PubMed · 14327294
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R KATAYAMA. 1965. [ARTIFICIAL JOINTS].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14327294/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This article describes the transition of annual total sales figures of bone cement in Japan during the last 12 years, bone cement-related complications, the present status of bone cement application in Japan as surveyed by the Implant Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association, and its proposed precautions to be taken for the prevention of bone cement complications.
The purpose of this article was to review critically the current treatment options for fractures of the proximal humerus in patients with severe osteoporosis. The main difficulties lie in correctly diagnosing the fracture and hence selecting the most appropriate method of treatment. The reliability of the diagnosis can be increased by systematically appending additional information to a basic fracture classification. Classification is best carried out on a morphological basis, whereby a descriptor of bone quality can be added in order to introduce the degree of osteoporosis into the decision-making algorithm. Any classification system that claims to provide both treatment and prognosis is inappropriate, because prognosis will depend hopefully on the treatment. Approaches to treatment differ widely amongst centers and surgeons. It is still unclear as to what would be the optimal treatment. Factors such as the individual's functional requirements and ability to cooperate should be given careful consideration. At our institution, hemiarthroplasty is the method of choice for ischemic humeral heads and/or when anatomic reconstruction cannot be obtained. In all other displaced fractures, the main objective is preservation of the head since the best functional results can generally be obtained with internal fixation. Selection of a balanced osteosynthesis, adapted to the weak bone, is mandatory. Bulky, stiff implants are inadequate and may cause additional damage. Load sharing, not load bearing, compound constructions are the aim. Obtaining metaphyseal elastic buttressing is the key element in achieving the necessary load-sharing fixation. The system should allow controlled impaction and be forgiving towards occasional load peaks that will occur and are beyond patient control. Thin and flexible implants are required to realize this type of fixation. Given the polypragmatic approach that is current in clinical practice there is room for further improvement of techniques and implants.
The most common cause of an arthritically damaged distal radioulnar joint is a malunion of a distal radius fracture. Therapeutically, ulnar head resection, hemiresection-interposition-technique, Kapandji-Sauvé procedure and implantation of an ulnar head prosthesis have been described. None of these procedures is able to restore the complete function of the joint. Therefore, anatomical reconstruction of the joint in acute or secondary correction osteotomy for malunited fractures of the distal radius should be performed to avoid the development of the arthrosis. Numerous clinical studies have demonstrated a similar reduction of the clinical symptoms for all procedures. Therefore, classification of the different procedures has to consider the number of complications. Biomechanically, partial resection of the distal ulna will destabilize the distal radioulnar context and clinically may lead to painful radioulnar and/or dorsopalmar instability of the distal ulnar stump. Biomechanically and clinically, this complication, next to secondary extensor tendon ruptures, has to be expected far more often following complete resection of the ulnar head than in the alternative procedures. We do not see any remaining indication for complete resection of the ulnar head. Clinical results and the occurrence of painful instability of the distal ulnar stump have been reported almost identically for the hemiresection-interposition technique and the Kapandji Sauvé procedure. Therefore, both procedures appear to be equally suitable for the treatment of painful arthrosis of the distal radioulnar joint. In patients with a preexisting instability of the distal radioulnar joint, or a major deformity of the radius or the ulna, we prefer to perform the hemiresection-interposition-technique. In these conditions we consider the remaining contact of the triangular fibrocartilage complex with the distal end of the ulna a biomechanical advantage to reduce the risk of secondary instability. Biomechanically as well as clinically, replacement of the ulnar head using a prosthesis has been shown to either avoid or solve the problem of instability. We therefore consider ulnar head replacement the treatment of choice in secondary painful instability following resection procedures at the distal end of the ulna. Primary ulnar head replacement should be considered in special indications until long-term follow-up results are available.