Hip resurfacing: case closed? A bibliometric analysis of the past 10 years.

INTRODUCTION: Hip resurfacing (HR) was introduced as a potential alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA), indicated predominantly for younger, high demand patients. The modern metal-on-metal implant was popularized in the 1990s and early 2000s and promised greater wear resistance. However, its popularity waned due to increased rates of complications related to metal toxicity including pseudo-tumors as well as the recall of many resurfacing implants. The purpose of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis and investigate the current trends in hip resurfacing literature. METHODS: Using the keywords "hip resurfacing," publications between 2012 and 2022 were identified on Web of Science Core Collection of Clarivate Analytics. Results were screened for relevance by three independent reviewers using title, abstract, and full text. The retrieved data were evaluated by the bibliometric method. Included articles were imported into CiteSpace 5.7.R1, 64-bit (Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA), VOSviewer 1.6.15 (Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands), and the Online Analysis Platform of Literature Metrology to identify trends in publication. RESULTS: Search terms yielded 1200 results and 724 were included in final analysis. A steady decrease of publications was noted over the past decade with less than 40 articles published in 2020 and 2021. The Journal of Hip Arthroplasty (92), Hip International (74), and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (54) published the most articles. Authors from the United States and the United Kingdom published the most studies. High-frequency keywords in co-occurrence and co-cited cluster analysis were metal-on-metal, metal ions, wear, pseudo-tumor, and revision, demonstrating that long-term concerns have been the focus of most recent studies. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our bibliometric analysis allowed novel exploration and identification of the current research trends, contributions, and the distribution of publications exploring HR. The understanding of HR and the poor long-term outcomes of some resurfacing implants has improved significantly over the past decade, with the most recent focus on failure rates and long-term complications from metal debris. However, the breadth of literature has steadily declined in the past decade, and ultimately demonstrates the decline of scientific interest and focus on novel areas in hip resurfacing and a potential reached consensus.

Can Rapid Progression in Nonambulatory Cerebral Palsy Scoliosis Be Predicted Using Humeral Head Ossification?

BACKGROUND: Patients with cerebral palsy scoliosis (CPS) experience higher complication rates compared with idiopathic scoliosis and often present for surgery with larger curves. Prediction of an inflection point for rapid deformity progression has proven difficult. A proximal humerus-based skeletal maturity staging system (HS) has been recently validated and is commonly visible on the posteroanterior radiograph. The authors hypothesize that this system can be used to identify a period at which CPS may progress rapidly, perhaps facilitating discussion of timely surgical intervention. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted for nonambulatory pediatric patients with CPS who presented between 2009 and 2018 at our institution. All patients were considered for inclusion regardless of operative or nonoperative management. Patients who were skeletally mature at initial evaluation or had prior spine surgery were excluded. The authors analyzed radiographs in each HS available. Survival was calculated for cutoffs of 60 and 70 degrees (numbers found to increase intraoperative and postoperative complications for CPS). RESULTS: Eighty-six patients with CPS were identified (54 male individuals). Major curves increased significantly between HS 1 and 2 (27.7 to 46.6 degrees, P=0.009) and HS 3 and 4 (53.1 to 67.9 degrees, P=0.023). The proportion of curves ≥70 degrees were significantly different between HS (P<0.001), with the greatest increase between HS 3 and 4 (24% to 51%; ≥70 degrees). The largest drop in the 60/70-degree survival curves was between HS 3 and 4. In a subanalysis, 69% of patients with curves ≥40 degrees but <70 degrees in stage 3 would progress ≥70 degrees by stage 4. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying a period of rapid curve progression may guide surgical planning before CPS curves become large, stiff, and more difficult to fix. Our findings suggest that humeral skeletal maturity staging is a valuable decision-making tool in neuromuscular scoliosis, with the HS 3 to 4 transition representing the time of the greatest risk of progression. Consider a surgical discussion or shortened follow-up interval for patients with CPS with curves ≥40 degrees who are HS 3. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Lumbar Vertebral Body Tethering: Single Center Outcomes and Reoperations in a Consecutive Series of 106 Patients.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes and reoperation rates in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) undergoing lumbar anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is a viable option in growing children. The benefit of motion preservation must be balanced by a higher reoperation rate. A paucity of reports has addressed lumbar AVBT. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was conducted to identify all patients who underwent lumbar AVBT (lowest instrumented vertebra L3 or L4) with a minimum 2 years of follow-up. Clinical and radiographic parameters, including complications and reoperations, were also collected. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test for qualitative variables. RESULTS: From a dataset of 551 patients, we identified 106 patients (89% female) who underwent a lumbar AVBT (33 lumbar only, 73 bilateral thoracic/lumbar) with mean follow-up of 4.1±1.6 years at which point 85% (90/106) had reached skeletal maturity. Preoperatively, these patients were skeletally immature (age: 12.8±1.3 y, Sanders: 3.3±0.8, R=0.6±0.9) with a lumbar coronal curve angle of 49.6°±11.2 which corrected to 19.9°±11.2 (P <0.0001) at most recent follow-up. At the latest follow-up, 76.4% (81/106) of the patients harbored a coronal curve angle of < 30°. Twenty patients (18.9%) underwent 23 reoperations, with overcorrection being the most common (10/23, 43%). Broken tethers led to reoperation in 3 instances (3/23, 13%). Six patients in the cohort needed a posterior spinal fusion (6/106, 5.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Vertebral body tethering is a viable treatment option for skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis. This report is the largest to date for lumbar AVBT, highlighting that 84% of patients harbored a curve < 35° at the latest follow-up but with an 18.9% reoperation rate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Type IV tibial tubercle fracture-Salter-Harris type II variant.

Fractures about the tibial tubercle are uncommon fracture patterns, seen most often in adolescent males as they approach skeletal maturity. Compartment syndrome has a high association with these fractures requiring close monitoring, and a heightened level of suspicion. Tibial tubercle fractures are typically stratified using the Ogden classification. The type of intra-articular involvement and degree of displacement guide appropriate treatment. This report highlights a 14-year-old male patient who suffered a type IV tibial tubercle fracture with a unique Salter-Harris II, or transitional, component posteriorly that was unable to be closed reduced and developed compartment syndrome. He underwent fasciotomy, open reduction, and temporary external fixation. Once the status of the soft tissues improved, he underwent staged open reduction and internal fixation with skin grafting. The patient's fracture and soft tissues healed and he currently ambulates without assistance or pain, and has returned to all desired activities including competitive sports.

Systematic review of dynamization vs exchange nailing for delayed/non-union femoral fractures.

AIM: To analyze the literature on efficacy of dynamamization vs exchange nailing in treatment of delayed and non-union femur fractures. METHODS: Ultimately, 31 peer-reviewed articles with 644 exchanged nailing patients and 131 dynamization patients were identified and analyzed. The following key words were inputted in different combinations in order to search the field of publications in its entirety: "non-union", "delayed union", "ununited", "femur fracture", "femoral fracture", "exchange nailing", "dynaiz(s)ation", "secondary nailing", "dynamic", "static", and "nail revision". The initial search yielded over 150 results, and was refined based on the inclusion criteria: Only studies reporting on humans, non-unions and delayed unions, and the usage of exchange nailing and/or dynamization as a secondary treatment after failed IM nailing. The resulting 66 articles were obtained through online journal access. The results were filtered further based on the exclusion criteria: No articles that failed to report overall union rates, differentiate between success rates of their reported techniques, or articles that analyzed less than 5 patients. RESULTS: Exchange nailing lead to fracture union in 84.785% of patients compared to the 66.412% of dynamization with statistically comparable durations until union (5.193 ± 2.310 mo and 4.769 ± 1.986 mo respectively). Dynamically locking exchange nails resulted in an average union time of 5.208 ± 2.475 mo compared to 5.149 ± 2.366 mo (P = 0.8682) in statically locked exchange nails. The overall union rate of the two procedures, statically and dynamically locked exchange nailing yielded union rates of 84.259% and 82.381% respectively. Therefore, there was no significant difference between the different locking methods of exchange nailing for union rate or time to union at a significance value of P < 0.05. The analysis showed exchange nailing to be the more successful choice in the treatment of femoral non-unions in respect to its higher success rate (491/567 EN, 24/57 dynam, P < 0.0001). However, there was no significant difference between the success rates of the two procedures for delayed union fractures (25/27 EN, 45/55 dynam, P = 0.3299). Nevertheless, dynamization was more efficient in the treatment of delayed unions (at rates comparable to exchange nailing) than in the treatment of non-unions. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, after examination of factors, dynamization is recommended treatment of delayed femur fractures, while exchange nailing is the treatment of choice for non-unions.