@article{BoelchStreckPlumhoffetal.2020, author = {Boelch, Sebastian Philipp and Streck, Laura Elisa and Plumhoff, Piet and Konrads, Christian and Gohlke, Frank and Rueckl, Kilian}, title = {Infection control and outcome of staged reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the management of shoulder infections}, series = {JSES International}, volume = {4}, journal = {JSES International}, doi = {10.1016/j.jseint.2020.08.012}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-230620}, pages = {959-963}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Background The treatment of septic arthritis, caused by either hematogenous seeding, injections, or surgery, can be challenging. Staged reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with temporary implantation of an antibiotic-loaded spacer is widely accepted but still discussed controversially. This study investigated the shoulder-specific bacterial spectrum, infection control rate, functional outcome, and infection-free survival rate after staged RSA in the mid- to long-term follow-up. It was hypothesized that staged RSA would show a high infection-free survival rate. Methods A total of 39 patients treated with staged RSA for primary septic arthritis (n = 8), secondary infection (n = 8), or periprosthetic infection (n = 23) were retrospectively included. The infection control rate was calculated based on cultures taken intraoperatively at spacer removal and RSA implantation. Infection-free survival was defined as no revision due to infection. The minimum follow-up period for functional outcome assessment was 2 years (n = 14; mean, 76 months; range, 31-128 months). Results Cutibacterium (26\%) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (23\%) were the predominant pathogens. The infection control rate was 90\%. The cumulative infection-free survival rate was 91\% after 128 months. Follow-up examinations showed a mean Constant score of 48 (range, 7-85), a mean QuickDASH (short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire) score of 40.0 (range, 11.4-93.3), and a mean pain score of 1.6 (range, 0-7). Conclusion Staged RSA implantation was confirmed to be a reliable treatment option for primary, secondary, and periprosthetic infections of the shoulder. The infection control rate and infection-free survival rate are satisfactory. However, patients and surgeons must be aware of functional impairment even after successful treatment of infections.}, language = {en} } @article{MeyerHessenauerReicheletal.2020, author = {Meyer, Julian S. and Hessenauer, Florian M. and Reichel, Thomas and Pham, Mirko and Plumhoff, Piet and Rueckl, Kilian}, title = {Isolated mononeuropathy of the suprascapular nerve: traumatic traction injury as an important differential diagnosis to the entrapment syndrome}, series = {JSES International}, volume = {4}, journal = {JSES International}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1016/j.jseint.2020.04.008}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-229322}, pages = {499-502}, year = {2020}, abstract = {No abstract available.}, language = {en} } @article{WeissenbergerHeinzRueckletal.2020, author = {Weissenberger, Manuel and Heinz, Tizian and Rueckl, Kilian and Rudert, Maximilian and Klug, Alexander and Hoffmann, Reinhard and Schmidt-Horloh{\´e}, Kay}, title = {No functional differences in anatomic reconstruction with one vs. two suture anchors after non-simultaneous bilateral distal biceps brachii tendon rupture: a case report and review of the literature}, series = {BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders}, volume = {21}, journal = {BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders}, doi = {10.1186/s12891-020-03304-3}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-229266}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Background Surgical reattachment of the tendon is still the gold standard for ruptures of the distal biceps brachii tendon. Several fixation techniques have been described in the literature, with suture anchors being one of the most common fixation techniques. Currently, there is no data available on how many anchors are required for a safe and stable refixation. In this case report clinical data of a patient with non-simultaneous bilateral distal biceps tendon ruptures treated with a different number of suture anchors for each side (one vs. two) are demonstrated. Case presentation A 47-year-old factory worker suffered a rupture of the distal biceps tendon on both arms following two different occasions. The left side was fixed using a single suture anchor, while refixation on the right side was performed with two anchors. The patient was prospectively followed for one year. Functional outcome was assessed using the Andrews Carson Score (ACS), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score after six, twelve, 24 and 48 weeks. Furthermore, an isokinetic strength measurement for flexion strength was performed after 24 and 48 weeks. After 48 weeks the patient presented with excellent functional outcome scores and no follow-up complications. During the follow-up period, no differences in the functional scores nor in the isokinetic flexion strength measurement could be detected. Furthermore, no radiological complications (like heterotopic ossifications) could be detected in the postoperative radiographs after one year. Conclusions Anatomic reattachment of the distal biceps tendon is a successful operative treatment option for distal biceps tendon ruptures. Suture anchor fixation remains one of the most common techniques, as it allows fast surgery and provides good results with respect to range of motion (ROM) and functional scoring according to the current literature. However, the number of anchors required for a stable fixation remains unclear. As indicated by our presented case, we hypothesize, that there are no significant differences between a one-point or a two-point fixation. In the presented case report, no intraindividual differences between the usage of one versus two suture anchors were evident in the short-term follow-up.}, language = {en} }