No abstract

The gold standard treatment of large segmental bone defects is autologous bone transfer, which suffers from low availability and additional morbidity. Tissue engineered bone able to engraft orthotopically and a suitable animal model for pre-clinical testing are direly needed. This study aimed to evaluate engraftment of tissue-engineered bone with different prevascularization strategies in a novel segmental defect model in the rabbit humerus. Decellularized bone matrix (Tutobone) seeded with bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells was used directly orthotopically or combined with a vessel and inserted immediately (1-step) or only after six weeks of subcutaneous “incubation” (2-step). After 12 weeks, histological and radiological assessment was performed. Variable callus formation was observed. No bone formation or remodeling of the graft through TRAP positive osteoclasts could be detected. Instead, a variable amount of necrotic tissue formed. Although necrotic area correlated significantly with amount of vessels and the 2-step strategy had significantly more vessels than the 1-step strategy, no significant reduction of necrotic area was found. In conclusion, the animal model developed here represents a highly challenging situation, for which a suitable engineered bone graft with better prevascularization, better resorbability and higher osteogenicity has yet to be developed.

Background: Little guidance is currently available for standardized diagnostic protocols and therapeutic recommendations for bone and joint infections (BJIs) of the hand. Objectives: To summarize the available data in the scientific English-language literature on the diagnosis and treatment of native BJIs of the hand. To illustrate these concepts from a narrative point of view in areas where there is lack of evidence. Sources: We performed a systematic PubMed and Internet search of studies that investigated hand BJIs in adult patients. Content: Few studies have systematically investigated and validated diagnostic concepts, classifications or surgical treatment protocols. Most concepts derive from traditional intra-institutional experience, expert opinions and extrapolations from infections in large joints and long bones. Similarly, there is no uniformly accepted infection definition of BJIs of the hand. The best-documented literature is available for microbiological findings and antibiotic treatment duration in uncomplicated native joint arthritis of the fingers. Retrospective studies and one prospective randomized trial suggest that post-surgical targeted antibiotic therapy of 2 weeks results in a microbiological cure rate of 88%. Implications: Studies on diagnostic workup and infection definition and classification are urgently needed to compare inter-institutional outcome results and generate guidelines for the best patient care. For uncomplicated pyogenic arthritis of native joints, current evidence suggests that a 2-week course of antibiotic therapy following surgery cures the infection.

Thread carpal tunnel release (TCTR) has been reported to be safe and effective for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. The aim of this study is to evaluate the modified TCTR for safety, efficacy, and postoperative recovery. Seventy-six extremities in 67 patients undergoing TCTR were analyzed pre- and postoperatively using clinical parameters and patient-reported outcome measures. Twenty-nine men and 38 women with a mean age of 59.9 ± 18.9 years underwent TCTR. The mean postoperative time to resume activities of daily living was 5.5 ± 5.5 days, analgesia was completed after 3.7 ± 4.6 days, and return to work was achieved after a mean of 32.6 ± 15.6 days for blue-collar workers and 4.6 ± 4.3 days for white-collar workers. The Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) and Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores were comparable with previous studies. Overall, two persistent compressions and one recurrence required open reoperation (3.9%). All three had been operated in the initial phase, and none required reoperation after an additional safety step was introduced. No other complications occurred. TCTR surgery appears to be a safe and reliable technique with almost no wound and scarring and a potentially faster recovery time than open techniques. Although our technical modifications may reduce the risk of incomplete release, TCTR requires both ultrasound and surgical skills and has a considerable learning curve.

Surgical intervention for thumb duplication can be divided into three categories: simple excision of the accessory thumb, excision of the accessory thumb with reconstruction from available “spare parts,” and combining the two thumbs into one, as described by Bilhaut. This prospectively PROSPERO registered systematic review evaluates the overall, aesthetic and functional outcomes for the latter two options (reconstruction from spare parts vs. combining two thumbs into one), aiming to facilitate evidence-based decision making when addressing thumb duplication and direct future research. The review was performed in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews and PRISMA statement. Embase, PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched. Studies offering comparisons of techniques were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies—of Intervention tool. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Ten retrospective observational studies were included. Data did not consistently allow analysis by procedure type. Four studies reported similar overall outcomes between techniques, while two specifically reported poor overall outcomes for the Bilhaut procedure. Two studies reported comparatively worse aesthetic outcomes for the Bilhaut procedure with four studies reporting comparatively improved functional outcomes for this procedure. Overall, interpretation of outcomes was challenging with no patient-reported outcome measures used. The quality of the evidence was universally “very low” due to all studies being at risk of methodological bias. Based on the available evidence, surgical techniques for thumb duplication correction appear comparable regarding overall outcome. There is limited evidence suggesting reconstruction with spare parts offers superior aesthetic outcomes at the expense of stability. The level of evidence is III.