Background: Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is one of the most common pediatric conditions. The current gold-standard treatment for children under six months of age with a reducible hip is bracing, but the orthopedic literature features several splint options, and each one has many advantages and disadvantages. The aim of this review is to analyze the available literature to document the up-to-date evidence on DDH conservative treatment. Methods: A systematic review of PubMed and Science Direct databases was performed by two independent authors (C.d.C. and A.V.) using the keywords “developmental dysplasia hip”, “brace”, “harness”, “splint”, “abduction brace” to evaluate studies of any level of evidence that reported clinical or preclinical results and dealt with conservative DDH treatment. The result of every stage was reviewed and approved by the senior investigators (V.P. and G.T.). Results: A total of 1411 articles were found. After the exclusion of duplicates, 367 articles were selected. At the end of the first screening, following the previously described selection criteria, we selected 29 articles eligible for full text reading. The included articles mainly focus on the Pavlik harness, Frejka, and Tubingen among the dynamic splint applications as well as the rhino-style brace, Ilfeld and generic abduction brace among the static splint applications. The main findings of the included articles were summarized. Conclusions: Dynamic splinting for DDH represents a valid therapeutic option in cases of instability and dislocation, especially if applied within 4–5 months of life. Dynamic splinting has a low contraindication. Static bracing is an effective option too, but only for stable hips or residual acetabular dysplasia.

The aim of this study is to report the results of the treatment of displaced supracondylar humerus fractures comparing two different techniques, crossed and lateral pins. We retrospectively reviewed 35 children hospitalized between May 2005 and December 2012. Patients were treated with two different pin configurations, crossed (Group 1) and lateral (Group 2). After surgery, clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed. Postoperatively, the clinical assessment showed recovery of joint function of the elbow. Radiographically, Group 1 showed a difference in the Baumann angle between the value of the injured limb and the normal angle of 5.3° ± 2.12°; in Group 2 the difference was 4.9° ± 2.82°. Complications: group 1, two cases of short paresthesia, one case of slight varus, mild asymmetry, and deficit to extension of the humerus and group 2, two cases of local infection and one of a slight hyperextension were reported. Both groups achieved a satisfying outcome with similar results in joint function recovery and complications.

The etiology and etiopathogenesis of Osgood–Schlatter Disease (OD) are not fully understood. The aim of this review is to systematically analyze the available literature about the etiology and risk factors of OD. The literature was systematically reviewed using the PRISMA criteria to evaluate all studies published in the last 25 years (between 1996 and 2021) dealing with the etiology of OD. A total of 16 articles were included. The etiology and risk factors of OD are controversial. The main articles focused on muscular factors (mainly tightness of the rectus femoris), alteration of the patellar tendon or extensor mechanism, mechanical factors (repetitive solicitation, trauma, sports), tibial anatomy (tibial slope or tibial torsion), and histological alteration. Associations with ankle kinematic and behavior disorders were also reported. Many theories about the etiology, risk factors, and associated factors of OD have been reported in the literature, but more studies are needed to fully understand the etiopathogenesis of this disorder.

Background: Septic arthritis (SA) in children is an acute inflammatory disease of the joints. If not treated promptly, it could become a surgical emergency. The incidence of the disease in children in Europe is approximately 2–7 per 100,000 children. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate which of these treatments—arthrocentesis, arthrotomy, and arthroscopy—provides better results in children and when to use them. Methods: Three independent authors conducted a systematic review of PubMed, ScienceDirect, and MEDLINE databases to assess studies with any level of evidence that reported the surgical outcome of SA. Two senior investigators evaluated and approved each stage’s findings. Results: A total of 488 articles were found. After screening, we chose 24 articles that were suitable for full-text reading based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results of our analysis showed that there are no numerically significant differences reported in the literature on clinical and radiographic outcomes by surgical technique. Conclusions: We developed an algorithm that could be used if septic arthritis is suspected. Based on our results, the surgical technique to be used will depend on the operator who will perform it.

Introduction: Corticosteroid injections have demonstrated short-term benefits for shoulder pain. This symptomatic treatment method is used in various inflammatory conditions that affect the shoulder joint. Corticosteroid joint injections are not without risks and complications. Adverse effects have been documented, including damage to the articular cartilage, tendon rupture, and attenuation of the subject’s immune response. The aim of this study was to examine the timing of preoperative corticosteroid injections on infectious outcomes of shoulder arthroscopies and shoulder arthroplasty. Materials and Methods: In accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), the PubMed, Cochrane, and Science Direct databases were systematically reviewed by two independent authors in January 2024. After full-text reading and checking the reference lists, 11 article were included. Results: Patients who received a shoulder injection within three months prior to undergoing shoulder arthroplasty exhibited a markedly elevated incidence of infection. In addition, a significantly increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) at 90 days postoperatively in patients who received CSIs (corticosteroid injections) within 1 month prior to shoulder arthroplasty was found. Different authors consider CSI injections within the 2 weeks prior to shoulder arthroscopy surgery principally associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection. Discussion: There is still no consensus on the correct timing of preoperative CSIs in both arthroscopic and arthroplasty procedures. The literature does not identify whether the number of preoperative injections could increase the risk of periprosthetic infection. Obesity, sex, and smoking did not have a significant effect on PJIs; alcohol abuse could be considered as a risk factor for PJIs with CSIs. Both in prosthetic surgeries and in arthroscopy procedures, modifiable and unmodifiable factors play secondary roles. The risk of postoperative infection is greater within 3 months, although it is almost comparable at one- and two-year follow-ups.