The New Double-row Bankart Repair Recovered Shoulder Stability without Excessive Motion Limitation: A Case-Control Study with Single-row Bankart Repair.

OBJECTIVES: Bankart lesion is one of the most common lesions of the glenohumeral joint. Several double-row suture methods were reported for Bankart repair, which could provide more stability, yet more motion limitation and complications. Therefore, we introduced a new double-row Bankart repair technique, key point double-row suture which used one anchor in the medial line. The purpose of this article is to investigate the clinical outcomes of this new method and to compare it with single-row suture. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients receiving key point double-row suture or single-row suture from October 2010 to June 2014 were collected retrospectively. The basic information including gender, age, dominant arm, and number of episodes of instability was collected. Before surgery, the glenoid bone loss was measured from the CT scan. The visual analogue scale, American shoulder and elbow surgeons, the University of California at Los Angeles shoulder scale, and subjective shoulder value were valued before surgery and at the last follow-up. RESULTS: Forty-four patients (24 patients receiving single-row suture and 20 patients receiving key point double-row suture) were followed up successfully. The follow-up period was 9.2 ± 1.1 years (range, 7.8-11.4 years). At the last follow-up, no significant differences were detected for any of the clinical scores. The recurrence rate was 12.5% for the single-row group and 10% for the double-row group, respectively (p = 0.795) 14 patients (31.8%) in the single-row group and nine patients (26.5%) in the double-row group were tested for active range of motion. A statistically significant difference was found only for the internal rotation at 90° abduction (48.9° for single-row and 76.7° for key point double-row, p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: The key point double-row sutures for Bankart lesions could achieve similar long-term outcomes compared with single-row suture, and one medial anchor did not result in a limited range of motion. The low recurrence rate and previous biomechanical results also indicate the key point double-row suture is a reliable method.

There is no difference in the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autograft combined with or without ligament augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using autograft combined with or without ligament augmentation. METHODS: A computerized search of the databases was conducted, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. Only prospective or retrospective comparative studies with a minimum 2-year follow-up were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and methodological quality assessment. A Mantel-Haenszel analysis was used for the pooling of results. Sensitivity analysis was performed to maintain the stability of results. The egger test was applied to assess the publication bias. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included. The total cohort was 1353 patients (non-augmented group: 763 patients; augmented group: 590 patients). There were three Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs, Level I), six retrospective comparative studies (Level III) and five case-control studies (Level III). The follow-up rate was ≥ 88% and the follow-up periods were ≥ 24 months in all included studies. The augmented graft used to compare with autograft included the Ligament Augmentation Device (LAD), the Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS) artificial ligament, FiberTape, hamstring tendon allograft, degradable poly (urethane urea). No significant differences were observed between the augmented and non-augmented groups regarding postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lysholm score and Tegner score, knee laxity, including KT-1000, side-to-side difference, Lachman test and pivot shift and rate of graft failure. CONCLUSIONS: ACLR using autografts combined with ligament augmentation shows no advantages in PROs, knee laxity and graft failure rate compared with using autografts only. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The research protocol was registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42022324784).

The glucose metabolic reprogramming in hepatitis B virus infection and hepatitis B virus associated diseases.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is closely related to viral hepatitis, liver cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. HBV infection can reprogram metabolism processes of the host cells including glucose metabolism. The aberrant glucose metabolism may aid in viral infection and immune escape and may contribute to liver associated pathology. In this review, we discussed the interplay between HBV infection and glucose metabolism, which may provide new insights into HBV infection and pathology, novel intervention targets for HBV-related diseases.

The efficacy of medial meniscal posterior Root tear Repair with or without high tibial osteotomy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Medial meniscal posterior root tear (MMPRTs) is a common lesion of the knee joint, and repair surgery is a well-established treatment option. However, patients with obvious varus alignment are at an increased risk for MMPRT and can suffer from a greater degree of medial meniscus extrusion, which leads to the development of osteoarthritis following repair. The efficacy of high tibial osteotomy (HTO) as a means of correcting this malformation, and its potential benefits for MMPRT repair, remains unclear. PURPOSE: To explore whether HTO influenced the outcome of MMPRT repair in clinical scores and radiological findings. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: According to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases for studies reporting the outcomes of MMPRT repair and extracted data about characteristics of patients, clinical functional scores and radiologic outcomes. One reviewer extracted the data and 2 reviewers assessed the risk of bias and performed a synthesis of the evidence. Articles were eligible if they reported the results of MMPRT repair with exact mechanical axis (registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, CRD42021292057). RESULTS: Fifteen studies with 625 cases of high methodological quality were identified. Eleven studies were assigned to the MMPRT repair group (M) with 478 cases performing MMPRT repair only, and others belonged to the MMPRT repair and HTO group (M and T) performing HTO and MMPRT repair. Most of the studies had significantly improved clinical outcome scores, especially in M groups. And the radiologic outcomes showed that the osteoarthritis deteriorated in both groups with similar degree in about 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: HTO is a useful supplement in treating MMPRT patients with severe osteoarthritis and the clinical and radiological outcomes were similar with MMPRT repair alone. Which would be better for patients' prognosis generally, performing MMPRT repair alone or a combination of HTO and MMPRT repair, was still controversial. We suggested taking K-L grade into account. Large-scale randomized control studies were called for in the future to help make better clinical decisions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.