Gait analysis and body composition after treatment of quadriceps tendon ruptures showed equal results independent of suture anchor or transosseus repair technique used: a pilot study.

Purpose: Suture anchor repair is a fairly new surgical technique for quadriceps tendon ruptures. It is supposed to be superior to the standard transosseus sutures because of biomechanical superiority and - due to a less invasive surgery - earlier rehabilitation onset. This study focused on analyzing functionality of the quadriceps muscle during gait as well as body composition between a suture anchor and a transosseus suture repair group and is the first study that undertook systematic gait analyses in this patient population.Materials and methods: Seventeen patients who underwent either suture anchor (9 subjects) or transosseus suture repair surgery (8 subjects) at two different trauma surgery centers between 2010 and 2015 were included. Gait analysis was performed with a three dimensional motion capture system (Vicon) and body composition was assessed with bioelectrical impedance analysis (Nutribox). Parametrical statistical analyses were conducted using independent t-tests.Results: No statistically significant differences were found in any outcome parameter of gait analysis or body composition measurement.Conclusion: Suture anchor repair shows equal results to transosseus suture repair technique regarding gait quality and body composition.Implications for rehabilitationIn a long term follow-up suture anchor repair shows similar results to the transosseus suture technique regarding body composition and musculus quadriceps function in gait.Without the implementation of an appropriate rehabilitation protocol incorporating the earlier load-carrying capacity, early biomechanical advantages of suture anchor technique over transosseus sutures might vanish over time.The decision which surgery technique might be best for the individual patient, should not be based on the expectation that suture anchor repair alone without considering appropriate rehabilitation would lead to long term functional advantages over transosseus suture technique.

Clinical outcomes after treatment of quadriceps tendon ruptures show equal results independent of suture anchor or transosseus repair technique used - A pilot study.

Biomechanical studies have shown the use of suture anchors (SA) to be superior to the traditional transosseous sutures (TS) in the repair of quadriceps tendon rupture (QTR). This study aimed to analyze and compare the functional outcomes of patients treated for quadriceps tendon ruptures using suture anchors or transosseous sutures. Patients having undergone suture anchor repair or transosseous suture repair for quadriceps tendon rupture between 2010 and 2015 at one of the two participating hospitals were included. Patients from site A underwent TS repair (TS group) while patients from site B underwent SA repair (SA group). Exclusion criteria included previous or concomitant injuries of the involved knee, penetrating injuries and pre-existing neurological conditions. Clinical outcome was assessed by subjective scores (Lysholm and Tegner Scores, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain), quadriceps isokinetic strength testing, Insall-Salvati Index (ISI), and physical examination. Non-parametrical statistical analysis was conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. Twenty-seven patients were included in the study of which 17 patients (63%) were available for follow-up (SA group: 9, TS group: 8). All patients were male with a mean age of 62.7 (SD: 8.8) and 57.9 (SD: 12.7) years for the SA group and TS group, respectively. The groups did not differ in terms of demographic characteristics. No clinically significant differences were identified between the two groups. There were no re-ruptures in either group. Treatment of quadriceps tendon rupture using suture anchors provides a clinically valid alternative treatment to the gold-standard transosseous suture repair.

Nonoperative management of odontoid fractures using a halothoracic vest.

OBJECTIVE: Despite various reports in the literature, the appropriate treatment of Type II odontoid fractures remains controversial. Although there is an increasing tendency toward surgical treatment of these fractures in recent years, nonoperative treatment strategies are still regarded as a practicable method, particularly in elderly patients with significant comorbidities. One purpose of this study was to determine the functional and radiographic long-term results after rigid immobilization of Type II odontoid fractures using a halothoracic vest. The second aim was to present a case-control series of patients with nonunion of Type II odontoid fractures compared with patients with successful fracture healing to determine specific risk factors for failure of halo immobilization. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical and radiographic records of 90 patients with an average age of 69 years at the time of injury who had undergone nonoperative treatment of odontoid fractures using a halothoracic vest between 1988 and 2004. To identify potential risk factors for failure of halo fixation, patients were divided into "cases" and "controls." Cases were defined as patients with nonfusion after halo immobilization, and controls were patients with successful fracture healing attained with this treatment option. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients returned to their preinjury activity level and were satisfied with their treatment. The Smiley-Webster scale showed an overall functional outcome score of 1.64. Successful fracture healing was achieved in 76 patients (84%). In 14 patients, nonunion was diagnosed by standard x-rays and additional computed tomographic scans within 6 to 12 months after trauma. Referring to possible risk factors for failure of halo fixation, nonunion was found significantly more often in older patients and in those with displaced fractures of the odontoid. Secondary loss of reduction and delay of treatment were identified as further risk factors for nonfusion. CONCLUSION: With regard to successful fracture healing and functional results of the patients, we had a satisfactory outcome after halo fixation of Type II odontoid fractures. Although a fusion rate of 84% should not be deemed as optimal, nonoperative management of these fractures using a halothoracic vest seems to be an appropriate treatment strategy in patients who are not suitable for surgical treatment.