Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 143
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 994
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3134
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Introduction: Scaphotrapeziotrapezoid (STT) arthrodesis and Pyrocardan® implant for painful isolated STT osteoarthritis have shown good results, but no paper has compared their medium-term outcomes.
Hypotheses: Our main hypothesis would be that the Pyrocardan® implant, by preserving the carpal biomechanics, could lead to better wrist mobility. Our secondary hypotheses would be that no other clinical and radiological differences will be found between these two procedures at a mean 5 years follow-up.
Patients: In this non-randomised retrospective study, performed at two healthcare facilities, we report and compare the outcomes of STT arthrodesis with staple fixation versus the Pyrocardan® implant in 38 patients (40 thumbs) from 2 previously published cohorts. Twenty-one patients with a mean age of 68 years (range, 46-79) underwent STT arthrodesis in facility 1. Seventeen patients with a mean age of 61 years (range, 41-80) received a Pyrocardan® implant in facility 2. Patients were reviewed at both facilities by the same examiner who performed a clinical and radiographical assessment.
Results: At a mean follow-up of 8 years (range, 2-20 years) for the STT group and 5 years (range 3-8 years) for the Pyrocardan® group, we found no significant differences in the clinical and radiological outcomes between the two procedures except in wrist active extension and ulnar deviation, where Pyrocardan® appears to produce better mobility (extension 58°± 9 vs. 38°± 14 and ulnar deviation 35°[25, 40] versus 45°[40, 50]) (p<.001 and p<.008 respectively). The two surgical techniques led to significantly improvement in terms of pain relief, function, and strength. For the STT arthrodesis group, two complete non-unions were found (9%), while narrowing of the styloscaphoid joint space was found in eight thumbs (36%). For the Pyrocardan® group, four postoperative DISI (22%), four calcifications around the trapezium and/or distal scaphoid (22%) and one asymptomatic dislocation (6%) of the implant were observed.
Discussion: Pyrocardan® implant seems to result in better mobility in extension and ulnar deviation. STT arthrodesis and Pyrocardan® implant to treat isolated STT osteoarthritis led to less pain, better strength and functional scores, and restored wrist stability. A future study with a larger population will be needed to confirm these results.
Level Of Evidence: IV.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2024.103867 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!