Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 278
Filtrar
1.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8728, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38623402

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DBVPG 48 SF (BioCell®) as a zootechnical feed additive for horses, pigs and ruminants. In a previous opinion, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious at the proposed conditions of use for horses, dairy ruminants and all pigs. However, the Panel was not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of BioCell® for calves, and, consequently, for other ruminants for fattening or rearing. The applicant provided three additional efficacy trials in veal calves to support the efficacy of BioCell® for ruminants for fattening or rearing. The three studies showed positive effects of the supplementation with the additive at 1.7 × 109 colony forming unit (CFU)/kg complete feed on the performance of veal calves. Considering the previously submitted studies in dairy cows and the new submitted trials, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious for all ruminants at the proposed condition of use: 4.0 × 108 CFU/kg complete feed for dairy ruminants and 4.0 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed for ruminants for fattening and rearing.

2.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8727, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38623403

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-4407 (Actisaf® Sc47) as a zootechnical feed additive (functional group: gut flora stabiliser) in cattle for fattening. The additive is already authorised for use in feed for dairy cows, calves for rearing, lambs for fattening, dairy goats, dairy sheep and dairy buffaloes. In a previous opinion, the EFSA Scientific Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) concluded that Actisaf® Sc47 was safe for cattle for fattening, the consumers and the environment. Additionally, the Panel considered that Actisaf® Sc47 is not a skin irritant, and no conclusions could be drawn on the additive's eye irritancy and dermal sensitisation potential. Due to the lack of adequate data, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive in cattle for fattening at the proposed conditions of use. In the current application, the applicant submitted three trials to support the efficacy in cattle for fattening. However, two of them were not considered for the assessment. The other trial showed an improved zootechnical performance of the animals at the proposed use level of 4 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed. Considering the additive is authorised in dairy cows and calves for rearing and the requirements of the current Guidance on the assessment of the efficacy of feed additives, no further demonstration of efficacy is necessary to extrapolate the conclusions previously reached to all ruminants. The significant positive effect shown in one trial in cattle for fattening supports the above extrapolation. Therefore, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that Actisaf® Sc47 is efficacious as a zootechnical additive for cattle for fattening at the proposed conditions of use.

3.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8725, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38623404

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of Levilactobacillus brevis DSM 21982 as a technological feed additive, silage additive, for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment. Regarding user safety, the additive should be considered as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. No conclusions can be drawn on the eye irritancy potential of the additive. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

4.
EFSA J ; 22(4)2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38601867

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of l-threonine produced by fermentation with Escherichia coli CGMCC 7.455 when used as a nutritional additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species and categories. The production strain is genetically modified. None of the introduced genetic modifications raised a safety concern. Viable cells of the production strain and its DNA were not detected in the final additive. Therefore, the final product does not give raise to any safety concern regarding the genetic modification of the production strain. The use of l-threonine (≥ 98.5%) produced with E. coli CGMCC 7.455 to supplement feed is safe for the target species. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) has concerns on the safety of the simultaneous oral administration of l-threonine via water for drinking and feed due to possible amino acid imbalances and hygienic reasons. The use of l-threonine produced with E. coli CGMCC 7.455 in animal nutrition raises no safety concerns to consumers of animal products and to the environment. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of the additive to be irritant to skin or eyes, or on its potential to be a dermal sensitiser. The endotoxin activity in the additive does not pose a risk for the user via inhalation. The additive l-threonine is regarded as an effective source of the amino acid l-threonine for all non-ruminant species. In order to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminants, it should be protected from ruminal degradation.

5.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8627, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38601869

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the selenised yeast (inactivated) Saccharomyces cerevisiae CCTCC M 2022402 (Plexomin® Se 3000, available in two forms: 'granules' and 'micro') as a nutritional feed additive for all animal species. Based on a tolerance-efficacy trial, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening at proposed conditions of use and this conclusion can be extrapolated to all animal species. In the absence of deposition data in all animal species and products, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety for the consumer. Plexomin® Se 3000 (granules) is dust-free; therefore, the exposure through inhalation is unlikely. Plexomin® Se 3000 (micro) presents a risk by inhalation. Both forms of the additive (granules and micro) are considered as respiratory sensitisers. Due to the lack of data, no conclusions can be drawn on the dermal and eye irritation potential of Plexomin® Se 3000 (granules). Plexomin® Se 3000 (micro) is not irritant to the skin and the eyes. No conclusions can be drawn on the potential of both forms of the additive to be dermal sensitisers. The use of the additive in animal nutrition is considered safe for the environment. The additive is an efficacious source of selenium in feedingstuffs for all animal species.

6.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8707, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38601872

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of l-tryptophan produced by fermentation with Escherichia coli CGMCC 7.460 when used as a nutritional additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species and categories. The production strain is not genetically modified. Viable cells of the production strain were not detected in the final additive. The additive does not give rise to any safety concern regarding the production strain. The use of l-tryptophan (≥ 98%) produced with E. coli CGMCC 7.460 to supplement feed is safe for non-ruminant species. There may be a risk for an increased production of toxic metabolites when unprotected tryptophan is used in ruminants. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) has concerns on the safety of the simultaneous oral administration of l-tryptophan via water for drinking and feed due to possible amino acid imbalances and hygienic reasons. The use of l-tryptophan produced with E. coli CGMCC 7.460 in animal nutrition raises no safety concerns to consumers of animal products and to the environment. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of the additive to be irritant to skin or eyes, or on its potential to be a dermal sensitiser. The endotoxin activity of the additive in combination with the high dusting potential may represent a risk of exposure by inhalation to endotoxins for users. The additive l-tryptophan is regarded as an effective source of the amino acid l-tryptophan for all non-ruminant species. To be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminants, it should be protected from ruminal degradation.

7.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8706, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38585215

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of Pediococcus pentosaceus DSM 14021, a technological additive for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, the Panel considers that any exposure through skin and respiratory tract is considered a risk. The Panel cannot conclude on the eye irritation potential of the additive due to the lack of data. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

8.
EFSA J ; 22(4): e8726, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38585213

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of l-isoleucine produced by fermentation with Corynebacterium glutamicum CGMCC 20437 as a nutritional feed additive for use in feed and in water for drinking for all animal species. The production strain is non-genetically modified, qualifies for the QPS approach to safety assessment when used for production purposes, is susceptible to the relevant antibiotics and contains no antimicrobial resistance genes of concern. No viable cells of the production strain were detected in the final product. The additive does not give rise to any safety concern regarding the production strain. l-Isoleucine produced by fermentation with Corynebacterium glutamicum CGMCC 20437 is considered safe for the target species, the consumer and the environment. Regarding the use in water, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) reiterates its concerns over the safety for the target species of l-isoleucine administered simultaneously via water for drinking and feed owing to the risk of nutritional imbalances and hygienic reasons. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel is not in a position to conclude on the potential of l-isoleucine produced by fermentation with Corynebacterium glutamicum CGMCC 20437 to be irritant to skin and/or eyes, or as a dermal sensitiser. Due to the high dusting potential, exposure by inhalation is likely. l-Isoleucine produced by fermentation with Corynebacterium glutamicum CGMCC 20437 is considered as an efficacious source of the essential amino acid l-isoleucine for non-ruminant animal species. For the supplemental l-isoleucine to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminant species, it would require protection against degradation in the rumen.

9.
EFSA J ; 22(2): e8638, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38425417

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of propyl gallate as a technological feed additive for all animal species. In its previous opinions on the safety and efficacy of the product, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on a safe level of propyl gallate for cats and on the safety for the consumer. Based on the new data provided, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that propyl gallate at a maximum concentration of 71 mg/kg complete feed is safe for cats. Propyl gallate is considered safe for the consumer when used in complete feed for all animal species at the concentrations considered safe for the target species.

10.
EFSA J ; 22(2): e8626, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38425418

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of hydroxypropyl cellulose as a technological feed additive for all animal species. In its previous opinions on the safety and efficacy of the product, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on proper identification and characterisation as required for a feed additive. The occurrence of potential toxic impurities could also not be assessed. Based on the new data provided, the feed additive hydroxypropyl cellulose was properly identified and characterised and was shown to meet the specifications set for the food additive. Therefore, the conclusions of the safety assessment reached in the previous opinion for hydroxypropyl cellulose meeting the food additive specifications, apply to the hydroxypropyl cellulose under assessment as a feed additive. The feed additive is considered safe for all animal species, the consumer and the environment. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel is not in the position to conclude on the safety for the user.

11.
EFSA J ; 22(2): e8636, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38425416

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of ethyl cellulose as a technological feed additive for all animal species. In its previous opinions on the safety and efficacy of the product, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on proper identification and characterisation as required for a feed additive. The occurrence of potential toxic impurities could also not be assessed. Based on the new data provided, the feed additive ethyl cellulose was properly identified and characterised and was shown to meet the specifications set for the food additive. Therefore, the conclusions of the safety assessment reached in the previous opinions for ethyl cellulose meeting the food additive specifications, apply to the ethyl cellulose under assessment as a feed additive. The feed additive is considered safe for all animal species, the consumer and the environment. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel is not in the position to conclude on the safety for the user.

12.
EFSA J ; 22(2): e8637, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38425419

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose and methyl cellulose as technological feed additives for all animal species. In its previous opinions on the safety and efficacy of the products, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on proper identification and characterisation as required for a feed additive. The occurrence of potential toxic impurities could also not be assessed. Based on the new data provided, the feed additives hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose and methyl cellulose were properly identified and characterised and were shown to meet the specifications set for the food additives. Therefore, the conclusions of the safety assessments reached in the previous opinions for hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose and methyl cellulose meeting the food additive specifications, apply to the hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose and methyl cellulose under assessment as feed additives. The additives are considered safe for all animal species, the consumer and the environment. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel is not in the position to conclude on the safety for the user.

13.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8614, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38464413

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the additive based on fumonisin esterase (Free Yeast® F), produced with a genetically modified strain of Komagataella phaffii. The additive is categorised as a technological feed additive, for the reduction of the contamination of feed by mycotoxins and intended for use in all pigs species (piglets, pigs for fattening, sows and minor growing and reproductive porcine species). It was shown that the production strain and its recombinant genes are not present in the additive. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for weaned and suckling piglets and pigs for fattening, and all minor growing porcine species up to 60 U/kg complete feed. No conclusions can be drawn on the safety of the additive in sows. The use of the additive in animal nutrition is of no concern for consumer safety. The additive is dust-free, and therefore, respiratory sensitisation/irritation is unlikely. The additive is non-irritant to the eyes and the skin. No conclusion could be made on skin sensitisation. The use of the additive as a feed additive is considered safe for the environment. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious as technological feed additive for the reduction of feed contamination by fumonisins, when used at the minimum recommended concentration of 60 U/kg. This conclusion can be extrapolated to all growing and reproductive pigs and other minor porcine species.

14.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8640, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38476320

RESUMO

EFSA was asked for a scientific opinion on the risks for animal and human health related to the presence of polychlorinated naphthalenes (PCNs) in feed and food. The assessment focused on hexaCNs due to very limited data on other PCN congeners. For hexaCNs in feed, 217 analytical results were used to estimate dietary exposures for food-producing and non-food-producing animals; however, a risk characterisation could not be performed because none of the toxicological studies allowed identification of reference points. The oral repeated dose toxicity studies performed in rats with a hexaCN mixture containing all 10 hexaCNs indicated that the critical target was the haematological system. A BMDL20 of 0.05 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day was identified for a considerable decrease in the platelet count. For hexaCNs in food, 2317 analytical results were used to estimate dietary exposures across dietary surveys and age groups. The highest exposure ranged from 0.91 to 29.8 pg/kg bw per day in general population and from 220 to 559 pg/kg bw per day for breast-fed infants with the highest consumption of breast milk. Applying a margin of exposure (MOE) approach, the estimated MOEs for the high dietary exposures ranged from 1,700,000 to 55,000,000 for the general population and from 90,000 to 230,000 for breast-fed infants with the highest consumption of breast milk. These MOEs are far above the minimum MOE of 2000 that does not raise a health concern. Taking account of the uncertainties affecting the assessment, the Panel concluded with at least 99% certainty that dietary exposure to hexaCNs does not raise a health concern for any of the population groups considered. Due to major limitations in the available data, no assessment was possible for genotoxic effects or for health risks of PCNs other than hexaCNs.

15.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8663, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38469362

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of 6-phytase produced by the genetically modified strain Aspergillus oryzae DSM 33737 (HiPhorius™ 10, 40, 20L and 50L) as a zootechnical feed additive for all poultry, all Suidae and all fin fish. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the genetic modification of the production strain does not give rise to safety concerns. Based on the no observed adverse effect level identified in a subchronic oral toxicity study in rats, the additive was considered safe for all poultry, all Suidae and all fin fish at the proposed conditions of use. The Panel also concluded that the use of the product as a feed additive is of no concern for the consumers and the environment. The liquid formulations of the additive are not skin or eye irritants. The two solid ones are not skin irritants but are eye irritants. Owing to the lack of data, the Panel cannot conclude on the skin sensitisation of the final formulations of the additive. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substance (6-phytase), the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The Panel concludes that the additive is efficacious when included in the diet of poultry for fattening or reared for laying/breeding, reproductive Suidae, and all fin fish. Due to the lack of sufficient data, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy for laying and reproductive poultry and growing Suidae.

16.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8644, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38469360

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of sodium bisulphate (SBS) as a feed additive for all terrestrial animal species (category: technological additive; functional group: preservative), and for all terrestrial animal species other than cats, mink, pets and other non-food-producing animals (category: technological additive; functional group: acidity regulator). EFSA has also been asked to assess the new use of the product as an acidity regulator and flavouring compound in all pets and other non-food-producing animals except aquatic animals. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all terrestrial animal species, consumer and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. The FEEDAP Panel considers that the proposed new use would not introduce risks not already considered in the previous assessment and therefore the same conclusions on all terrestrial animal species, consumers of products from animals fed the additive and the environment would apply. Regarding user safety, the additive is irritant to the skin, eyes and the respiratory tract, and should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There is no need to assess the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation. The Panel considers that the additive has the potential to be efficacious as an acidity regulator and sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed for pet and non-food-producing animals (except aquatic animals).

17.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8621, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38450082

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Enterococcus lactis DSM 22502 as a technological feed additive for all animal species. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions regarding the safety and efficacy of the additive. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that E. lactis remains safe for all animal species, consumers and environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding the user safety, the Panel concluded that the additive is not irritating to the skin or eyes. No conclusions can be drawn on the potential of the additive to cause skin sensitisation, but it is considered to be a respiratory sensitiser. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

18.
EFSA J ; 22(3): e8643, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38450084

RESUMO

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Huvezym® neXo 100 G/L, a product containing endo-1,4-ß-xylanase, endo-1,4-ß-glucanase and xyloglucan-specific-endo-ß-1,4-glucanase activities produced by a non-genetically modified strain of Trichoderma citrinoviride (DSM 33578), as a zootechnical additive for all Suidae. The applicant provided information confirming the taxonomic identification of the production strain. The batches used for the characterisation of the final formulations showed compliance with the minimum specifications of the additive in terms of enzyme activities (> 15,000 EPU, > 1000 CU, > 1000 XGU per g) but not for the ratio of the enzymes, which is lower (ca. 7:1:1) than the ones specified (15:1:1). The Panel could not conclude on the representativeness of the test item used in the toxicological and tolerance studies with respect to the final formulations. Therefore, the conclusions are limited to the product with a minimum enzyme activity of 15,000 EPU, 1000 CU, 1000 XGU per g and a xylanase:glucanase:xyloglucanase ratio of 15:1:1. The Panel concluded that the additive is safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. Huvezym® neXo 100 G is not an irritant to the skin and eyes but should be considered a skin sensitiser. Huvezym® neXo 100 L is neither an irritant to the skin and eyes nor a skin sensitiser. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substances, the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The additive has the potential to be efficacious in all reproductive Suidae at the minimum proposed use level. Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive for Suidae for fattening or reared for reproduction.

19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38483618

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: There is only limited literature available evaluating the preferable treatment for active mid-age or elderly patients presenting with a degenerative medial meniscus root tear (d-MMRT) with medial meniscal extrusion (MME) and early-phase radiographic osteoarthritis (OA), failing to provide solid evidence. The aim of this study was to evaluate early outcomes of medial unicompartimental arthroplasty (mUKA) in active patients presenting a d-MMRT with meniscal extrusion and mild radiographic OA of the knee. To prove this claim we hypothesized that (1) patients with a d-MMRT with initial grade 1-3 KL OA of the medial compartment of the knee present the same pre-operative symptoms as patients with an end-stage grade 4 K-L OA, and that (2) those patients with d-MMRT and low-grade OA achieve the same early clinical and functional outcomes when treated with mUKA compared to patients with end-stage medial OA. METHODS: We reviewed the prospectively collected data of 185 patients undergoing robotic-assisted image-based mUKA from January 2021 to July 2022 at a single Institution. We identified two different cohorts of non-consecutive patients: a group of 24 patients undergoing mUKA surgery following d-MMRT combined with K-L grades 1-3 OA (group 1), and a group of 161 patients who underwent mUKA but presenting with an end-stage bone-on-bone K-L grade 4 OA (group 2). Preoperative and postoperative clinical assessments at one-year follow-up included the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), 5-level EQ-5D version (EQ-5D-5L score), and a standard weight-bearing X-ray protocol. The paired t-test was used to compare clinical outcomes and radiologic values of the two cohorts and in-between the two cohorts. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The mean follow-up for group 1 was 16.4 ± 2.5 months, and the mean age at the time of operation was 63 ± 8.6 years with a mean time from diagnosis to intervention of 53 ± 47.5 days. Preoperative impairment was greater in group 1 compared to group 2, but with no significant difference. Postoperatively, both groups showed excellent mean outcomes at 1-year follow-up, with no significant difference. The mean preoperative HKA, mPTA, and LDFA were 176.3 ± 3.1, 88.1 ± 2.3, and 86.6 ± 1.7 respectively. The mean postoperative HKA, coronal femoral component angle, and coronal tibial component angle were 179.1 ± 2.6, 87.2 ± 2.3, and 87.2 ± 3.3. No difference was found between preoperative age, BMI, between the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Favorable early clinical outcomes were obtained after mUKA in active mid-age and elderly patients presenting with degenerative medial meniscus root tear and mild isolated medial OA. Patients with mild no bone-on-bone OA but with degenerative medial meniscus root tear and medial meniscal extrusion presented the same or worse pre-operative symptoms as patients with end-stage medial OA and benefit the same from mUKA.

20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38555541

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether this system is associated with a reduced rate of failure and complications in patients treated for proximal femoral fractures with intramedullary nailing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 742 Patients with AO-OTA 31-A intertrochanteric fractures were enrolled at a single Institution. Functional evaluation was assessed through the Functional Independence Measure (FIM™) instrument and Parker's New Mobility Score (NMS). Radiological follow-up included the degree of the reduction according to the Baumgartner criteria, the Tip-Apex Distance, and the shortening of the telescoping screws and its lateral protrusion. RESULTS: Pre-operative mean FIM™ and NMS were 4.3 (range 1-9) and 98.7 (range 22-126), respectively. At the 12-month follow-up the average FIM™ and NMS were 95.3 (range 22-126) and 3.7 (range 1-9), respectively. Mean shortening of the lag screws was 4.3 mm (range 1-8) and mean lateral protrusion was 1.7 mm (range 0-3). 3 Cases (0.70%) of non-consolidation requiring reoperation were recorded. 1 Case (0.24%) of these cases was also characterized by nail breakage. No case of cut-out has been reported at our follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This dual telescoping nail system is effective and safe. The sliding of the telescoping screws within the barrel is able to decrease strain from the femoral head during weight bearing reducing the risk of cut-out.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...