rehabilitation Interventions in Improving Postoperative Outcomes for Orthopedic Surgery Patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The surge in orthopedic surgeries strains the US healthcare system, necessitating innovative rehabilitation solutions. This review examines the potential of virtual reality (VR)-based interventions for orthopedic rehabilitation. RECENT FINDINGS: The effectiveness of VR-based interventions in orthopedic surgery patients is scrutinized. While some studies suggest better patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction, mixed results emerge from others, demonstrating comparable or varied results compared to traditional rehabilitation. The underlying mechanisms of VR-based rehabilitation are elucidated, showing its positive impact on proprioception, pain management, agency, and balance. Challenges of unfamiliarity, patient engagement, and drop-out rates are identified, emphasizing the need for tailored approaches. VR technology's immersive environments and multisensory experiences offer a novel approach to addressing functional deficits and pain post-surgery. The conclusion drawn is that VR-based rehabilitation complements rather than replaces conventional methods, potentially aiding in pain reduction and functional improvement. VR-based rehabilitation holds promise for enhancing orthopedic surgery outcomes, presenting a dynamic approach to recovery. Its potential to reshape healthcare delivery and reimbursement structures underscores its significance in modern healthcare. Overall, VR-based rehabilitation offers a promising avenue for optimizing postoperative recovery in orthopedic surgery patients.

All-Suture Suspensory Button Has Similar Biomechanical Performance to Metal Suspensory Button for Onlay Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.

Purpose: To evaluate the maximal load at failure, cyclic displacement, and stiffness of onlay subpectoral biceps tenodesis (BT) with an intramedullary unicortical metal button (MB) versus a unicortical all-suture button (ASB). Methods: Eighteen matched paired human cadaveric proximal humeri were randomly allocated for subpectoral BT with either ASB or MB using a high-strength suture. Specimens were tested on a servohydraulic mechanical testing apparatus under cyclic load for 1,000 cycles and then loaded to failure. The clamp was then adjusted to isolate the suture-anchor point interface and loaded to failure. Maximal load to failure, displacement, and stiffness were compared. Results: There was no significant difference between groups in stiffness, displacement, or yield load. The maximal load to failure for the MB was greater than the ASB (347.6 ± 74.1N vs 266.5 ± 69.3N, P = .047). Eight specimens in each group failed by suture pull-through on the tendon. When the suture-anchor point interface was isolated, there was no significant difference in maximal load at failure (MB 586.5 ± 215.8N vs ASB 579.6 ± 255.9N, P = .957). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the MB and ASB have similar biomechanical performance when used in subpectoral BT. Although the MB showed statistically significant greater maximal load to failure, there was no difference between the MB and ASB when the suture-tendon interface was eliminated. Suture pull-through was the most common mode of failure for both implants, underscoring the importance of the suture-tendon interface. Clinical Relevance: Fixation techniques for the treatment of long head of the biceps brachii tenodesis continue to evolve. The use of an all-suture suspensory button has advantages, but it is important to understand if this implant is a biomechanically suitable alternative to a metal suspensory button.

Intramedullary Unicortical Button and All-Suture Anchors Provide Similar Maximum Strength for Onlay Distal Biceps Tendon Repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the biomechanical profile of onlay distal biceps repair with an intramedullary unicortical button versus all-suture anchors under cyclic loading and maximal load to failure. METHODS: Twenty paired fresh-frozen human cadaveric elbows were randomized to onlay distal biceps repair with either a single intramedullary button or with two 1.35-mm all-suture anchors. A 1.3-mm high tensile strength tape was used in a Krackow stitch to suture the tendons in both groups. Specimens and repair constructs were loaded for 3,000 cycles and then loaded to failure. Maximum load to failure, mode of failure, and construct elongation were recorded. RESULTS: Mean (± standard deviation) maximum load to failure for the unicortical intramedullary button and all-suture anchor repairs were 503.23 ± 141.77 N and 537.33 ± 262.13 N (P = .696), respectively. Mean maximum displacement after 3,000 cycles (± standard deviation) was 4.17 ± 2.05 mm in the button group and 2.06 ± 1.05 mm in the suture anchor group (P = .014). Mode of failure in the button group was suture tape rupture in 7 specimens, failure at the tendon-suture interface in 2 specimens, and button pullout in 1 specimen. Anchor pullout was the mode of failure in all suture anchor specimens. There were no tendon ruptures or radial tuberosity fractures in either group. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that onlay distal biceps repair with 2 all-suture anchors has similar maximum strength to repair with an intramedullary button and that both are viable options for fixation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: All-suture anchors and unicortical intramedullary button have similar maximum strength at time zero. Both constructs provide suitable fixation for onlay distal biceps repair.

Early Versus Delayed Active Range of Motion After Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the effect of early active elbow range of motion (ROM) protocols on failure rates and outcomes after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that patients managed using an early active ROM protocol after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis would demonstrate similar failure rates and functional outcomes compared to patients managed using a traditional delayed active ROM protocol. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We evaluated 63 patients who underwent open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with unicortical suture button fixation. Based on surgeon preference, 22 patients were managed using an early active motion protocol consisting of no restrictions on elbow flexion or forearm supination, while 41 patients were managed using a delayed motion protocol postoperatively. Primary outcome measures included failure of biceps tenodesis and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores. Secondary outcomes included shoulder and elbow ROM at 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The mean follow-up for the 63 patients was 24.2 months postoperatively. One patient (2.4%) in the delayed active motion cohort and no patients in the early active motion cohort experienced failure. Final outcome scores as well as 6-month shoulder and elbow ROM indicated excellent functional outcomes, with no significant difference between motion cohorts. The median postoperative ASES scores were 97.99 in the early active motion cohort (mean ± standard deviation [SD], 95.49 ± 7.68) and 95.42 in the delayed motion cohort (mean ± SD, 90.93 ± 16.08), while median postoperative SANE scores were 96 in the early motion cohort (mean ± SD, 94.23 ± 6.68) and 95 in the delayed motion cohort (mean ± SD, 88.39 ± 17.98). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant difference in outcome scores based on the performance of concomitant rotator cuff repair or hand dominance. CONCLUSION: Early active ROM after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with unicortical suture button fixation resulted in low failure rates and excellent clinical outcomes, comparable to the results of patients managed using delayed active ROM protocols. This suggests that patients undergoing open subpectoral biceps tenodesis may be managed using either early or delayed active motion protocols without compromising functional outcome.