Consenso GEDOS-SECOT sobre el proceso de atención a pacientes con artrosis de rodilla e indicación de artroplastia / GEDOS-SECOT consensus on the care process of patients with knee osteoarthritis and arthoplasty

Objetivo. Desarrollar recomendaciones sobre el proceso de evaluación y manejo del paciente con artrosis de rodilla e indicación de artroplastia basadas en la mejor evidencia científica disponible y la experiencia de un panel de expertos. Métodos. Se seleccionó un grupo multidisciplinar de 12 expertos que definieron: alcance, usuarios, apartados del documento, revisiones sistemáticas a realizar y a quienes se asignaron tareas. Se realizaron 3 revisiones sistemáticas en pacientes con indicación de artroplastia de rodilla sobre: 1) eficacia y seguridad de los protocolos de fast-track; 2) papel de las intervenciones cognitivo-conductuales en sujetos con catastrofismo, y 3) efecto del control del dolor agudo posquirúrgico en los resultados. Se realizaron 2 revisiones narrativas sobre la sensibilización central en este grupo y sobre la eficacia de la rehabilitación preoperatoria. Los expertos redactaron los apartados y generaron las recomendaciones. Estas recomendaciones se consensuaron mediante la metodología Delphi en un grupo multidisciplinar de 85 expertos. Se estableció también el nivel de evidencia de cada recomendación. Resultados. Se generaron 20 recomendaciones. Todas alcanzaron un nivel de acuerdo mayor del 80%. El mayor acuerdo se alcanzó en la necesidad de realizar informe de alta completo, en informar adecuadamente al paciente sobre el proceso y en seguir las recomendaciones de las guías clínicas disponibles. Conclusiones. Existe consenso entre los responsables del manejo de los pacientes con artrosis de rodilla e indicación de artroplastia en que es necesario protocolizar el proceso de sustitución articular, realizando una correcta evaluación y seguimiento del paciente, de forma integral y coordinada y con especial atención al procedimiento quirúrgico y al postoperatorio (AU)

Objective. To develop recommendations on the evaluation and management procedure in patients undergoing total knee replacement based on best evidence and the experience of a panel of experts. Methods. A multidisciplinary group of 12 experts was selected that defined the scope, users and the document parts. Three systematic reviews were performed in patients undergoing knee replacement: (I) efficacy and safety of fast-tracks; (II) efficacy and safety of cognitive interventions in patients with catastrophic pain, and (III) efficacy and safety of acute post-surgical pain management on post-surgical outcomes. A narrative review was conducted on the evaluation and management of pain sensitization, and about the efficacy and safety of pre-surgical physiotherapy. The experts generated the recommendations and explicative text. The level of agreement was evaluated in a multidisciplinary group of 85 experts with the Delphi technique. The level of evidence was established as well for each recommendation. Results. A total of 20 recommendations were produced. An agreement higher than 80% was reached in all of them. We found the highest agreement on the need for a full discharge report, on providing proper information about the process and on following available guidelines. Conclusions. There is consensus among professionals involved in the management of patients undergoing total knee replacement, in that it is important to protocolize the replacement process, performing a proper, integrated and coordinated patient evaluation and follow-up, paying special attention to the surgical procedure and postoperative period (AU)

GEDOS-SECOT consensus on the care process of patients with knee osteoarthritis and arthoplasty. / Consenso GEDOS-SECOT sobre el proceso de atención a pacientes con artrosis de rodilla e indicación de artroplastia.

OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations on the evaluation and management procedure in patients undergoing total knee replacement based on best evidence and the experience of a panel of experts. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group of 12 experts was selected that defined the scope, users and the document parts. Three systematic reviews were performed in patients undergoing knee replacement: (i)efficacy and safety of fast-tracks; (ii)efficacy and safety of cognitive interventions in patients with catastrophic pain, and (iii) efficacy and safety of acute post-surgical pain management on post-surgical outcomes. A narrative review was conducted on the evaluation and management of pain sensitization, and about the efficacy and safety of pre-surgical physiotherapy. The experts generated the recommendations and explicative text. The level of agreement was evaluated in a multidisciplinary group of 85 experts with the Delphi technique. The level of evidence was established as well for each recommendation. RESULTS: A total of 20 recommendations were produced. An agreement higher than 80% was reached in all of them. We found the highest agreement on the need for a full discharge report, on providing proper information about the process and on following available guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: There is consensus among professionals involved in the management of patients undergoing total knee replacement, in that it is important to protocolize the replacement process, performing a proper, integrated and coordinated patient evaluation and follow-up, paying special attention to the surgical procedure and postoperative period.

Ultra minimally invasive sonographically guided carpal tunnel release: an external pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Authors have reported better outcomes, by reducing surgical dissection for carpal tunnel syndromes requiring surgery. Recently, a new sonographically guided technique for ultra minimally invasive (Ultra-MIS) carpal tunnel release (CTR) through 1mm incision has been described. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that a clinical trial for comparing Ultra-MIS versus Mini-open Carpal Tunnel Release (Mini-OCTR) was feasible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To test our hypothesis, we conducted a pilot study for studying Ultra-MIS versus Mini-OCTR respectively performed through a 1mm or a 2 cm incision. We defined success if primary feasibility objectives (safety and efficacy) as well as secondary feasibility objectives (recruitment rates, compliance, completion, treatment blinding, personnel resources and sample size calculation for the clinical trial) could be matched. Score for Quick-DASH questionnaire at final follow-up was studied as the primary variable for the clinical trial. Turnover times were studied for assessing learning curve stability. RESULTS: Forty patients were allotted. Primary and secondary feasibility objectives were matched with the following occurrences: 70.2% of eligible patients finally recruited; 4.2% of randomization refusals; 26.6 patients/month recruited; 100% patients receiving a blinded treatment; 97.5% compliance and 100% completion. A sample size of 91 patients was calculated for clinical trial validation. At final follow-up, preliminary results for Quick-Dash substantially favored Ultra-MIS over Mini-OCTR (average 14.54 versus 7.39) and complication rates were lower for Ultra-MIS (5% versus 20%). A stable learning curve was observed for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical trial is feasible. There is currently no evidence to contraindicate nor withhold the use of Ultra-MIS for CTR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Liberación percutánea guiada por ecografía en la rehabilitación intervencionista del dedo en resorte: descripción de una nueva técnica / Ultrasound-assisted percutaneous release in interventionist rehabilitation of the trigger finger: description of a new technique

Introducción. En pacientes con dedo en resorte y fracaso del tratamiento conservador, los procedimientos mínimamente invasivos pueden formar parte del arsenal terapéutico de un médico rehabilitador intervencionista. El objetivo de nuestro estudio es encontrar en voluntarios una «zona segura» y describir en cadáver una nueva técnica de liberación percutánea de la polea A1. Material y métodos. En 100 dedos de 10 voluntarios empleamos ecografía Doppler para situar las estructuras en riesgo (arterias, nervios y tendones). Desde el punto más volar de la vaina sinovial, línea teórica estándar para la liberación de la polea A1, medimos la posición relativa de las paredes arteriales más próximas y definimos un sector denominado «zona segura» (en que 0° era el punto más radial y 180°, el más cubital). Posteriormente, liberamos la polea A1 en 46 dedos de 5 cadáveres, y colocamos nuestro instrumento de corte palmarmente y desde un posicionamiento intravaginal, así lo dirigimos hacia la «zona segura» descrita. Mediante disección, evaluamos la precisión, seguridad y eficacia del método. Resultados. Con los valores de referencia descritos, la posición media a la pared arterial más cercana fue de 8,96 (3,5-20,6) mm para la arteria digital radial y 7,59 (3,7-16,8) mm para la arteria digital cubital. La liberación fue completa en 44 dedos (95,7%) con una liberación incompleta de menos de 1,6mm en dos dedos. Conclusiones. Nuestro estudio describe una «zona segura» situada palmarmente a la vaina sinovial de A1 desde la que realizar una liberación percutánea intravaginal guiada por ecografía. La rehabilitación intervencionista del dedo en resorte es una técnica eficaz y segura(AU)

Introduction. In patients with trigger finger and failure of conservative treatments, the use of minimally invasive procedures can be a part of the therapeutic armamentarium of an interventionist rehabilitation physician. The objective of our study is to find in a «safe zone» in volunteer subjects and to describe a percutaneous technique for releasing the A1 pulley in cadavers. Materials y methods. In 100 fingers of 10 volunteers, we used the Doppler ultrasound to locate the structures at risk (arteries, nerves and tendons). From the synovial sheath's most volar point, we measured the relative position of the nearest arterial wall to define a sector called «safe area» (the most radial point was set as 0° and the most ulnar as 180°). We then released the A1 pulley in 46 fingers in 5 cadavers, directing the cutting device volarly and from an intrasheath position towards our «safe area». The accuracy, safety and efficacy of the method was evaluated by surgical exposure. Results. The average position of the nearest arterial wall was at 8.96mm (3.5-20.6) for the radial and at 7.59mm (3.7-16.8) for the ulnar digital arteries. A complete release was achieved in 44 fingers (95.7%) with an incomplete release of less than 1.6mm in two digits. Conclusions. Our present study describes a «safe area», volar to the synovial sheath at A1, from which we can perform a percutaneous intravaginal ultrasound guided release. Interventionist rehabilitation shows efficacy and safety in the treatment of trigger digits(AU)

Espondilodiscitis lumbar: clínica y factores de riesgo en el diagnóstico precoz / Lumbar spondylodiscitis: Symptoms and risk factors in the early diagnosis

La espondilodiscitis lumbar (EDL) es una infección del cuerpo y el disco vertebral cuya clínica en fases iniciales se puede confundir fácilmente con otros cuadros de dolor lumbar de causa menor. Es necesario un elevado grado de sospecha clínica para evitar retrasar su diagnóstico, así como tener en cuenta la presencia de factores de riesgo que pudieran favorecer su desarrollo. La detección y el manejo precoces pueden evitar en gran parte la discapacidad que causa este cuadro. Se presentan dos casos clínicos de EDL asociados a estreptococos del grupo viridans y Enterobacter aerogenes, respectivamente, y se destacan, a propósito de éstos, los pasos clave necesarios para evitar un retraso diagnóstico (AU)

Lumbar spondylodiscitis is an infection of the low back vertebral body and the intervertebral disc space. In early stages it must be differenciated from other minor causes of low back pain. Its diagnosis demands a high level of clinical suspicion, as well as taking into account any risk factor which could favour its development. Early detection and treatment prevent future disability. Two cases, related to Viridians Streptococi and Enterobacter aerogenes, respectively, are described in order to review the key steps to avoid delayed diagnosis (AU)