Large bone defects resulting from musculoskeletal tumours, infections, or trauma are often unable to heal spontaneously. The challenge for surgeons is to avoid amputation, and provide the best functional outcomes. Allograft, vascularized fibular or iliac graft, hybrid graft, extracorporeal devitalized autograft, distraction osteogenesis, induced-membrane technique, and segmental prostheses are the most common surgical strategies to manage large bone defects. Given its optimal osteogenesis, osteoinduction, osteoconduction, and histocompatibility properties, along with the lower the risk of immunological rejection, autologous graft represents the most common used strategy for reconstruction of bone defects. However, the choice of the best surgical technique is still debated, and no consensus has been reached. The present study investigated the current reconstructive strategies for large bone defect after trauma, infections, or tumour excision, discussed advantages and disadvantages of each technique, debated available techniques and materials, and evaluated complications and new perspectives.

Given the progressive ageing of Western populations, the fragility fractures market has a growing socioeconomic impact. Fragility fractures are common in the elderly, negatively impacting their quality of life, limiting autonomy, increasing disability, and decreasing life expectancy. Different causes contribute to the development of a fractures in frail individuals. Among all, targeting fragile patients before the development of a fracture may represent the greatest challenge, and current diagnostic tools suffer from limitations. This study summarizes the current evidence on the management of fragility fractures, discussing risk factors, prevention, diagnosis, and actual limitations of the clinical therapeutic options, putting forward new ideas for further scientific investigation.

Background: Osteoporosis affects mostly postmenopausal women, leading to deterioration of the microarchitectural bone structure and low bone mass, with an increased fracture risk with associated disability, morbidity and mortality. This Bayesian network meta-analysis compared the effects of current anti-osteoporosis drugs on bone mineral density. Methods: The present systematic review and network meta-analysis follows the PRISMA extension statement to report systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions. The literature search was performed in June 2021. All randomised clinical trials that have investigated the effects of two or more drug treatments on BMD for postmenopausal osteoporosis were accessed. The network comparisons were performed through the STATA Software/MP routine for Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model analysis. The inverse variance method with standardised mean difference (SMD) was used for analysis. Results: Data from 64 RCTs involving 82,732 patients were retrieved. The mean follow-up was 29.7 ± 19.6 months. Denosumab resulted in a higher spine BMD (SMD −0.220; SE 3.379), followed by pamidronate (SMD −5.662; SE 2.635) and zoledronate (SMD −10.701; SE 2.871). Denosumab resulted in a higher hip BMD (SMD −0.256; SE 3.184), followed by alendronate (SMD −17.032; SE 3.191) and ibandronate (SMD −17.250; SE 2.264). Denosumab resulted in a higher femur BMD (SMD 0.097; SE 2.091), followed by alendronate (SMD −16.030; SE 1.702) and ibandronate (SMD −17.000; SE 1.679). Conclusion: Denosumab results in higher spine BMD in selected women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Denosumab had the highest influence on hip and femur BMD. Level of evidence: Level I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs

Articular cartilage (AC) sheathes joint surfaces and minimizes friction in diarthrosis. The resident cell population, chondrocytes, are surrounded by an extracellular matrix and a multitude of proteins, which bestow their unique characteristics. AC is characterized by a zonal composition (superficial (tangential) zone, middle (transitional) zone, deep zone, calcified zone) with different mechanical properties. An overview is given about different testing (load tests) methods as well as different modeling approaches. The widely accepted biomechanical test methods, e.g., the indentation analysis, are summarized and discussed. A description of the biphasic theory is also shown. This is required to understand how interstitial water contributes toward the viscoelastic behavior of AC. Furthermore, a short introduction to a more complex model is given.

Background: Biochemical markers of bone turnover (BTMs), such as bone alkaline phosphatase (bALP), procollagen type I N propeptide (PINP), serum cross-linked C-telopeptides of type I collagen (bCTx), and urinary cross-linked N-telopeptides of type I collagen (NTx), are commonly used for therapy monitoring purposes for osteoporotic patients. The present study evaluated the potential role of BTMs as therapy monitoring. Methods: All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing two or more pharmacological treatments for postmenopausal osteoporosis were accessed. Only studies that reported the value of bALP, PINP, bCTx, and NTx at last follow-up were included. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess associations between these biomarkers and clinical outcomes and rate of adverse events in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. A multiple linear model regression analysis through the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was used. Results: A total of 16 RCTs (14,446 patients) were included. The median age was 67 years, and the median BMI 25.4 kg/m². The median vertebral BMD was 0.82, hip BMD 0.79, and femur BMD 0.64 g/cm². The ANOVA test found optimal within-group variance concerning mean age, body mass index, and BMD. Greater bALP was associated with lower femoral BMD (P = 0.01). Greater NTx was associated with a greater number of non-vertebral fractures (P = 0.02). Greater NTx was associated with greater rate of therapy discontinuation (P = 0.04). No other statistically significant associations were detected. Conclusion: Our analysis supports the adoption of BTMs in therapy monitoring of osteoporotic patients. Level of evidence: Level I, systematic review of RCTs.