Titanium vs. carbon fiber-reinforced intramedullary nailing for humeral bone tumors.

BACKGROUND: Multiple techniques have been described to treat humeral diaphyseal bone tumors requiring curettage or excision. Recent studies have suggested that carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR-PEEK) intramedullary nails (IMNs) may be preferable to titanium IMNs for patients with musculoskeletal tumors due to CFR-PEEK's high tensile strength, radiolucency, a modulus of elasticity closer to native bone, and improved postoperative surveillance/radiation dosing. In this study, we describe the rate of fixation failure for both CFR-PEEK and titanium humeral IMNs when used for humeral diaphyseal bone tumors requiring curettage or excision. METHODS: This was a single-institution retrospective cohort study including 81 patients (27 CFR-PEEK and 54 titanium) treated for a humeral diaphyseal bone tumor using an IMN ± methylmethacrylate between January 2017 and December 2022. Primary outcome was revision surgery due to soft tissue complications, nonunions, structural complications such as periprosthetic fracture or IMN breakage, periprosthetic infection, tumor progression, and implant failure due to rejection or fatigue. RESULTS: No failures were observed in either patients treated with titanium nails or patients treated with CFR-PEEK not requiring curettage. Fixation failure due to implant failure was observed in 2 cases-at 214 days and 469 days after surgery-where CFR-PEEK IMN was used for stabilization after a wide segmental resection for oncologic control with a cement spacer reconstruction. In both cases, the resection was larger than 6 cm, the remaining distal humerus was less than 5 cm, and failures occurred at the interface of the residual bone and spacer. Both patients were revised using a titanium distal posterolateral humeral plate fixed with screws and cables without any subsequent complications. One additional CFR-PEEK IMN required revision surgery after 744 days due to progression of the tumor and subsequent nonunion. One revision surgery was observed after 63 days for the titanium IMN because of nonunion and tumor progression. CONCLUSIONS: Humeral diaphyseal bone tumors requiring large segmental resection with small residual bone and a large cement spacer may fail via tension due to bending forces at the distal portion. In this clinical scenario, the use of larger-diameter CFR-PEEK IMNs may be indicated when available. In the interim, use of intercalary allografts instead of cement spacers, additional fixation with a titanium plate distally, or the use of a titanium nail when using a cement spacer may be considered.

The Healthcare Experience of Autistic Patients in Orthopaedic Surgery and Closely Related Fields: A Scoping Review.

Orthopaedic and related care has the potential to present unique obstacles for patients with a range of autism manifestations. In this review, we aim to describe and analyze the literature on autistic patients' experience within orthopaedics and closely related fields. This literature search utilized the PubMed, Embase, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. Three major concepts were built into the search terms: (1) patients on the autism spectrum; (2) patient experience; and (3) movement sciences, including orthopaedics, physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R), occupational therapy (OT), and physical therapy (PT). Our search yielded 35 topical publications, with the major topic areas addressed as follows: (1) clinical and perioperative management, (2) therapy interventions, (3) participation in exercise and social play, (4) sensory management and accommodations, (5) caregiver/parent training and involvement in care, (6) healthcare needs and barriers to care, and (7) utilization of technology. In the current literature, there are no studies that attempt to directly assess autistic patient experience with care practices and clinical environments in orthopaedics. Rigorous, direct examination of the experience of autistic patients within clinical orthopaedic settings is urgently needed to address this gap.

Optimizing Spinal Anesthesia in Same-Day Discharge Knee Arthroplasty Patients: Mepivacaine Versus Ropivacaine.

BACKGROUND: Short-acting spinal anesthetics are playing an increasing role in same-day discharge total joint arthroplasty though their direct comparison remains to be studied. Therefore, this study aims to compare two formulations of spinal anesthesia regarding time to discharge following knee arthroplasty surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 207 patients who underwent unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA, n = 172) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA, n = 35) from May 2018 to December 2020 at a single institution and were discharged the same day. Two formulations of the spinal anesthetic were routinely administered in this population: 1) mepivacaine 1.5% 3-4 mL (n = 184) and 2) ropivacaine 0.5% 2.3-2.7 mL (n = 23). Discharge times were subsequently compared between mepivacaine and ropivacaine spinal anesthesia for each surgical procedure and between surgical procedures. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in discharge times between patients receiving mepivacaine versus ropivacaine for UKA (202 minutes [range = 54-449] versus 218 minutes [range = 175-385], P = .45) or TKA (193 minutes [range = 68-384] versus 196 minutes [range = 68-412], P = .93). Similarly, no difference was found in discharge times between UKA and TKA patients receiving mepivacaine (P = .68) or ropivacaine (P = .51). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in discharge times between anesthetic agents among knee surgery patients. Therefore, either agent may be recommended for same-day discharge.

Gender Disparity Trends in Authorship of Hand Surgery Research.

PURPOSE: Despite an overall trend towards gender parity, women continue to remain underrepresented in surgical fields. Until recently, women's representation in hand surgery literature was largely unexplored. The objective of this study was to examine how authorship gender trends among academic hand surgeons have evolved between 2006 and 2019. METHODS: Original research articles published from 2006 to 2019 in 3 leading clinical hand surgery journals were extracted from PubMed. Publications with a full author first name were analyzed, and the gender of each author was assigned with the validated Genderize algorithm. Analyses were performed to evaluate authorship publication trends, unique authors, and research career productivity. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2019, 4,769 articles met the inclusion criteria, and the genders of 17,102 authors were identified. There were 2,848 (16.6%) female authors and 14,254 (83.4%) male authors. The proportion of female authors increased from 13.4% to 19.9% from 2006 to 2019. Similarly, female representation as first and senior authors increased significantly, from 10.9% to 20.1% and 7.6% to 14.2%, respectively. Of the 8,417 unique authors, 1,775 (21.1%) were women and 6,642 (78.9%) were men. Only 3.3% of these unique female authors published 5 or more papers during the study period. Among the 10 most frequently published authors for each gender, 18 of the 20 authors were surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: There has been substantial progress toward gender parity in academic hand surgery over the last 14 years, and the proportion of women publishing in leadership positions has increased. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Increased gender representation in medicine and research is important for both patients and providers, and these findings suggest that ongoing support and mentorship for women in academic careers should be a priority.

Disparities Among Leading Publishers of Arthroplasty Research.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of diversity in advancing scientific progress, diversity among leading authors in arthroplasty has not been examined. This study aimed to identify, characterize, and assess disparities among leading authors in arthroplasty literature from 2002 to 2019. METHODS: Articles published between 2002 and 2019 from 12 academic journals that publish orthopedic and arthroplasty research were extracted from PubMed. Original articles containing keywords related to arthroplasty were analyzed. Author gender was assigned using the Genderize algorithm. Gender and characterization of the top 100 male and female authors utilized available information on academic profiles. RESULTS: From the 14,692 articles that met inclusion criteria, the genders of 23,626 unique authors were identified. Women were less likely than men to publish 5 years after beginning their publishing careers (adjusted odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.57, P < .001). Of the top 100 authors, 96 were men, while only 4 were women. Orthopedic surgeons made up 93 of 100 top authors, of which 92 were men and 1 was a woman. Among the top 10 publishing female and male authors, 10 of 10 men were orthopedic surgeons, only 2 of 10 women were physicians, and only one was an attending orthopedic surgeon. CONCLUSION: While the majority of authors with high arthroplasty publication volume were orthopedic surgeons, there were significant gender disparities among the leading researchers. We should continue working to increase gender representation and supporting the research careers of women in arthroplasty.

Trends in Gender Disparities in Authorship of Arthroplasty Research.

BACKGROUND: Despite efforts to address gender disparities in medicine, female representation in orthopaedics lags behind that of other fields, and little work has evaluated gender disparities within the subspecialty of arthroplasty surgery. The objective of this study was to analyze female authorship trends in arthroplasty research from 2002 to 2019. METHODS: Articles published from 2002 to 2019 in 12 clinical orthopaedic and arthroplasty journals were extracted from PubMed. Articles that provided the full name of the first author and contained the terms "arthroplasty," "hip replacement," "knee replacement," or "joint replacement" in the title and/or as keywords were analyzed. The gender of the author was determined with the validated Genderize algorithm, and publication trends were analyzed over time. Descriptive and comparative statistics were computed, and logistic regression was used to evaluate gender trends. RESULTS: From 2002 to 2019, 14,692 articles met the inclusion criteria, and the gender of 63,628 authors was identified. There were 23,626 unique authors; 4,003 (16.9%) were women and 19,623 (83.1%) were men. Female involvement in arthroplasty publications increased from 11.1% in 2002 to 12.6% in 2019 (p < 0.001), and the percentage of female first authors increased from 5.0% in 2002 to 11.3% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Critically, however, the proportion of women as senior authors significantly declined from 8.5% in 2002 to 6.2% in 2019 (p < 0.001). From our analysis of U.S. publications with physician senior authors, the proportion of female senior authors remained relatively stable from 1.7% in 2002 to 2.4% in 2019 without a significantly increasing trend (p = 0.88). Overall, on average, women published a mean (and 95% confidence interval) of 1.9 ± 0.1 publications, while men published 2.9 ± 0.1 publications (p < 0.001). The proportion of female senior authors in arthroplasty publications (6.6%) was lower than that of other orthopaedic subspecialties such as sports medicine (9.2%), spine (13.6%), and foot and ankle (13.1%). CONCLUSIONS: While overall female representation and first authorship in arthroplasty literature have increased over time, the paucity of women in senior author roles remains troubling. Future studies should examine why the proportion of women publishing in arthroplasty remains lower than that in most other orthopaedic subspecialties.