bjective To study the change of mucins of expression in lithic cholecystitis and cholecystic adenomatiod polyps. MethodsMUC1 and MUC3 were detected in the mucosa of human normal gallbladders (20 cases, control group), of calcareous cholecystitis (38 cases, calcareous group) and of adenomatoid polyps (18 cases, polyp group) with immunohistochemical stains and Western blotting methods. ResultsThe positive rate and optical density values of MUC1 were increased significantly in calcareous and polyp group vs control group (P＜0.01), otherwise, MUC3 was decreased markedly (P＜0.01). Conclusion The expressions of MUC1, MUC3 were not synchronization in different lesions of cholecyst.
Objective To evaluate the strength of polyethylene l inercement interface when cementing a new linerinto a fixed acetabular cup in revision. Methods Twenty-five pairs of metal acetabular cups with polyethylene l iners were randomly divided into 5 groups: 1 group with standard locking device as control group (group A), other l iners were cemented into acetabular cups as 4 experimental groups. According to different intersection angles of metal acetabular cups with polyethylene liners and the polyethylene l iners with or without metal ball, the 4 experimental groups were no ball 0° group (group B), 0° group (group C), 10° group (group D), and 20° group (group E), metal acetabular cups intersected with polyethylene liners without metal ball in group B, with metal ball in groups C, D, and E, respectively. The lever-out biomechanical test reproduced in vivo failure mechanism was then performed to evaluate the lever-out failure strength of l iner-cement-metalcup interface. Results The values of l iver-out failure force were (626.68 ± 206.12), (915.04 ± 197.49), (449.02 ± 119.78),(814.68 ± 53.89), and (1 033.05 ± 226.44) N in groups A, B, C, D, and E, respectively, showing significant differences forcomparison among groups (F=8.989，P=0.000). The values of l iver-out failure force in groups B and E were significantlyhigher than that in group A (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference was found between groups C, D and group A (P gt; 0.05).Conclusion Cementation of polyethylene l iner into a malposition shell meeting within 20° can provide enough fixed strength.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of cemented polyethylene liner technique in hip revision.MethodsBased on inclusion criteria, the clinical data of 26 patients who were undergone hip revision between January 2011 and December 2013, were retrospectively reviewed. Among them, 14 cases were treated with isolated liner exchange (group A) and 12 cases were treated with cemented polyethylene liner technique (group B). There was no significant difference in gender, age, the time from primary total hip arthroplasty to revision, and the preoperative Harris score between 2 groups (P>0.05). The post-operative Harris score and complications were compared between 2 groups, and X-ray findings of the hip joint were recorded to review the position of hip components.ResultsAll patients were followed up 4.4-6.4 years (mean, 5.4 years). Except for two femoral fractures during the revision (1 in each group), there was no other complication in 2 groups. The hip pain relieved and the lame gait corrected in 2 groups. The hip’s function of 2 groups improved gradually after operation, with a better Harris score at 3 months and the best at last follow-up, compared with preoperative scores (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in Harris score at difference time points after operation between 2 group (P>0.05). X-ray films showed no dislocation, aseptic loosening, and other interface related complication.ConclusionFor the cases without the chance to do change liner, cemented polyethylene liner technique has a good effectiveness. But restrict patient selection should be considered before hip revision.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of body mass index (BMI) on the short- and medium-term effectiveness of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in the treatment of anterior medial compartmental osteoarthritis of knee joint.MethodsThe clinical data of 55 patients (61 knees) with anterior medial compartmental osteoarthritis of knee joint treated with minimally invasive UKA between May 2014 and May 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. According to BMI, the patients were divided into 3 groups: normal body mass group [group A, BMI 18.50-24.99 kg/m2, 23 cases (25 knees)], overweight group [group B, BMI 25.00-29.99 kg/m2, 23 cases (25 knees)], obesity group [group C, BMI 30.00-39.99 kg/m2, 9 cases (11 knees)]. There was no significant difference in gender, age, sides, disease duration, and preoperative American Special Surgery Hospital (HSS) score, pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and knee range of motion (ROM) among 3 groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative dominant blood loss, and the postoperative decreased amount of hemoglobin at 1 week were recorded and compared among 3 groups. The HSS score, VAS score, and ROM were used to evaluate the knee function and pain improvement.ResultsThere was no significant difference in the operation time, the intraoperative dominant blood loss, and the postoperative decreased amount of hemoglobin at 1 week among 3 groups (P>0.05). All the 55 patients were followed up 5-60 months, with an average of 24 months. No complication such as infection, fat embolism, or deep venous thrombosis of lower extremity occurred after operation. The anteroposterior and lateral X-ray films of the knee joint showed that no dislocation or loosening of the prosthesis occurred and the position of the prosthesis was good. At last follow-up, the HSS score, VAS score, and ROM of the 3 groups were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones (P<0.05); but there was no significant difference among 3 groups (P>0.05).ConclusionFor obese and overweight patients with anterior medial compartmental osteoarthritis of the knee joint, the use of minimally invasive UKA can achieve satisfactory short- and medium-term effectiveness, and the long-term effectiveness needs further follow-up.
Objective To compare the early analgesic effects and the impact on knee joint function recovery after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) between single adductor canal block (SACB) and continuous adductor canal block (CACB) combined with local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) using a prospective study. Methods The patients with knee osteoarthritis admitted between April 2022 and December 2023 were enrolled as a subject. Among them, 60 patients met the selection criteria and were enrolled in the study. They were randomly assigned to the SACB group or CACB group in a ratio of 1:1 using a random number table method. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in terms of age, gender, height, body mass, body mass index, affected side, and preoperative resting visual analogue scale (VAS) score and active VAS score, Oxford knee score (OKS), and American Hospital of Special Surgery (HSS) score. All patients received multimodal analgesia management using LIA combined with SACB or CACB. The operation time, pain related indicators (resting and activity VAS scores, number and timing of breakthrough pain, opioid consumption), joint function related indicators (quadriceps muscle strength, knee range of motion, OKS score, and HSS score), as well as postoperative block complications and adverse events were recorded and compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups (P<0.05). All patients in the two groups were followed up with a follow-up time of (9.70±4.93) months in the SACB group and (12.23±5.05) months in the CACB group, and the difference was not significant (P>0.05). The CACB group had a significant lower resting VAS score at 24 hours after operation compared to the SACB group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in resting and active VAS scores between the two groups at other time points (P>0.05). The CACB group had a significantly lower incidence of breakthrough pain compared to the SACB group [9 cases (30.00%) vs. 17 cases (56.67%); P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the timing of breakthrough pain occurrence and opioid consumption between the two groups (P>0.05). Four cases in the SACB group and 7 cases in the CACB group experienced adverse events, with no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups (P>0.05). The CACB group had significantly better knee joint mobility than the SACB group at 1 and 2 days after operation (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in knee joint mobility on 0 day after operation and quadriceps muscle strength and OKS and HSS scores at different time points (P>0.05). Conclusion In UKA, the analgesic effects and knee joint function recovery are similar when compared between LIA combined with SACB and LIA combined with CACB. However, SACB is simpler to perform and can avoid adverse events such as catheter displacement and dislocation. Therefore, SACB may be a better choice.