Purpose: The NOM (non-operative management) of distal radius fractures (DRF) is influenced by various factors. This study seeks to determine whether poor fracture alignment correlates with poor outcome. Methods: Over a period of three years, a study was conducted on conservatively treated DRF involving 127 patients, 104 women (81.9%) and 23 men (18.1%). The average age was 70.6 years (SD ± 19.1; range 21 to 102 years). The patient population is categorized into two groups according to radiological healing outcomes: Group I and Group II. The classification threshold was established as (1) > 10° dorsal/volar tilt of the lateral articular surface angle. (2) Radial tilt of the anteroposterior joint surface angle exceeds 10 degrees. (3) The loss in radial height surpasses 4 mm. Patients were categorized into group II if they met two or more criteria for DRFs, while those with one or fewer criteria were placed in group I. Results: Group I exhibited superior mobility across all planes, except in radial abduction. There was also a significant improvement in the clinical scores (QuickDASH, PRWE). Patients over 70 years with anatomically healed distal radius fractures (Group I) had superior range of motion in all planes, with the exception of radial abduction. Group II exhibited significantly higher scores (QuickDASH, PRWE). Conclusion: Thus, the ultimate goal—both in younger and older patients—should remain to achieve the best possible anatomical reduction. And especially in geriatric people, anatomical repositioning demonstrates enhanced ROM and significantly improvement in patient’s satisfaction and daily functioning.

A 75-year-old patient was transferred to the oncology department due to the discovery of a large pelvic tumor compressing the femoral neurovascular bundle suspected to be of malignant origin. Further investigation revealed a rare complication related to a 27-year-old total hip arthroplasty (THA). The final diagnosis was a severe adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) resulting from excessive implant wear—first from a metal-on-metal (MoM) bearing and later exacerbated by a revision to a metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) articulation. The clinical course was further complicated by periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The patient underwent extensive tumor-like mass resection followed by two-stage revision arthroplasty. Despite these interventions, infection persisted, ultimately necessitating joint resection. This case highlights the rare but serious convergence of dreaded orthopedic complications (ALTR and PJI). It underscores the diagnostic challenge posed by wear-induced pseudotumors, which are rare even among arthroplasty specialists and are often unfamiliar to oncologists. This case illustrates the importance of early orthopedic evaluation, maintaining a high index of suspicion in atypical presentations, and invites further discussion about the interplay between ALTRs and infection risk in arthroplasty patients.

Background: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) in total knee arthroplasty represents an increasingly relevant component of personalized surgical planning. As nearly half of orthopedic patients search online for medical information before or after clinical consultation, the quality, accuracy, and readability of publicly available digital resources directly influence patient expectations, shared decision-making, and rehabilitation engagement. This study assessed the content, quality, and readability of online information about PSI in TKA. Methods: Google searches using four predefined PSI-related terms were conducted on 6 March 2025. After applying exclusion criteria, 71 websites were included for evaluation. Websites were categorized as academic or non-academic and analyzed for authorship, reporting of advantages and disadvantages, inaccurate assertions, use of peer-reviewed references, multimedia content, and mention of specific PSI platforms. Website quality was assessed using validated quality evaluation tools (QUEST and JAMA criteria), and readability was evaluated using established readability indices (SMOG, FKGL, and FRE). Results: Academic websites demonstrated significantly higher quality than non-academic sources based on QUEST (25.4 vs. 9.8; p < 0.001) and JAMA criteria (3.7 vs. 1.7; p < 0.001). Disadvantages of PSI were reported in 69.1% of academic sites versus 12.5% of non-academic sites (p < 0.001). Inaccurate claims occurred in 31.3% of non-academic sites but were absent in academic sources (p < 0.001). Peer-reviewed references were present in 81.8% of academic websites and only 12.5% of non-academic sites (p < 0.001). Readability was uniformly poor across all websites, with no significant group differences (mean SMOG 13.5; mean FKGL 11.8; mean FRE 32.4). Conclusions: Online information about PSI in total knee arthroplasty varies widely in transparency and accuracy, with non-academic websites frequently omitting risks or presenting misleading claims. Given the role of individualized implant planning, accessible and evidence-based digital content is essential to support personalized patient education and shared decision-making. Because limited readability restricts patient comprehension and informed participation in personalized orthopedic care, improving the clarity and accessibility of digital patient resources is essential.