Scoliocorrector Fatma-UI for correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Development, effectivity, safety and functional outcome

BACKGROUND Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis remains a major problem due to its high incidence,high risk,and high cost.One of the aims of the management in scoliosis is to correct the deformity.Many techniques are available to correct scoliosis deformity;however,they are all far from ideal to achieve three-dimensional correction in scoliosis.AIM To develop a set of tools named Scoliocorrector Fatma-UI(SCFUI)to aid threedimensional correction and to evaluate the efficacy,safety,and functional outcome.METHODS This study consists of two stages.In the first stage,we developed the SCFUI and tested it in finite element and biomechanical tests.The second stage was a single-blinded randomized clinical trial to evaluate the SCFUI compared to direct vertebral rotation(DVR).Forty-four subjects with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis were randomly allocated into the DVR group(n=23)and SCFUI group(n=21).Radiological,neurological,and functional outcome was compared between the groups.RESULTS Finite element revealed the maximum stress of the SCFUI components to be between 31.2-252 MPa.Biomechanical analysis revealed the modulus elasticity of SCFUI was 9561324±633277 MPa.Both groups showed improvement in Cobb angle and sagittal profile,however the rotation angle was lower in the SCFUI group(11.59±7.46 vs 18.23±6.39,P=0.001).Neurological and functional outcome were comparable in both groups.CONCLUSION We concluded that SCFUI developed in this study resulted in similar coronal and sagittal but better rotational correction compared to DVR.The safety and functional outcomes were also similar to DVR.

Total hip replacement:A meta-analysis to evaluate survival of cemented,cementless and hybrid implants

AIM To determine whether cemented, cementless, or hybrid implant was superior to the other in terms of survival rate.METHODS Systematic searches across MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane that compared cemented, cementless and hybrid total hip replacement(THR) were performed. Two independent reviewers evaluated the risk ratios of revision due to any cause, aseptic loosening, infection, and dislocation rate of each implants with a pre-determined form. The risk ratios were pooled separately for clinical trials, cohorts and registers before pooled altogether using fixed-effect model. Meta-regressions were performed to identify the source of heterogeneity. Funnel plots were analyzed. RESULTS Twenty-seven studies comprising 5 clinical trials, 9 cohorts, and 13 registers fulfilled the research criteria and analyzed. Compared to cementless THR, cemented THR have pooled RR of 0.47(95%CI: 0.45-0.48), 0.9(0.84-0.95), 1.29(1.06-1.57) and 0.69(0.6-0.79) for revision due to any reason, revision due to aseptic loosening, revision due to infection, and dislocation respectively. Compared to hybrid THR, the pooled RRs of cemented THR were 0.82(0.76-0.89), 2.65(1.14-6.17), 0.98(0.7-1.38), and 0.67(0.57-0.79) respectively. Compared to hybrid THR, cementless THR had RRs of 0.7(0.65-0.75), 0.85(0.49-1.5), 1.47(0.93-2.34) and 1.13(0.98-1.3).CONCLUSION Despite the limitations in this study, there was some tendency that cemented fixation was still superior than other types of fixation in terms of implant survival.