Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
EFORT Open Rev ; 6(5): 316-330, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34150326

RESUMEN

Thumb carpometacarpal joint (CMCJ) arthritis is a common and painful condition. Thumb CMCJ prosthetic replacement aims to restore thumb biomechanics and improve pain and function. Early reviews demonstrated a lack of high-quality studies, but more recently a significant number of higher-quality studies have been published. This review provides a concise and systematic overview of the evidence to date.A systematic review of several databases was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies evaluating the outcomes of thumb CMCJ prosthetic total joint replacement were included. Data extracted included patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pain scores, range of motion, strength, survival rates and complications.A total of 56 studies met all inclusion criteria and were analysed. There was one randomized controlled trial, three prospective comparative cohort studies, five retrospective comparative cohort studies, and 47 descriptive cohort studies. The reported studies included 2731 patients with 3048 thumb total CMCJ prosthetic joint replacements. Follow up ranged from 12 months to 13.1 years.In general, good results were demonstrated, with improvements in PROMs, pain scores and strength. Failure rates ranged from 2.6% to 19.9% depending upon implant studied. Comparative studies demonstrated promising results for replacement when compared to resection arthroplasty, with modest improvements in PROMs but at a cost of increased rates of complications.Studies reporting outcomes in thumb CMCJ prosthetic total joint replacement are increasing in both number and quality. Failure, in terms of loosening and dislocation, remains a concern, although in the medium-term follow up for modern implants this issue appears to be lower when compared to their predecessors.Functional outcomes also look promising compared to resection arthroplasty, but further high-quality studies utilizing a standardized resection arthroplasty technique and modern implants, together with standardized core outcome sets, will be of value. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:316-330. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200152.

2.
EFORT Open Rev ; 5(5): 280-288, 2020 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32509333

RESUMEN

The optimal management and long-term outcomes of olecranon fractures in the paediatric population is not well understood. This systematic review aims to analyse the literature on the management of paediatric olecranon fractures and the long-term implications.A systematic review of several databases was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. English-language studies evaluating the management of isolated paediatric olecranon fractures were included. Data extracted included demographics, classifications, conservative and operative treatment methods and outcomes.Fifteen articles fitting the inclusion criteria were included. There were 11 case series and four retrospective comparative series. The reported studies included 299 fractures in 280 patients.The mechanism of injury was predominantly low energy. Fractures displaced < 4 mm were treated non-operatively with almost universally good results, with the majority being treated with cast immobilization. Fractures displaced > 4 mm were commonly treated operatively with generally good results, with tension band wire and suture fixation being the most common treatment modalities. Weight > 50 kg was associated with failure of suture fixation.In those studies that reported olecranon fractures with associated elbow injuries (e.g. radial head fractures) outcomes were poorer. Forty-six fractures were in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta, who sustained a higher rate of re-fracture after removal of metalwork and contralateral olecranon fracture.Despite a relatively low evidence base pool of studies, the aggregate data support the non-operative treatment of isolated undisplaced olecranon fractures with good results, and support the operative treatment of fractures displaced ≥ 4 mm. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:280-288. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190082.

5.
BMJ ; 377: e068547, 2022 04 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35450852
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA