Hip displacement, common in patients with cerebral palsy (CP), causes pain and hinders adequate care. Hip reconstructive surgery (HRS) is performed to treat hip displacement; however, only a few studies have quantitatively assessed femoral head sphericity after HRS. The aim of this study was to quantitatively assess improvement in hip sphericity after HRS in patients with CP. We retrospectively analyzed hip radiographs of patients who had undergone HRS because of CP-associated hip displacement. The pre- and postoperative migration percentage (MP), femoral neck-shaft angle (NSA), and sphericity, as determined by the Mose hip ratio (MHR), age at surgery, Gross Motor Function Classification System level, surgical history including Dega pelvic osteotomy, and triradiate cartilage status were studied. Regression analyses using linear mixed model were performed to identify factors affecting hip sphericity improvement.Aims
Methods
The objective of this study was to assess the association between whole body sagittal balance and risk of falls in elderly patients who have sought treatment for back pain. Balanced spinal sagittal alignment is known to be important for the prevention of falls. However, spinal sagittal imbalance can be markedly compensated by the lower extremities, and whole body sagittal balance including the lower extremities should be assessed to evaluate actual imbalances related to falls. Patients over 70 years old who visited an outpatient clinic for back pain treatment and underwent a standing whole-body radiograph were enrolled. Falls were prospectively assessed for 12 months using a monthly fall diary, and patients were divided into fallers and non-fallers according to the history of falls. Radiological parameters from whole-body radiographs and clinical data were compared between the two groups.Objectives
Methods
Although vertebroplasty is very effective for relieving acute pain from an osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture, not all patients who undergo vertebroplasty receive the same degree of benefit from the procedure. In order to identify the ideal candidate for vertebroplasty, pre-operative prognostic demographic or clinico-radiological factors need to be identified. The objective of this study was to identify the pre-operative prognostic factors related to the effect of vertebroplasty on acute pain control using a cohort of surgically and non-surgically managed patients. Patients with single-level acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture at thoracolumbar junction (T10 to L2) were followed. If the patients were not satisfied with acute pain reduction after a three-week conservative treatment, vertebroplasty was recommended. Pain assessment was carried out at the time of diagnosis, as well as three, four, six, and 12 weeks after the diagnosis. The effect of vertebroplasty, compared with conservative treatment, on back pain (visual analogue score, VAS) was analysed with the use of analysis-of-covariance models that adjusted for pre-operative VAS scores.Objectives
Patients and Methods
All patients underwent anterior cervical discectomy followed by anterior cervical plating or implantation of the Bryan artificial disc prosthesis, done by one surgeon. Clinical evaluation included the visual analogue scale (VAS), and neck disability index (NDI). Radiographic evaluation included static and dynamic flexion-extension radiographs in an upright position using the computer software (Infinitt PiviewSTAR 5051) program. Range of motion/disc space angle and inter vertebral height were measured at the operative site and adjacent levels. Functional spinal unit (FSU) and overall sagittal alignment (C2–C7) were also measured pre-operatively, postoperatively and at final follow-up. ROM was calculated for all 3 areas and data collected were compared from pre operative to last follow-up as well as between the two groups. Radiographic assessment for adjacent level changes was also done. Radiologic change was analyzed using chi square test (95% confidence interval). Other data were analyzed using the mixed model. (SAS enterprise guide 4.1 version)
