Background: Bony Bankart lesions larger than a certain size can lead to a high redislocation rate, despite treatment with Bankart repair. Detection and measurement of glenoid bone loss play key roles in selecting the appropriate surgical therapy in patients with shoulder instability. There is controversy about which diagnostic modalities, using different measurement methods, provide the best diagnostic validity. Questions/purposes: (1) What are the diagnostic accuracies of true AP radiographs, West Point (WP) view radiographs, MRI, and CT to detect glenoid bone loss? (2) Are there differences in the measurements of glenoid bone loss on MRI and CT? (3) What are the intrarater and interrater reliabilities of CT and MRI to measure glenoid bone loss? Methods: Between August 2012 and February 2017, we treated 80 patients for anterior shoulder instability. Of those, we considered patients with available preoperative true AP radiographs, WP radiographs, CT images, and MR images of the affected shoulder as potentially eligible. Based on that, 63% (50 of 80) of patients were eligible for analysis; 31% (25 of 80) were excluded because not all planes or slices (such as sagittal, axial, or frontal) of each diagnostic imaging modalities were available and 7% (5 of 80) because of the insufficient quality of diagnostic images (for example, setting of the layers did not allow adequate en face view of the glenoid). Preoperative true AP radiographs, WP radiographs, CT images and MR images of the affected shoulders were retrospectively assessed for the presence of glenoid bone loss by two blinded observers at a median (range) 25 months (12 to 66) postoperatively. To evaluate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, diagnostic odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the curve (AUC), we compared the detection of glenoid bone loss at follow-up achieved with the aforementioned imaging modalities with intraoperative arthroscopic detection. In all patients with glenoid bone loss, two blinded observers measured the size of the glenoid bone loss on preoperative CT and MR images using six measuring techniques: depth and length of the glenoid bone loss, Bigliani classification, best-fit circle width loss method, AP distance method, surface area method, and Gerber X ratio. Subsequently, the sizes of the glenoid bone loss determined using CT and MRI were compared. To estimate intraobserver and interobserver reliability, measurements were performed in a blinded fashion by two observers. Their level of experience was equivalent to that of orthopaedic residents, and they completed a training protocol before the measurements. Results: For the ability to accurately diagnose Bankart lesions, the AUC (accuracy of a diagnostic test; the closer to 1.0, the more accurate the test) was good for MRI (0.83 [95% confidence interval 0.70 to 0.94]; p < 0.01), fair for CT (0.79 [95% CI 0.66 to 0.92]; p < 0.01), poor for WP radiographs (0.69 [95% CI 0.54 to 0.85]; p = 0.02) and failed for true AP radiographs (0.55 [95% CI 0.39 to 0.72]; p = 0.69). In paired comparisons, there were no differences between CT and MRI regarding (median [range]) lesion width (2.33 mm [0.35 to 4.53] versus 2.26 mm [0.90 to 3.47], p = 0.71) and depth (0.42 mm [0.80 to 1.39] versus 0.40 mm [0.06 to 1.17]; p = 0.54), and there were no differences concerning the other measurement methods: best-fit circle width loss method (15.02% [2.48% to 41.59%] versus 13.38% [2.00% to 36.34%]; p = 0.66), AP distances method (15.48% [1.44% to 42.01%] versus 12.88% [1.43% to 36.34%]; p = 0.63), surface area method (14.01% [0.87% to 38.25] versus 11.72% [2.45% to 37.97%]; p = 0.68), and Gerber X ratio (0.75 [0.13 to 1.47] versus 0.76 [0.27 to 1.13]; p = 0.41). Except for the moderate interrater reliability of the Bigliani classification using CT (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.599 [95% CI 0.246 to 0.834]; p = 0.03) and acceptable interrater reliability of the Gerber X ratio using CT (0.775 [95% CI 0.542 to 0.899]; p < 0.01), all other measurement methods had good or excellent intrarater and interrater reliabilities on MRI and CT. Conclusion: The results of this study show that CT and MRI can accurately detect glenoid bone loss, whereas WP radiographs can only recognize them poorly, and true AP radiographs do not provide any adequate diagnostic accuracy. In addition, when measuring glenoid bone loss, MRI images of the analyzed measurement methods yielded sizes that were no different from CT measurements. Finally, the use of MRI images to measure Bankart bone lesions gave good-to-excellent reliability in the present study, which was not inferior to CT findings. Considering the advantages including lower radiation exposure and the ability to assess the condition of the labrum using MRI, we believe MRI can help surgeons avoid ordering additional CT imaging in clinical practice for the diagnosis of anterior shoulder instability in patients with glenoid bone loss. Future studies should investigate the reproducibility of our results with a larger number of patients, using other measurement methods that include examination of the opposite side or with three-dimensional reconstructions. Level of Evidence: Level I diagnostic study.

Introduction: In hip preservation surgery, the term “borderline hip dysplasia” was used when the lateral center edge angle (LCEA), historically described by Wiberg, measured 18–25°. In recent years, several radiographic parameters have been described to assess the antero posterior coverage of the femoral head, for example, the anterior and posterior wall index (AWI and PWI). This allowed an increasingly comprehensive understanding of acetabular morphology and a questioning of the borderline definition. Material and methods: A retrospective review of 397 consecutive hips was performed, all treated with triple pelvic osteotomy (TPO) due to symptomatic hip dysplasia. On all preoperative pelvic radiographs with a LCEA of 18–25°, acetabular index (AI), AWI and PWI were measured. With these values, the hips were categorized into laterally, antero-laterally and postero-laterally dysplastic and stratified by gender. Intra- and interobserver correlation of the parameters was analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: According to LCEA, 192 hips were identified as “borderline dysplastic”. Based on AWI and PWI, the categorization resulted in 116 laterally dysplastic (60.4%), 33 antero-laterally (17.2%) and 43 postero-laterally dysplastic hips (22.4%). Gender stratification revealed that male acetabula seemed to be slightly more postero-laterally deficient than female (mean PWI 0.80 vs 0.89; p = 0.017). ICC confirmed highly accurate and reproducible readings of all parameters. Conclusion: The rather high proportion of symptomatic hips labelled borderline dysplastic suggested, that there might be substantial acetabular deficiency not recognizable by LCEA. Comprehensive deformity analysis using LCEA, AI, AWI and PWI showed, that 40% of these hips were deficient either antero-laterally or postero-laterally. Male acetabula were more deficient postero-laterally than female.

Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the impact of intravenous iloprost therapy on pain, function, edema changes, and follow-up surgery in bone marrow edema syndrome of the proximal femur. Methods: A systematic literature search up to May 2022 was performed to find relevant papers that made a statement about the outcome of intravenous iloprost therapy alone. Factors such as the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Harris Hip Score (HHS), edema reduction, and follow-up interventions were considered. These were compared using Forest plots. Results: In 11 studies, 190 proximal femora with bone marrow edema syndrome that received intravenous iloprost therapy without further therapeutic intravenous or surgical intervention such as core decompression were studied. There was a significant mean improvement in VAS by 3.3 cm (2.07–4.5 cm) (p < 0.001) and HHS by 24.36 points (18.23–30.49) (p < 0.001) 3–6 months after receiving iloprost therapy. Only in 9.3% of cases (1.1–24.3%) did no clinical or radiological improvement occur. Conclusions: It could be shown that the existing publications support intravenous therapy with iloprost in patients with bone marrow edema syndrome and result in good clinical outcomes.

Purpose: This retrospective cohort study investigated the efficacy of a sublingual sufentanil tablet system (SSTS) in comparison to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) with piritramide for the management of postoperative pain following lumbar spinal fusion surgery. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing single- or two-level lumbar spinal fusion surgery and receiving the SSTS or IV-PCA for postoperative pain relief as part of multimodal pain management that included IV paracetamol and oral metamizole. The following variables were collected: postoperative pain intensity and frequency scores using the numerical rating scale (NRS), hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), occurrence of nausea, postoperative mobilization, and patient satisfaction (MacNab criteria). Results: Sixty-four patients were included. Those receiving the SSTS (n = 30) had significantly lower pain intensities on the operative day (NRS: 4.0, CI: 3.6–4.3 vs. 4.5, CI: 4.2–4.9; p < 0.05) and one day postoperatively (NRS: 3.4, CI: 3.1–3.8 vs. 3.9 CI: 3.6–4.3; p < 0.05) compared to patients receiving IV-PCA (n = 34). No differences were observed on postoperative days 2 to 5. SSTS patients experienced more nausea than IV-PCA patients (p = 0.027). Moreover, SSTS patients had a higher percentage of early mobilization following surgery than IV-PCA patients (p = 0.040). Regarding patient satisfaction, no significant differences were seen between the groups. Conclusion: The SSTS is a potentially advantageous alternative to opioid IV-PCA for use within a multimodal approach to managing postoperative pain after lumbar fusion surgery. Furthermore, the potentially higher emetic effect of SSTS should be considered, and the patient should be able to perform the application.

(1) Background: Primary in-brace correction has been shown to be related to conservative adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) treatment outcome. The purpose of the study was to evaluate TLSO brace design changes over eight years regarding primary Cobb correction and de-rotation of the (major) curve. (2) Methods: This retrospective analysis included AIS patients treated with a full-time TLSO-brace in a single Orthopedic University hospital in 2012–2014 and 2017–2019. Brace design changes resulted from an evolutionary process, from a 3-point bending to a 3D TLSO. The brace parameters (presence of an anterior shoulder pad, posterior high-thoracic pad, thoracic space, and angle of the lumbar and thoracic pressure points) were analyzed regarding the primary (major) Cobb angle and apex rotation correction with a multivariate analysis. (3) Results: A total of 74 (63 female) patients were included in the study. The Cobb angle primary correction was significantly improved over the timeframe. The primary correction was significantly influenced by all design parameters and partially by its interactions with (curve specific) different effects on the Cobb correction and apex de-rotation. (4) Conclusions: Knowledge about the effects of brace design parameters on the curve’s angle and rotation correction enables improvements in individualized brace design and the brace optimization process.

Introduction: After pelvic osteotomy for the treatment of symptomatic hip dysplasia, the longevity of the hip joint can be compromised by acetabular overcorrection. This iatrogenic pincer-type deformity is considered to be one of the major risk factors for persistent pain and progressing osteoarthritis. There is evidence that acetabula in the borderline range, defined by a lateral center edge angle (LCEA) between 18° and 25°, are more delicate to be orientated physiologically. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of acetabular orientation by triple pelvic osteotomy (TPO), established by Tönnis and Kalchschmidt, especially with respect to acetabular overcorrection. Materials and methods: A retrospective examination on 368 consecutive hips treated with TPOs was conducted. On the preoperative pelvic radiograph and the radiographic control 5 days after surgery, LCEA, acetabular index (AI), and anterior (AWI) and posterior wall index (PWI) were measured. According to the above-mentioned definition, the hips were divided into a borderline (n = 196) and a dysplastic (n = 172) group. Acetabular overcorrection was defined as when LCEA exceeded 35°, AI was below 0° and AWI exceeded 0.60, postoperatively. The postoperative occurrence of a relevant femoroacetabular impingement was correlated to these thresholds. Statistics comprised a priori power analysis, correlation analyses and receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Results: In the borderline group, in 64 hips (32.7%), LCEA and AI indicated lateral overcorrection. In the dysplastic group, in 14 hips (8.1%), solely AI indicated overcorrection. In none of the hips, relevant anterior overcorrection was detected since AWI never exceeded 0.60. Chi-square test demonstrated a significant correlation between the occurrence of a postoperative femoroacetabular impingement and LCEA exceeding 35°, as well as AI below 0° (p < 0.001, resp.). Bravais–Pearson’s analysis showed a significant correlation between the pre- and postoperative values of all parameters in the borderline and the dysplasia group (p < 0.001). Thus, ROC analysis could be performed and provided preoperative cutoff values for LCEA (23°) and AI (12.5°), hinting at postoperative overcorrection. Conclusion: The comparison of radiographic parameters after TPO showed a considerably greater percentage of laterally overcorrected acetabula in the borderline hips than in the dysplastic hips. According to the wall indices, anterior overcorrection was not observed. ROC analysis anticipated unfavorable lateral overcorrection when preoperative LCEA was above 23° and AI below 12.5°. These findings should sensitize the surgeon to the delicate acetabular correction in borderline dysplastic hips.