METHODS: Three different cams (triangle, ellipse, and circle) and three different posts (straight, convex, concave) geometries were considered in this study and were analysed using kinematic analyses. Femoral rollback did not occur until reaching 50° of knee flexion. Beyond this angle, two of the nine combinations demonstrate poor knee flexion and were eliminated from the study.
RESULTS: The combination of circle cam with concave post, straight post and convex post showed 15.6, 15.9 and 16.1 mm posterior translation of the femur, respectively. The use of ellipse cam with convex post and straight post demonstrated a 15.3 and 14.9 mm femoral rollback, whilst the combination of triangle cam with convex post and straight post showed 16.1 and 15.8 mm femoral rollback, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates that the use of circle cam and convex post created the best femoral rollback effect which in turn produces the highest amount of knee flexion. The findings of the study suggest that if the design is applied for knee implants, superior knee flexion may be possible for future patients.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
METHODS: Six porcine lumbar spines (L2-L5) were separated into 12 functional spine units. Bilateral total facetectomies and interlaminar decompression were performed for all specimens. Non-destructive loading to assess stiffness in lateral bending, flexion and extension as well as axial rotation was performed using a universal material testing machine.
RESULTS: PS and CS constructs were significantly stiffer than the intact spine except in axial rotation. Using the normalized ratio to the intact spine, there is no significant difference between the stiffness of PS and CS: flexion (1.41 ± 0.27, 1.55 ± 0.32), extension (1.98 ± 0.49, 2.25 ± 0.44), right lateral flexion (1.93 ± 0.57, 1.55 ± 0.30), left lateral flexion (2.00 ± 0.73, 2.16 ± 0.20), right axial rotation (0.99 ± 0.21, 0.83 ± 0.26) and left axial rotation (0.96 ± 0.22, 0.92 ± 0.25).
CONCLUSION: The CS-rod TLIF construct provided comparable construct stiffness to a traditional PS-rod TLIF construct in a 'standardized' porcine lumbar spine model.
Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction using anatomic versus low tibial tunnels. We hypothesized that the outcomes of low tibial tunnel placement would be superior to those of anatomic tibial tunnel placement at the 2-year follow-up after remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction.
Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data for patients who underwent remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction between March 2011 and January 2018 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years (N = 63). On the basis of the tibial tunnel position on postoperative computed tomography, the patients were divided into those with anatomic placement (group A; n = 31) and those with low tunnel placement (group L; n = 32). Clinical scores (International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, Lysholm score, and Tegner activity level), range of motion, complications, and stability test outcomes at follow-up were compared between the 2 groups. Graft signal on 1-year follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans was compared between 22 patients in group A and 17 patients in group L.
Results: There were no significant differences between groups regarding clinical scores or incidence of complications, no between-group differences in posterior drawer test results, and no side-to-side difference on Telos stress radiographs (5.2 ± 2.9 mm in group A vs 5.1 ± 2.8 mm in group L; P = .900). Postoperative 1-year follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans showed excellent graft healing in both groups, with no significant difference between them.
Conclusion: The clinical and radiologic outcomes and complication rate were comparable between anatomic tunnel placement and low tibial tunnel placement at 2-year follow-up after remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction. The findings of this study suggest that both tibial tunnel positions are clinically feasible for remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction.
METHODS: 63 patients who underwent remnant-preserving single-bundle PCL reconstruction between 2011 and 2018 with a minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the femoral tunnel position: group A (33 patients with anatomical femoral tunnel) and group H (30 patients with high femoral tunnels). The femoral tunnel was positioned at the center (group A) or upper margin (group H) of the remnant anterolateral bundle. The position of the femoral tunnel was evaluated using the grid method on three-dimensional computed tomography. Clinical and radiological outcomes and failure rates were compared between the groups at the 2-year follow-up.
RESULTS: The position of the femoral tunnel was significantly high in group H than in group A (87.4% ± 4.2% versus 76.1% ± 3.7%, p motion, and posterior drawer test. Radiological outcomes also showed no intergroup differences in the side-to-side differences of posterior tibial translation and osteoarthritis progression. Side-to-side difference on the Telos stress radiograph was 5.2 ± 2.9 mm in group A and 5.2 ± 2.7 mm in group H (n.s.). There were four failures in group A (12.1%) and one in group H (3.3%). The differences between the groups were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: The clinical and radiological outcomes and failure rates of the high femoral tunnels were comparable with those of the anatomical femoral tunnels at the 2-year follow-up after remnant-preserving single-bundle PCL reconstruction. The findings of this study suggest that high femoral tunnels can be considered an alternative in remnant-preserving single-bundle PCL reconstruction.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
METHODS: Ovid, MEDLINE, Scopus, PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database), EBSCOHOST, Cochrane library and Open Grey databases were searched to identify relevant studies. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro Scale and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS). Meta-analysis was undertaken when the same outcome measures were reported in a minimum of two studies with appropriate data. (PROSPERO: CRD42020177317).
RESULTS: Eleven studies with 900 participants were included, out of which 395 participants were allocated to group exercise programs and 383 completed the program. Culturally adapted Thai dance programs and multicomponent exercise programs were the most-commonly reported group exercises. The Timed Up and Go test (TUG) and attendance rates were the most-frequently reported outcomes. Meta-analysis demonstrated significant improvement in physical function assessed using the Timed Up and Go test (Random effect model -1.27 s, 95% CI -1.65, -0.88, I2 = 74%). In two studies, adherence (81% and 94%) and dropout rates (4% and 19%) were reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Group-based exercise programs in Southeast Asia consisting mostly of culturally adapted Thai dance programs and multicomponent exercise programs appear to have positive effects on physical function. However, better descriptions of fidelity, including adherence, are required in future studies.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the proximal thoracic (PT) flexibility and its compensatory ability above the "potential UIV."
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Shoulder and neck imbalance can be caused by overcorrection of the main thoracic (MT) curve due to inability of PT segment to compensate.
METHODS: Cervical supine side bending (CSB) radiographs of 100 Lenke 1 and 2 patients were studied. We further stratified Lenke 1 curves into Lenke 1-ve: PT side bending (PTSB) 80.0% of cases of the PT segment were unable to compensate at T3-T6. In Lenke 1+ve curves, 78.4% were unable to compensate at T6, followed by T5 (75.7%), T4 (73.0%), T3 (59.5%), T2 (27.0%), and T1 (21.6%). In Lenke 1-ve curves, 36.4% of cases were unable to compensate at T6, followed by T5 (45.5%), T4 (45.5%), T3 (30.3%), T2 (21.2%), and T1 (15.2%). A significant difference between Lenke 1-ve and Lenke 1+ve was observed from T3 to T6. The difference between Lenke 1+ve and Lenke 2 curves was significant only at T2.
CONCLUSION: The compensation ability and the flexibility of the PT segments of Lenke 1-ve and Lenke 1+ve curves were different. Lenke 1+ve curves demonstrated similar characteristics to Lenke 2 curves.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
METHODS: Patients included had the diagnosis of significant back pain caused by osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture secondary to trivial injury. All the patients underwent routine preoperative sitting lateral spine radiograph, supine stress lateral spine radiograph, and supine anteroposterior spine radiograph. The radiological parameters recorded were anterior vertebral height (AVH), middle vertebral height (MVH), posterior vertebral height (PVH), MVH level below, wedge endplate angle (WEPA), and regional kyphotic angle (RKA). The supine stress versus sitting difference (SSD) for all the above parameters were calculated.
RESULTS: A total of 28 patients (4 males; 24 females) with the mean age of 75.6 ± 7.7 years were recruited into this study. The mean cement volume injected was 5.5 ± 1.8 ml. There was no difference between supine stress and postoperative radiographs for AVH ( p = 0.507), PVH ( p = 0.913) and WEPA ( p = 0.379). The MVH ( p = 0.026) and RKA ( p = 0.005) were significantly less in the supine stress radiographs compared to postoperative radiographs. There was significant correlation ( p < 0.05) between supine stress and postoperative AVH, MVH, PVH, WEPA, and RKA. The SSD for AVH, PVH, WEPA, and RKA did not have significant correlation with the cement volume ( p > 0.05). Only the SSD-MVH had significant correlation with cement volume, but the correlation was weak ( r = 0.39, p = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic mobility stress radiographs can predict the postoperative vertebral height restoration and kyphosis correction after vertebroplasty for thoracolumbar osteoporotic fracture with intravertebral clefts. However, it did not reliably predict the amount of cement volume injected as it was affected by other factors.