Search

Background: Muscle injuries are some of the most common injuries in sports; they have a high recurrence rate and can result in the loss of ability to participate in training or competition. In clinical practice, a wide variety of treatment strategies are commonly applied. However, a limited amount of evidence-based data exists, and most therapeutic approaches are solely based on "best practice". Thus, there is a need for consensus to provide strategies and recommendations for the treatment of muscle injuries., Methods: The 2016 GOTS Expert Meeting, initiated by the German-Austrian-Swiss Society for Orthopaedic Traumatologic Sports Medicine (GOTS), focused on the topic of muscle and tendon injuries and was held in Spreewald/Berlin, Germany. The committee was composed of twenty-two medical specialists. Nine of them were delegated to a subcommittee focusing on the nonoperative treatment of muscle injuries. The recommendations and statements that were developed were reviewed by the entire consensus committee and voted on by the members., Results: The committee reached a consensus on the utility and effectiveness of the management of muscle injuries., Main Results: the "PRICE" principle to target the first inflammatory response is one of the most relevant steps in the treatment of muscle injuries. Haematoma aspiration may be considered in the early stages after injury. There is presently no clear evidence that intramuscular injections are of use in the treatment of muscle injuries. The ingestion of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) should be regarded critically because there is currently no hard evidence to support their use, although they are appropriate in exceptional cases., Conclusions: The present work provides a structured overview of the various nonoperative treatment strategies of muscle injuries and evaluates their effectiveness with respect to the existing scientific evidence and clinical expertise in the context of basic science on the healing process of muscle injuries. The committee agreed that there is a compelling need for further studies, including high-quality randomized investigations to completely evaluate the effectiveness of the existing therapeutic approaches. The given recommendations may be updated and adjusted as further evidence will be generated.

Purpose: Little scientific evidence on the clinical and radiological outcome after stemless reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) exists. The hypothesis of this study was that stemless RSA has an inferior outcome compared to RSA with stem., Methods: All cases of cuff-arthropathy fullfilling strict selection criteria (selection rate 18.4 %) were treated with stemless RSA between 2009 and 2013. Twenty nine of 37 cases (78.4 %) were clinically and radiologically examined by an independent observer. Twenty four of the 29 cases could be matched with 24 patients that underwent conventional stemmed RSA at a different institution based on the following criteria: indication (cuff-arthropathy), age (within 5 years), gender, and time of follow-up (within 2 years). Clincial and radiological outcomes of both groups were compared., Results: After mean follow-up of 35 months (range 24-75) no significant difference regarding constant score, ASES, subjective shoulder value, pain score, patient satisfaction, strength, and range of motion was detected. One case of traumatic dislocation was observed in the stemless RSA group. Scapular notching grade 1 was detected in two cases of the stemless group while in the stemmed group five cases with grade 1 and four cases with grade 2 notching were observed. Average post-operative humeral component inclination (neck-shaft angle) in the stemless RSA group (134.4°) was significantly steeper than in the stemmed RSA group (155°) (p < 0.001). No loosening of the humeral component was observed in both groups., Conclusion: At short to mid-term follow-up, stemless RSA does not feature inferior clinical or radiological outcomes in a strictly selected patient population.

Purpose: The purpose of this randomized study was to compare the clinical efficacy of intra-articular versus periarticular acromioclavicular joint injections., Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial, 101 patients (106 shoulders) with symptomatic acromioclavicular joints were treated with an injection and were randomly assigned to either the intra-articular group or the periarticular group. To ensure accurate needle placement either intra-articularly or in a periarticular manner, the needle was placed under ultrasound guidance. Baseline values including the Constant-Murley score, pain assessment with a visual analog scale for pain under local pressure and pain at night, and the crossover arm test were investigated in 7 different centers immediately before treatment. Follow-up examinations were scheduled after 1 hour, 1 week, and 3 weeks., Results: All patients completed the study. Overall, a highly significant clinical improvement in all tested variables and in both groups was observed over time (P < .0001) beginning with 1 hour after treatment and lasting for the entire follow-up period of 3 weeks. The difference between the 2 groups was not significant except regarding the crossover arm test (P < .016)., Conclusions: With both injection techniques, a highly significant clinical advantage for the patient can be achieved. The difference between the 2 treatments was not significant except for more pain reduction according to the crossover arm test after intra-articular injection at 3 weeks' follow-up., Level of Evidence: Level II, multicenter, randomized, prospective, controlled trial., (Copyright © 2013 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a growing tendency for complex proximal humerus fractures (PHF) in osteoporotic patients to be treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). It has been proposed that RSA has more benefits than other treatment options. The aim of our study was to investigate preoperative characteristics as well as clinical and radiological outcomes in patients with complex 3- or 4-part PHF who had undergone primary RSA., Methods: Patients with a minimum follow-up of 6 months who had undergone a primary RSA after 3- or 4-part PHF in the period between 2008 and 2011 were eligible for the study. Clinical records, X-rays and CT-scans were investigated and a clinical examination was performed. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and Constant-Murley score (CMS) were calculated. Sixteen patients were examined as part of the study. The mean follow-up was 20 months (range 6-42 months). According to Codman-Hertel classification we encountered 15 Hertel "12" and 1 Hertel "8" type fractures., Results: Thirty-two patients (27 female - 84.4%) with a mean age of 72 years underwent operations to treat complex 3- and 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus. Sixteen patients were reexamined. In 14 cases the dominant upper extremity was on the right, in 2 cases it was on the left, in 6 cases the right side was affected and in 10 cases the left side was affected. The mean CMS was 54.8 (range 18-95) and the mean DASH was 37.5 (range 2.9-81). A trend was established between the CMS and dominance of the affected shoulder. The CMS was better if the affected shoulder was on the non-dominant side (p-value 0.051). No statistical difference was noted between age and clinical outcome., Conclusions: Our mid-term follow-up shows satisfying results in terms of the treatment of severe displaced fractures in elderly patients with RSA. RSA can provide immediate relief and good shoulder function in elderly patients. Nevertheless, the question of longevity of these implants remains to be observed.

Clinical/methodical Issue: Imaging for shoulder surgery varies a lot nowadays. Advantages and disadvantages of possible imaging methods according to the pathology and treatment options are described., Standard Radiological Methods: Digital projection radiography in 3 planes, ultrasonography, MRI, CT scanning and scintigrams., Methodical Innovations: Special axial view to visualize the glenoid situation, as well as 3-D CT scanning for larger defects and classification., Performance: Imaging of the glenoid situation, the version and erosion in axial view x-ray is mandatory to plan and control glenoid replacement., Achievements: Useful application of imaging methods for the daily routine of orthopedic surgeons., Practical Recommendations: Digital 3 plane x-ray imaging in arthroplasty surgery is the minimum requirement. For rotator cuff lesions ultrasonography is good. In order to gain information on fatty infiltration of rotator muscles MRI is needed as well as for intra-articular lesions. For bony defects CT and reconstruction 3-D are recommended.

The clinical finding of flatfoot is characterized by a flattening of the medial longitudinal arch and valgus deformity of the hindfoot. The differential diagnosis of flatfoot is the physiological, flexible, contracted flatfoot, which occurs as a congenital or acquired deformity. Congenital flatfoot deformity requires early intensive therapy, while a flexible flatfoot in children has a good prognosis and conservative treatment usually leads to a stable and sufficient load-bearing foot. Severe flatfoot in children can be corrected successfully by simple, minimally invasive procedures. In adults with symptomatic flatfoot, which usually occurs due to an insufficiency of the tendon of the tibialis posterior, conservative therapy with insoles, shoe modifications and physiotherapeutic measures can lead to significant improvement, otherwise surgical correction is recommended. Early, stage-appropriate therapy helps to prevent an impending decompensation of the hindfoot.

Clinical/methodical Issue: Imaging for shoulder surgery varies a lot nowadays. Advantages and disadvantages of possible imaging methods according to the pathology and treatment options are described., Standard Radiological Methods: Digital projection radiography in 3 planes, ultrasonography, MRI, CT scanning and scintigrams., Methodical Innovations: Special axial view to visualize the glenoid situation, as well as 3-D CT scanning for larger defects and classification., Performance: Imaging of the glenoid situation, the version and erosion in axial view x-ray is mandatory to plan and control glenoid replacement., Achievements: Useful application of imaging methods for the daily routine of orthopedic surgeons., Practical Recommendations: Digital 3 plane x-ray imaging in arthroplasty surgery is the minimum requirement. For rotator cuff lesions ultrasonography is good. In order to gain information on fatty infiltration of rotator muscles MRI is needed as well as for intra-articular lesions. For bony defects CT and reconstruction 3-D are recommended.