Diabetic Foot Management: How Could a Procedural Pathway Improve the Surgical Outcome?

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic foot ulcer is the main aetiology for non-traumatic amputation, which is a major public health care concern. A multidisciplinary approach in the management of this pathology has been shown to improve the surgical outcome. However, there are little data available on the tools we can use to pursue this multidisciplinary approach. The main goal of this cross-sectional study was to find out whether the implementation of a specific management pathway could improve the treatment outcome in the treatment of diabetic foot. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2012 to 2014, we consecutively recruited patients with diabetic foot referred to Orthopaedic surgery department of our university for surgical opinion. A specific diabetic foot pathway was introduced in 2013. One group of patients who were treated with previous method were evaluated retrospectively. Another group of patients who were treated after implementation of the pathway were evaluated prospectively. We compared treatment outcome between the two groups. RESULTS: We included 51 patients. Amputation rate was similar both the groups: 74% in the retrospective group not using the new pathway versus 73% in a prospective group that used the new pathway. Revision surgery was 39% in the retrospective group and 14% in the prospective group (p=0.05). CONCLUSION: We recommend the use of this simple and cost-effective pathway to guide the interdisciplinary management of diabetic foot. A prospective study with more subjects would provide a better overview of this management pathway.

Long-term survivorship of the Corail™ standard stem.

INTRODUCTION: The Corail™ stem, which was first introduced in 1986, has since been modified twice: first to make the neck thinner and then to change the location of the laser markings. The survival and complications of the first-generation straight, titanium, hydroxyapatite-coated stem are known; however, there is little specific information about the latest-generation stem. This led us to conduct a retrospective study to determine the: (1) long-term survival; (2) clinical and radiographic outcomes; (3) complications; and (4) risk factors for revision of the newest Corail™ stem. HYPOTHESIS: The newest Corail™ AMT (Articul/EZE™ Mini Taper) standard stem has comparable survival to prior models. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study included 133 patients (140 hips), who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), between January and December 2004, in which a Corail™ Standard stem was implanted using a posterolateral approach. Patients who underwent revision THA, THA due to femoral neck fracture or who received lateralized (offset) stems were excluded. The mean age at the time of THA was 69±13 years [35-92] in 85 men (61%) and 55 women (39%) who had a mean BMI of 27kg/m2±11 [16-39]. At the latest follow-up, 32 patients (32 hips) had died and 8 patients (8 hips) had less than 3 years' follow-up, thus were not included in the clinical evaluation. The Merle d'Aubigné (PMA) score was collected. The stem's survivorship was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method with revision for aseptic loosening and revision or implant removal for any reason as the end-points. The Cox model was used to analyze risk factors for revision. The mean follow-up was 10±3 years [3-12]. RESULTS: The PMA score was 12±2.6 [5-17] preoperatively and 16±2.7 [7-18] at the last follow-up (P<0.00001). Eighteen complications (12.8%) were recorded at the last follow-up. There were 15 early complications: 6 dislocations, 5 calcar fractures (4 treated by wire cerclage and 1 by stem change plus wire cerclage), 2 greater trochanter fractures (treated non-surgically) and 2 cases of sciatic nerve palsy. There were 3 late complications: 2 cases of iliopsoas irritation and 1 ceramic insert fracture. Stem survival for surgical revision due to aseptic loosening was 98% (95% CI: [0.96-1]). At 12 years, 95% of stems had not been revised or removed (95% CI: [0.92-0.99]). Being less than 58 years of age at the time of surgery was the only risk factor significantly associated with stem revision for any reason (P=0.04). CONCLUSION: Survival of the Corail™ Standard stem is similar to that of previous generation stems. The changes made in this stem solved the neck failure problem and did not induce new complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV (retrospective study).

Cementless lateralized stems in primary THA: Mid-term survival and risk factors for failure in 172 stems.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing the femoral offset when performing total hip arthroplasty (THA) theoretically increases the stresses and risks of the stem not integrating itself into bone. But this concept has not been validated for cementless stems; this led us to conduct a retrospective study to determine: (1) the risk factors for the occurrence of symptomatic femoral radiological abnormalities, (2) the incidence of these abnormal radiological findings, (3) the revision rate for aseptic non-integration of a cementless lateralized stem. HYPOTHESIS: Young patients with significant femoral canal flare and a small cementless lateralized stem have a higher risk of abnormal osseointegration. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analyzed retrospectively 172 consecutive lateralized stems (KHO, Corail™ product line) implanted during primary THA between 2006 and 2012 in 157 patients (mean age 68years±12.6 (20-95), 89% men). Radiographs were used to evaluate osseointegration scores, offset restoration and the Noble index. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed using "symptomatic femoral radiological abnormalities" and "revision for aseptic stem non-integration" as endpoints. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 5.9years±2.7 (range, 2-12.4years). Being more than 70years of age (HR=0.7, 95% CI: [0.3-0.9], P=0.004) and having a larger stem (HR=0.6, 95% CI: [0.4-0.9], P=0.03) were protective against symptomatic femoral radiological abnormalities, while increasing the postoperative femoral offset (HR=1.1, 95% CI: [1.01-1.2], P=0.02) was deleterious. The survival free of "symptomatic femoral radiological abnormalities" was 93% (95% CI: 89-97) at 5years and 84% (95% CI: 75-95) at 8years. The survival free of "revision for aseptic stem non-integration" was 98% (95% CI: 96.8-100) at 5years and 97% (95% CI: 95.2-100) at 8years. DISCUSSION: In this study, the risk factors for symptomatic radiological abnormalities were being less than 70years of age, having a small lateralized stem and restoring a large femoral offset. Lateralized stems used in this study had a 10% rate of symptomatic radiological abnormalities and a 4% rate of revision for aseptic non-integration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective study.

Can a target zone safer than Lewinnek's safe zone be defined to prevent instability of total hip arthroplasties? Case-control study of 56 dislocated THA and 93 matched controls.

BACKGROUND: Various factors contribute to instability of total hip arthroplasty (THA), with implant orientation being a major contributor. We performed a case-control study with computed tomography (CT) data to determine whether: 1) orientation contributes to THA instability and 2) a safer target zone for stability than Lewinnek's classic safe zone can be defined. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included prospectively 363 cases of THA dislocation that occurred during the calendar 2013 year in 24 participating hospitals. Of the 128 dislocations that occurred in patients who underwent THA at these centers, 56 (24 anterior, 32 posterior) had CT scans, thus were included in the analysis. The control group was matched 4:1 based on implant type, year of implantation, age, sex, bearing types and THA indication. Of the 428 matched control THA cases, 93 had CT scans. In all, the CT scans from 149 cases (56 unstable, 93 stable) were analyzed to determine the acetabular cup's inclination and anteversion, and the femoral stem's anteversion. RESULTS: In the unstable THA group, cup inclination was 46.9°±7.4°, cup anteversion was 20.4°±10.8° and stem anteversion was 14.2°±9.9°. In the stable THA group, cup inclination was 44.9°±5.3° (P=0.057), cup anteversion was 22.1°±5.1° (P=0.009) and stem anteversion was 13.4°±4.4° (P=0.362). The optimal total anteversion (cup+stem) of 40-60° was achieved in 16.5% of unstable THA cases and 13.9% of stable THA cases, thus this parameter does not predict stability (odds ratio [OR] of 0.40, P=0.144). The cup was positioned in Lewinnek's safe zone in 44.6% of patients in the unstable group and 68.2% of those in the stable group (OR 3.74, P=0.003). A target zone defined as 40-50° inclination and 15-30° anteversion was better able to distinguish between unstable cases (23.2%) and stable cases (71.6%) resulting in an OR of 13.91 (P<0.001). DISCUSSION: Implant positioning was the only risk factor for instability found in this study. Moreover, our findings reinforce the theory put forward by other authors that Lewinnek's safe zone is not specific enough to differentiate between stable and unstable THA implantations. The target zone for acetabular cups proposed here (40-50° inclination and 15°-30° anteversion) is related to a lower risk of instability. This orientation can be used as a guide, but must be combined with other technical elements to optimize stability. By balancing stability and biomechanics, the 40-50° inclination and 15°-30° anteversion target zone redefines the optimal positioning window. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III case-control study.

Cementless Corail™ femoral stems with laser neck etching: Long-term survival, rupture rate and risk factors in 295 stems.

INTRODUCTION: Implant neck fracture involving a non-modular femoral stem is rare in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Occasional cases have been reported following laser etching of the Corail(tm) stem, but risk factors have not been precisely determined. We therefore performed a retrospective study on a series of Corail(tm) stems with laser neck etching, in order to: (1) determine the exact implant neck fracture rate at 10 years, and (2) identify associated risk factors. HYPOTHESIS: Laser etching increases the rate of implant neck fracture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between October 2002 and December 2003, 295 THAs were consecutively performed using the Corail(tm) stem with laser neck etching, in 286 patients: 151 male (53%), 135 female (47%); mean age, 63 years (range, 18-89 years); mean weight, 73kg (range, 45-120kg). Stems were standard in 240 cases (81%) and lateralized in 55 (19%). The main assessment criterion was stem replacement for implant neck fracture. RESULTS: At a mean 10 years' follow-up (range, 1-11 years), 11 patients were lost to follow-up (4%) and 35 had died (12%) (with stem in situ). Overall 10-year stem survival was 91% (95% CI: [87-94%]). Sixteen patients (5.4%) underwent revision surgery for implant neck fracture, 6 (2%) bone and joint infection and in 4 cases (1.3%) the stem was replaced preventively for fracture risk suspected during a revision procedure on the cup. All fractures were of the fatigue type, implicating implant neck laser etching. Mean time to fracture was 4.5 years (range, 1.4-9.8 years). Risk factors comprised: weight>80kg (P=0.002) (OR=5.7; 95% CI: 1.9-17), age<60 years (P=0.02) (OR=3.4; 95% CI: 1.2-9.6), male gender (P=0.01) (OR=14.8; 95% CI: 1.9-113) and lateralized stem (P<0.001) (OR=6.5, 95% CI: 2.3-18). CONCLUSION: The present 5.4% fracture rate was higher than in registry data (<1%). Fracture mechanisms involved excessive stress in an area under tension, leading to fatigue fracture. Male gender, high weight and young age were risk factors, as in the literature for fatigue fracture. Location and depth of laser etching induced fatigue fracture. The study demonstrated that laser etching creates an area of weakness in the implant neck and should therefore be eschewed in this part of the femoral stem. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective study.

Compared fixation and survival of 280 lateralised vs 527 standard cementless stems after two years (1-7).

BACKGROUND: Restoring the native hip anatomy increases hip prosthesis survival, whereas increased femoral lateralisation creates high torque stresses that may alter prosthesis fixation. After finding lucent lines around cementless lateralised stems (Corail™, DePuy Synthes, St Priest, France) in several patients, we evaluated the effects of lateralisation in a large case-series. The objective of our study was to compare lateralised vs standard stems of identical design in terms of radiological osteo-integration and survival. HYPOTHESIS: Lateralised stems, despite being used only when indicated by the anatomical parameters, carry a higher risk of impaired osteo-integration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted in 807 primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed between 2006 and 2010 in 798 patients with a mean age of 65 ± 14.2 years. Lateralised stems were used in 280 cases (Corail High Offset KHO, n = 169; and Corail coxa vara KLA, n = 111 cases) and standard stems in 527 cases (Corail KA). Mean follow-up was 2.3 years (range, 1-7 years). The clinical evaluation included determination of the Postel-Merle d'Aubigné (PMA) score. Bone fixation and stability of the implants were assessed by determining the Engh and Massin score and the ARA score on the radiographs at last follow-up. Femoral, acetabular and global offset values were determined before and after THA. Nobles's Canal Flare Index was computed. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method with surgical revision for aseptic loosening as the end-point. RESULTS: The PMA score improved from 12 (10-15) pre-operatively to 17.7 (14-18) (P < 0.05). After THA, in the lateralised stem group, femoral offset was restored in 217 (77%) hips and the mean change vs the pre-operative offset value was -2 mm; in the standard stem group, femoral offset was restored in 440 (83.5%) hips and the mean change was +1 mm. The Engh and Massin score values were similar in the standard stem and lateralised stem groups (24.4 ± 2.2 and 22.6 ± 2.4, respectively, NS). Revision for aseptic loosening was required in 5 patients with lateralised stems (3 KHO and 2 KLA) versus none of the patients with standard stems. There were no cases of excessive femoral offset and the mean change in offset was -2.3mm (-5.3 to -1.1). Noble's index was increased (4.27 ± 0.5 for the loosened lateralised stems, 3.65 ± 0.8 for the well-fixed lateralised stems and 3.82 ± 0.6 for the standard stems), with no significant difference across groups. Overall survival after 3.5 years of follow-up was 94.6% (95% confidence interval, 88.4-100%) with lateralised stems and 100% with standard stems (P < 0.05). DISCUSSION: The risk of aseptic loosening was significantly higher with the lateralised stem (5/280, 1.8%) than with the standard stem (n = 0). Our findings indicate a need for careful preparation to obtain primary fixation of lateralised stems. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective case-control study.

Diabetic Foot Management: How Could a Procedural Pathway Improve the Surgical Outcome?

@#Introduction: Diabetic foot ulcer is the main aetiology for non-traumatic amputation, which is a major public health care concern. A multidisciplinary approach in the management of this pathology has been shown to improve the surgical outcome. However, there are little data available on the tools we can use to pursue this multidisciplinary approach. The main goal of this cross-sectional study was to find out whether the implementation of a specific management pathway could improve the treatment outcome in the treatment of diabetic foot. Materials and Methods: From 2012 to 2014, we consecutively recruited patients with diabetic foot referred to Orthopaedic surgery department of our university for surgical opinion. A specific diabetic foot pathway was introduced in 2013. One group of patients who were treated with previous method were evaluated retrospectively. Another group of patients who were treated after implementation of the pathway were evaluated prospectively. We compared treatment outcome between the two groups. Results: We included 51 patients. Amputation rate was similar both the groups: 74% in the retrospective group not using the new pathway versus 73% in a prospective group that used the new pathway. Revision surgery was 39% in the retrospective group and 14% in the prospective group (p=0.05). Conclusion: We recommend the use of this simple and costeffective pathway to guide the interdisciplinary management of diabetic foot. A prospective study with more subjects would provide a better overview of this management pathway.

Scarf osteotomy versus metatarsophalangeal arthrodesis in forefoot first ray disorders: comparison of functional outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Scarf osteotomies of the first metatarsal and metatarsophalangeal arthrodesis are the two most frequent surgical forefoot reconstructive procedures. HYPOTHESIS: We compared functional results of isolated arthrodesis of the first metatarsophalangeal joint with an isolated Scarf osteotomy of the first metatarsal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational, continuous study of patients operated between 1993 and 2008. After patients who had undergone a procedure on the lateral rays, extremely elderly patients, lost to follow-up patients and those with incomplete questionnaires had been excluded, there remained two comparable groups of 25 patients. Mean age was 60 in the arthrodesis group [41-70] and 59.8 in the Scarf group [47-71]. The Scarf group included 25 hallux valgus (100%) compared to 16 hallux valgus (64%) and nine hallux rigidus (36%) in the arthrodesis group. Complications were recorded. Evaluation of functional results was based on the most recent functional or quality of life scores (AOFAS, FFI, FAAM, SF 36) and a questionnaire on physical and athletic ability. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rate of complications between the two groups. There was no difference in pain according to the AOFAS score with 35.6/40 (± 6.5) in the Scarf group and 34.5 (± 5.9) in the arthrodesis group. Global satisfaction was also similar between the Scarf and arthrodesis groups: 91.4% and 90% of very satisfied or satisfied patients, respectively. The FFI score was higher in the Scarf group than in the arthrodesis group: 8.6 (± 20.1) and 19.8 (± 17.7) respectively. Functional results were better in the Scarf group than in the arthrodesis group with a FAAM Daily Activity score of 80.2 (± 12.1) compared to 68 (± 7.2), a FAAM Sports Activity score of 29.7 (± 6.7) compared to 25.2 (± 7.6) and a FAAM Global Function score of 94% (± 10.8) compared to 87% (± 15.7), respectively. The Global SF36 score was higher in the Scarf group than in the arthrodesis group: 70.9% (± 14.1) and 62.3% (± 20.6) respectively, which was due to a higher Mental Health score in the Scarf group: 68.7% (± 14.2) and 60.4% (± 19.3) respectively. In the area of sports activities the Scarf group practiced more hiking than the arthrodesis group (74% versus 42% respectively). There was no difference for other activities. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This study provides detailed information on the level of physical and sports activities that are practiced following these procedures, so that the patient can be better informed.

Autologous chondrocyte implantation for traumatic full-thickness cartilage defects of the knee in 14 patients: 6-year functional outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) was introduced in 1987 in Sweden by Brittberg and Peterson for the treatment of severe chondral defects of the knee. Here, our objective was to evaluate mid-term outcomes of ACI in young athletic patients with deep chondral defects of the knee after trauma. HYPOTHESIS: ACI is effective in filling full-thickness chondral defects of the knee. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively monitored 14 patients, with International Cartilage Repair Society grade III or IV lesions, who underwent ACI between 2001 and 2006. Standard evaluation measurements were used. Mean age at surgery was 37.7 years (range, 30-45). A history of surgery on the same knee was noted in ten (67%) patients. The defect was on the medial femoral condyle in 11 patients, lateral femoral condyle in two patients, and both femoral condyles in one patient. Mean defect surface area after debridement was 2.1cm(2) (1-6.3). RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of six years, improvements were noted in 12 (86%) patients, with an International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score increase from 40 (27.6-65.5) to 60.2 (35.6-89.6) (P=0.003) and a Brittberg-Perterson score decrease from 54.4 (11.8-98.2) to 32.9 (0-83.9) (P=0.02), between the preoperative assessment and last follow-up. The visual analogic scale pain score decreased from 66.3 (44-89) to 23.2 (0-77) (P=0.0006). In two (14%) patients, no improvements were detectable at last follow-up. The remaining 12 patients were satisfied and able to resume sporting activities, albeit at a less strenuous level. Two ACI-specific complications occurred, namely, periosteal hypertrophy treated with debridement in one patient and transplant delamination in another. DISCUSSION: Our findings are consistent with previous reports but cover a longer follow-up period. Although the outcomes are promising, longer follow-ups are needed to confirm the long-term effectiveness of ACI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, prospective therapeutic study.