|
|
|
|
Mark C. Gebhardt, MD |
|
Third Session
Moderator: Mark C. Gebhardt, MD
|
|
|
Micahel N. Fehm, MD |
Daniel Estok, MD |
|
Repair of Massive Abductor Loss After Total Hip Replacement Using Achilles Tendon Allograft
Micahel N. Fehm, MD
Discussor: Daniel Estok, MD
Advisor: Dennis, W. Burke, MD
Abductor failure after total hip arthroplasty is a rare but debilitating
problem. Dr. Fehm reviewed a new technique using fresh-frozen Achilles tendon
allograft with an attached calcaneal bone graft to reconstruct a deficien
abductor mechanism. At an average follow-up of 25 months, he found the average
post-reconstruction Harris Hip Score to be 85.9 and average pain score
to be 38.9 compared to 34.7 and 11.4, respectively, in the pre-reconstructed
hips. He concluded that in his series, the technique offers significant pain
relief and improvement in function at early follow-up.
Dr. Estok praised Dr. Fehms work explaining that even with all the advances
in THR the loss of the abductors remained an unsolved problem. He
asked whether there was any role for modalities such as EMG to help with
decision making. Dr. Fehm responded that while they didnt directly look at
this, there could be a useful role. He also suggested that modalities such as
MRI to look for abductor fatty degeneration (analogous to whats done in
rotator cuff disease) may be a useful adjunct.
|
|
|
George S.M. Dyer, MD |
Kevin Raskin, MD |
|
Improving Evaluation of Orthopaedic Surgical Teaching
George S.M. Dyer, MD
Discussor: Kevin Raskin, MD
Advisor: James Herndon, MD, MBA
Surgical teaching in the operating room is the cornerstone of orthopaedic
residency training. Dr. Dyer explained that the existing tools for evaluating surgical
teaching are inadequate and frustrating, for trainee and staff surgeon alike
and an ideal evaluation tool should meaningfully measure key teaching behaviors
relevant to instruction in surgery. His study sought to improve methods
for evaluation and feedback of orthopaedic surgical residents and to improve
the mentorship and instruction that defines academic orthopaedic surgery.
Dr. Raskin stated that Dr. Dyers work was of critical importance in todays
surgical educational climate. There are more and more external pressures
to develop tools to ensure that surgical residents are properly trained. Dr.
Raskin asked with specific reference to our own program how a better teaching
environment could be achieved. Dr. Dyer pointed out that two factors are
at play: He noted the need for longer resident rotations so that attendings
could become more familiar with residents and the need for patience on the
part of attendings.
|
|
|
Stefan R. Jibodh, MD |
Dennis Burke, MD |
|
Comparison of Modular and Non-Modular Cementless Stems in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty
Stefan R. Jibodh, MD
Discussor: Dennis Burke, MD
Advisor: Daniel Estok, MD
The gold standard for revision total hip arthroplasty is non-modular cementless
implants. Recently modular implants were introduced in an attempt
to improve on these results. Dr. Jibodh compared two groups of patients with
modular and non-modular implants at a minimum of 5 year follow-up with
clinical and radiographic outcomes. While the Harris hip scores were similar
in the two groups, there was a trend toward more early failures in the nonmodular
group and a significant increase in the amount of proximal ingrowth
in the modular group. A large percentage of the modular stems demonstrated
a pattern of dual (proximal and distal) ingrowth.
Dr. Burke asked Dr. Jibodh about the incidence of stem fractures in the
ZMR (modular) group. Dr. Jibodh noted that the documented risk of stem
fracture in the modular group is very low and can be minimized by ensuring
stem implantation with adequate proximal support. Dr. Burke agreed with Dr.
Jibodhs analysis that there was a wealth of products on the market but very
little comparative data. He then recounted his own experience with modular
stems and asked Dr. Jibodh about the problem of stem dissociation and breakage.
Dr. Jibodh agreed that this was a problem with modular stem design, but
in his analysis it didnt rise to the level of being a significant problem.
|
|
|
|