The adapted German version of the SRS-22 questionnaire can be used to assess the outcome of treatment for German-speaking patients with idiopathic scoliosis.

The discussion as to whether or not to use closed suction drainage (CSD) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is still ongoing. A multitude of surgical techniques makes comparison between studies difficult. The aim of the present study was to investigate the benefit of CSD versus nondrainage following primary TKA when operating after exsanguination (by means of a rubber Esmarch bandage) with a tourniquet and without any form of hemostasis. A prospective randomized trial was performed with a homogeneous sample of 36 patients with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients were evaluated preoperatively, on a daily basis during their hospital stay, and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. The use of CSD led to a significantly stronger drop in hemoglobin levels by approximately 1 g/dL (= 0.012). Knee circumference, wound secretion, wound healing, and postoperative range of motion did not show significant differences. All discharge criteria were met in both groups by day 9. Interestingly, patients without CSD reported higher pain levels during the entire postoperative inpatient stay and also at the 6-week follow-up (= 0.012). These differences could not be observed in longer follow-up. The use of CSD after primary TKA in this study did not lead to indispensable advantages but did lead to increased postoperative blood loss. When evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of the use of CSD after TKA from the data in the literature, special attention must be paid to the operating technique, as it has a strong impact on the results obtained.

No abstract

No abstract

Numerous classification systems have been proposed to analyze lumbar spine MRI scans. When evaluating these systems, most studies draw their conclusions from measurements of experienced clinicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of specific measurement training on interobserver reliability in MRI classification of the lumbar spine. Methods: Various measurement and classification systems were assessed for their interobserver reliability in 30 MRIs from patients with chronic lumbar back and sciatic pain. Two observers were experienced spine surgeons. The third observer was an inexperienced medical student who, prior to the study measurements, in addition to being given the detailed written instructions also given to the surgeons, obtained a list of 20 reference measurements in MRI scans from other patients to practice with. Results: Excellent agreement was observed between the medical student and the spine surgeon who had also created the reference measurements. Between the two spine surgeons, agreement was markedly lower in all systems investigated (e.g., antero-posterior spinal canal diameter intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] [3.1] = 0.979 vs. ICC [3.1] = 0.857). Conclusion: These data warrant the creation of publicly available standardised measurement examples of accepted classification systems to increase reliability of the interpretation of MR images.