Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases
-
In recent years, metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has become an increasingly popular treatment for patients needing hip arthroplasty. Important factors to consider for a successful outcome include proper patient selection and surgical technique, including approach, component positioning, and cementing technique. This review will serve as guide to both those who are learning the technique of hip resurfacing and to more experienced surgeons.
-
Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis · Jan 2009
Multicenter Study Comparative StudyResurfacing arthroplasty for patients with osteonecrosis.
The suitability of third-generation metal-on-metal hip resurfacing products for patients with a primary diagnosis of osteonecrosis has been debated. The preservation of femoral head bone stock for femoral prosthetic support is essential for the long-term stability of implants. A modern hip resurfacing system was implanted in 1148 hips as part of a United States multicenter investigational device exemption study. ⋯ Survival rates were not significantly different (95.9% and 95.8% at 24 months for osteoarthritis and osteonecrosis respectively, p = 0.46). Resurfacing arthroplasty for patients with osteonecrosis appears to be a reasonable alternative, taking into consideration implant size, patient gender, and size of femoral deficiency. Further characterization is needed to identify those specific patients with osteonecrosis for whom resurfacing arthroplasty would be appropriate.
-
The distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) acts in concert with the proximal radioulnar joint to control forearm rotation. The DRUJ is stabilized by the triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC). ⋯ TFCC and DRUJ injuries are part of the common pattern of injuries we see with distal radius fractures. While much attention has been paid to the treatment of the distal radius fractures, many of the poor outcomes are due to untreated or unrecognized injuries to the DRUJ and its components.
-
Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis · Jan 2009
Comparative StudyA comparison of total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty - patients and outcomes.
A comparison of pertinent preoperative and postoperative data relative to total hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty (THA) would assist in evaluating current perceptions in outcome. We compared 50 consecutive metal-metal resurfacing replacements in 50 patients with 44 consecutive conventional total hip arthroplasties in 35 patients, who were implanted during the same time period, by the same surgeon, and followed prospectively for 2 to 4 years. The patients undergoing hip resurfacing were 62% male, 9 years younger, and 3.2 inches taller, with a lower mean body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade than patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. ⋯ There were no differences in postoperative range of motion or dislocation (one each). The preoperative characteristics and general health status of the average patient undergoing resurfacing are more favorable than that of the average patient undergoing conventional total hip arthroplasty. Caution should be applied in attributing differences in outcomes directly to the arthroplasty technology.
-
Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis · Jan 2009
ReviewCan RAPID3, an index without formal joint counts or laboratory tests, serve to guide rheumatologists in tight control of rheumatoid arthritis in usual clinical care?
Tight control of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may be guided by RAPID3 (routine assessment of patient index data), an index without formal joint counts or laboratory tests, which can be scored on a multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) in 5 seconds, compared to 42 seconds to score a standard HAQ, 90 seconds to perform a 28-joint count, 114 seconds to score a disease activity score 28 (DAS28), and 106 seconds to score a clinical disease activity index (CDAI). RAPID3 scores are correlated significantly with DAS28 and CDAI (rho > 0.65, p < 0.001), and distinguish active from control treatment similarly to DAS28 and CDAI in clinical trials of methotrexate, lefunomide, adalimumab, abatacept, certolizumab, and infiximab. RAPID3 scores can be used to classify patient disease activity status as high (> 12), moderate (6.1-12), low (3.1-6), and remission (