JBJS Open Access最新文献

Background: Calcaneal avulsion fractures (CAvFs) at the Achilles tendon insertion are among the more challenging fractures to treat. Although rare, they often require reoperation. The optimal treatment, including nonsurgical procedures and better implants for surgical procedures in the treatment of CAvFs, remains to be established. Therefore, our study aimed to (1) perform a descriptive evaluation of CAvFs, including cases managed nonsurgically, and (2) assess surgical procedures, including the incidence of complications and reoperation for surgically treated CAvFs.

Methods: In this multicenter retrospective study, we collected data of patients with CAvFs treated at 9 hospitals from 2012 to 2022. We performed a descriptive study of CAvFs and compared postoperative complications and reoperation rates for multiple surgical techniques and implants. The size of the bone fragments was quantified.

Results: The data of 70 patients with CAvFs were analyzed; 20 patients were treated nonsurgically, and 50 were treated surgically. The mean age of patients was 68.5 years; 67% of the patients were female. Nineteen percent of the patients had diabetes, and 19% had osteoporosis. The incidence of postoperative complications was 30%, with infection in 14%, necrosis in 26%, and loss of reduction in 18%. The reoperation rate was 22%. Surgical techniques with use of cannulated cancellous screws were performed in 80% of the surgical cases. Cannulated cancellous screw (CCS) fixation alone resulted in a reoperation rate of 35%, whereas additional augmentation, including washers with CCS fixation, resulted in a reoperation rate of 10%. CCS fixation was successfully performed, although suture anchors were used in some cases with smaller fragments.

Conclusions: CAvFs occurred more frequently in older women and had a high rate of postoperative complications. A combination of CCS with augmentation was more effective at reducing postoperative complications than CCS fixation alone, even when the bone fragment size was small.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Minimally invasive surgical interventions for metastatic invasion of the pelvis have become more prevalent and varied. Our group hypothesized that the use of percutaneous photodynamic nails (PDNs) would result in decreased pain, improved functional outcomes and level of ambulation, and decreased use of opioid pain medication.

Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with metastatic pelvic bone disease undergoing stabilization with PDNs (IlluminOss Medical) at 2 institutions. Functional outcome measures assessed include the Combined Pain and Ambulatory Function (CPAF), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function, and PROMIS Global Health-Physical. Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS). Outcomes were assessed preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year following surgery.

Results: A total of 39 patients treated with PDNs were included. No cases of surgical site infection or implant failure were identified. The median pain VAS score decreased from 8 preoperatively to 0 at the 6-week time point (p < 0.0001). The median CPAF score improved from 5.5 points preoperatively to 7 points at the 3-month mark (p = 0.0132). A significant improvement in physical function was seen at 6 months in the PROMIS Physical Function (p = 0.02) and at both 6 months (p = 0.01) and 1 year (p < 0.01) for the PROMIS Global Health-Physical. The rate of patients prescribed opioid analgesia dropped from 100% preoperatively to 20% at 6 months following surgery (p < 0.001). By 6 weeks, all patients were fully weight-bearing and able to walk independently with or without assistive devices.

Conclusions: Percutaneous stabilization of metastatic periacetabular defects using PDNs is a safe and effective palliative procedure that has been shown to improve patient mobility and provide early pain relief.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with decompression-only procedure has been performed for its added benefit of a shorter duration of surgery, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. However, reported failure rates for decompression-only procedures vary depending on the methods utilized for decompression. Hence, we aim to identify the failure rates of individual methods of decompression-only procedures performed for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Methods: An independent systematic review of 4 scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, Web of Science) was performed to identify relevant articles as per the preferred reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Studies reporting on failure rates defined by reoperation at the index level following decompression-only procedure for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included for analysis. Studies were appraised using ROBINS tool of Cochrane, and analysis was performed using the Open Meta[Analyst] software.

Results: The overall failure rate of decompression-only procedure was 9.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] [6.5-11.7]). Furthermore, open decompression had failure rate of 10.9% (95% CI [6.0-15.8]), while microendoscopic decompression had failure rate of 6.7% (95% CI [2.9-10.6]). The failure rate gradually increased from 6.9% (95% CI [2.0-11.7]) at 1 year to 7% (95% CI [3.6-10.3]), 11.7% (95% CI [4.5-18.9]), and 11.7% (95% CI [6.6-16.7]) at 2, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Single level decompression had a failure rate of 9.6% (95% CI [6.3-12.9]), while multilevel decompression recorded a failure rate of 8.7% (95% CI [5.6-11.7]).

Conclusion: High-quality evidence on the decompression-only procedure for degenerative spondylolisthesis is limited. The decompression-only procedure had an overall failure rate of 9.1% without significant differences between the decompression techniques.

Level of evidence: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Introduction: Little is known about risk factors for changes in students' interest in orthopaedics during medical school. We aimed to identify variables associated with diminished (vs. sustained) and emerging (vs. no) plans to become board certified in orthopaedic surgery.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective national-cohort study of students who matriculated in US MD-granting medical schools in academic years 1993 to 1994 through 2000 to 2001. The outcome measure was the evolution of students' board-certification plans in orthopaedic surgery from matriculation to graduation using responses on the Association of American Medical Colleges' Matriculating Student Questionnaire and Graduation Questionnaire. Covariates included demographic, attitudinal, experiential, and career intention variables.

Results: Of 53,560 graduates with complete data, 2,765 students reported diminished interest in becoming board certified in orthopaedics, 1,345 reported emerging interest, and 1,327 reported sustained interest. In multivariable logistic regression models, students who were female (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43-2.34), Asian (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.18-1.82), reported greater importance of social responsibility (aOR 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.33) and prestige (aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.10-1.30) in choosing a medicine career, and planned full-time university faculty careers (aOR 1.58, 95% CI 1.33-1.89) at graduation were independently more likely to have diminished (vs. sustained) interest. Students who participated in research and/or authorship electives (aOR 3.50, 95% CI 3.00-4.07) and who attended private institutions (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10-1.39) were more likely to have emerging (vs. no) interest.

Conclusions: Twice as many students lost interest than gained interest in orthopaedics during medical school, and the cohort of students interested in orthopaedics became less diverse over the course of medical school. Several risk factors amenable to change were identified. Interventions that target these risk factors are warranted to increase the diversity of the orthopaedic surgery workforce.

Introduction: More than 90% of orthopaedic surgery residents in the United States complete a fellowship program. While there is significant oversight of the educational process and rights of residents during residency, there is little standardization in fellowships in the United States. Applicants to fellowship need to be aware that they may be required to sign restrictive covenants ("non-competes") as part of the fellowship application or acceptance process. These restrictive covenants may be designed to protect the business interests of the host institution but may affect the fellow's ability to obtain employment in a geographic region.

Methods: A review of society websites designed to education fellowship applicants was reviewed. Information was gathered on whether the society provided information on restrictive covenants in fellowship programs.

Results: There is little standardization of restrictive covenants in orthopedic fellowships in the United States. Only accredited fellowships prohibit restrictive covenants in orthopedic fellowships. Pediatrics is the only sub-specialty society that provides information to applicants on restrictive covenants for fellowship applicants.

Conclusion: The current lack of standardization in the fellowship process means applicants need to be well versed in these restrictive covenants before applying. In turn, fellowships themselves, as well as subspecialty societies, should seek to be transparent in providing information on restrictive covenant requirements of their respective fellowships.

Introduction: Orthopaedic surgery continues to be one of the most competitive specialties to match into as a medical student, particularly for osteopathic medical students. Therefore, in this study, we sought to examine the prevalence of osteopathic students (DO) matching into orthopaedic surgery at traditional Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited programs (former allopathic residency programs) in recent years.

Methods: A retrospective review of National Residency Match Program annual reports and Association of American Medical Colleges's Electronic Residency Application Service Statistic reports were performed to determine the number of applications and match rates among osteopathic (DO) and allopathic (MD) medical students into orthopaedic surgery from 2019 to 2023. Data on the degree type of current residents at all ACGME-accredited residency programs were identified.

Results: During the analyzed study period of 2019 to 2023, there were 3,473 (74.5%) allopathic students and 571 (59.9%) osteopathic students who successfully matched into orthopaedic surgery. This match rate for allopathic students was 74.5% compared with 59.9% for osteopathic students. Of the 3,506 medical students who hold postgraduate orthopaedic surgery positions at former allopathic programs over the past 5 years, only 58 (1.7%) hold an osteopathic degree. Of the 560 medical students who hold postgraduate orthopaedic surgery positions at former osteopathic programs over the past 5 years, 47 (8.4%) hold an allopathic degree. The match rate of allopathic students at former osteopathic programs is significantly higher than the match rate of osteopathic students at former allopathic programs.

Conclusions: Osteopathic students continue to match into orthopaedic surgery at lower rates than their allopathic counterparts. In addition, there remains a consistent and low number of osteopathic students matching into former allopathic programs. Allopathic students also have a higher likelihood of matching into former osteopathic programs when compared with osteopathic students matching into previous allopathic orthopaedic surgery programs.

Introduction: Smaller hand size has been shown to affect ease of instrument use and surgeon injury rates in multiple surgical subspecialties. Women have a smaller average hand size and are more often affected by this issue than men. The goal of this resident survey was to investigate whether hand size and gender impact self-reported difficulty with instrument use among orthopaedic surgery residents.

Methods: Residents were surveyed about how often they experience difficulty using common orthopaedic instruments. Self-reported difficulty using surgical instruments was compared between residents with small glove (SG, outer ≤7.0) vs. large glove (LG, ≥ 7.5) sizes and between male and female residents.

Results: One hundred forty-five residents (118 males and 27 females) completed the survey for a response rate of 3.7%. The SG group contained 35 residents, with 26 females and 9 males. The LG group contained 110 residents, with 1 female and 109 males. The SG group reported more difficulty than the LG group when using 3/6 instruments: the wire-cutting pliers (71.4% vs. 25.5%), universal T-handle chuck (65.7% vs. 21.4%), and large wire driver (60.0% vs. 24.8%). Female residents reported more difficulty than males for 5/6 instruments. Within the SG group, however, there was no difference in self-reported difficulty between female SG and male SG residents for 4/6 instruments.

Conclusions: The predominantly male LG group reported significantly less difficulty than the more gender mixed though still predominantly female SG group. A subanalysis comparing males and females within the SG group found that there was no difference between SG female and SG male residents for 4/6 of the instruments, suggesting that glove size might impact reported difficulty independently from gender. Although the effect of glove size vs. gender is difficult to differentiate in this study, the high rate of difficulty experienced by male and female residents in the SG group should be considered by residency programs, surgeon educators, and instrument manufacturers as the field of orthopaedic surgery continues to become more diverse.

Level of evidence: III.

Background: Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) is a disabling, poliomyelitis-like illness that mainly affects children. Although various surgical interventions are performed for intractable paralysis due to AFM, the timing of surgery and its long-term outcomes have yet to be established, especially for shoulder reconstruction. This study aimed to analyze the midterm outcomes of nonsurgically and surgically treated upper-extremity AFM and the factors influencing shoulder functional outcomes after surgical reconstruction.

Methods: We retrospectively examined 39 patients with AFM in 50 upper extremities between 2011 and 2019. The degree of spontaneous recovery of completely paralyzed muscles was evaluated at a median of 3, 6, and 37 months after the onset of paralysis. Twenty-seven patients with 29 extremities underwent surgery involving nerve transfer, muscle-tendon transfer, or free muscle transfer for shoulder, elbow, and hand reconstruction.

Results: Patients with complete paralysis of shoulder abduction at 6 months did not show later recovery. Twenty-two patients with 24 extremities underwent shoulder surgery, and all but 1 were followed for at least 24 months after surgery. Although postoperative shoulder abduction recovery was similar between transfer of the spinal accessory nerve and of the contralateral C7 nerve root to the suprascapular nerve, the outcomes obtained with spinal accessory nerve transfer had more variability, likely related to latent spinal accessory nerve paralysis, shoulder instability related to pectoralis major paralysis, and the type of paralysis. Shoulder abduction recovery was also greatly affected by scapulothoracic joint movement. In contrast, the outcomes of the elbow flexion and hand reconstructions were more consistent and acceptable.

Conclusions: All patients had loss of shoulder abduction, and restoration of shoulder function was less predictable and depended on the quality of the donor nerves and recovery of the synergistic muscles. Strict donor nerve selection and additional nerve transfer for shoulder reconstruction are imperative for satisfactory outcomes.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Introduction: Little is known about attrition before American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) board certification for orthopaedic residents training in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited orthopaedics programs. This national-cohort study examined orthopaedic surgery attrition, associated risk factors, and specialties pursued by residents who left orthopaedics.

Methods: From August 2022 through July 2023, we analyzed deidentified, individual-level data from the Association of American Medical Colleges for 129,860 US MD-granting medical-school matriculants in academic years 1993 to 1994 through 2000 to 2001. Graduates with records of training ≥1 year in orthopaedic surgery during GME and of board certification as of May 2020 were included. Retention was defined as being ABOS-certified; attrition was defined as being certified by another specialty board and not ABOS. We identified variables independently associated with attrition from orthopaedics using multivariable logistic regression analysis and reported adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: Of 4,319 US medical-school graduates from 1997 to 2009 with ≥1 year of orthopaedic surgery GME, 4,085 (94.6%) obtained ABOS board certification (retention) and 234 did not (attrition). Women (OR 2.8, 95% CI 2.0-3.9), first-generation college graduates (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), Asians (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4-2.7), and residents who placed greater importance on innovation/research in choosing medicine as a career (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.7) and completed ≥1 year of research during GME (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.7-3.5) were more likely to leave orthopaedics. Overall, 121 trainees who left orthopaedics selected surgical specialties for board certification, most commonly plastic surgery (n = 66) and general surgery (n = 45).

Conclusions: The increased risk of attrition among women, Asians, first-generation college graduates, and trainees endorsing higher importance of innovation/research in choosing medicine and participating in research during GME raises concerns about the potential loss of underrepresented groups among orthopaedic surgeons and surgeon-scientists. Efforts to mitigate attrition among residents in high-risk groups are warranted.