The Experts below are selected from a list of 693 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Johannes Holinka - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
treatment of septic arthritis of the knee a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2016Co-Authors: Christoph Bohler, M Dragana, S Puchner, Reinhard Windhager, Johannes HolinkaAbstract:Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic Monarthritis of the knee.
-
treatment of septic arthritis of the knee a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-british Volume, 2015Co-Authors: Christoph Bohler, M Dragana, S Puchner, Reinhard Windhager, Johannes HolinkaAbstract:Septic arthritis is a therapeutic emergency with a high mortality rate (about 11%)(1). Inadequate treatment can cause permanent joint damage. Management of the septic arthritis includes prompt antibiotic treatment as well as joint-decompression and removal of purulent material(2). It is still discussed controversially and there is little evidence which surgical concept is preferable: arthroscopy with lavage and debridement or open arthrotomy with synovectomy(3,4). The aim of the study was to compare efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic gonarthritis. We evaluated 70 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopy or arthrotomy at our clinic, because of a bacterial Monarthritis of the knee between 2002 and 2010. Our primary outcome was the early recurrence of infection (> 3 months after surgery), which made a second surgery necessary. We compared patients who suffered reinfection and those who did not, in regard to the surgery type as well as potential confounders like comorbidity (measured by Charlson comorbidity index), age, body mass index (BMI), Gachter9s -, Kellgren and Lawrence - and Outerbridge classification, duration of symptoms and inflammatory parameters. Furthermore we evaluated differences of the confounders between the surgery groups. From the 70 patients 41 were treated arthroscopic and 29 with arthrotomy. In total eight patients (11.4%) had to undergo a second surgery because of early reinfection. The rate was significantly higher in patients treated with arthrotomy (n=6; 20.7%) compared to those treated with arthroscopy (n=2; 4.9%) (p=0.041). Whereas we found no significant influence of potential confounders between the reinfection group and the group where primary eradication was achieved. Patients who underwent arthrotomy were significantly older, had more comorbidities (both p Patients with bacterial Monarthritis of the knee who were treated with arthroscopy had a significantly lower reinfection rate than those treated with arthrotomy. As arthroscopy is the less invasive and more sufficient method it should be considered the routine treatment according to our data.
R Gaulke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
sauve kapandji procedure in destructive Monarthritis of the distal radioulnar joint
Zeitschrift Fur Rheumatologie, 2003Co-Authors: R GaulkeAbstract:INTRODUCTION Detructive Monarthritis of the distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) is rare. PATIENTS AND METHODS Three patients with destructive Monarthritis of the DRUJ were treated by arthrodesis in the technique described by L. Sauve and M. Kapandji, modified by I. A. Kapandji. Prospective evaluation with a mean follow-up of 12 months was performed. RESULTS After cast immobilization for 3 weeks and mobilization, bone healing was uneventful. All patients were completely free of pain. Even a painless "snap" at the end of the ulna was mentioned in all, if rotating the forearm with powerful grasp. Rotation of the forearm improved completely. Wrist motion also improved after arthrodesis of DRUJ but did not reach the range of motion of the unaffected hand. Irritation of the ramus dorsalis nervi ulnaris was found in one patient 9.5 months after arthrodesis and disappeared after removal of the screws. CONCLUSION Arthrodesis of the DRUJ with distal segmental resection of the ulna seams to be an effective therapy for destructive Monarthritis of the DRUJ after failed non-operative and joint-preserving operative treatment.
-
die arthrodese des distalen radioulnargelenkes mit ellensegmentresektion bei destruierender distaler radioulnarer Monarthritis
Zeitschrift Fur Rheumatologie, 2003Co-Authors: R GaulkeAbstract:Introduction Detructive Monarthritis of the distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) is rare. Patients and methods Three patients with destructive Monarthritis of the DRUJ were treated by arthrodesis in the technique described by L. Sauve and M. Kapandji, modified by I. A. Kapandji. Prospective evaluation with a mean follow-up of 12 months was performed. Results After cast immobilization for 3 weeks and mobilization, bone healing was uneventful. All patients were completely free of pain. Even a painless snap at the end of the ulna was mentioned in all, if rotating the forearm with powerful grasp. Rotation of the forearm improved completely. Wrist motion also improved after arthrodesis of DRUJ but did not reach the range of motion of the unaffected hand. Irritation of the ramus dorsalis nervi ulnaris was found in one patient 9.5 months after arthrodesis and disappeared after removal of the screws. Conclusion Arthrodesis of the DRUJ with distal segmental resection of the ulna seams to be an effective therapy for destructive Monarthritis of the DRUJ after failed non-operative and joint-preserving operative treatment.
-
Die Arthrodese des distalen Radioulnargelenkes mit Ellensegmentresektion bei destruierender distaler radioulnärer Monarthritis
Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie, 2003Co-Authors: R GaulkeAbstract:Einleitung: Die isolierte destruierende Arthritis des distalen Radioulnargelenkes (DRUG) stellt ein seltenes Krankheitsbild dar. Methode: Drei Patienten mit isolierter destruierender Arthritis des DRUG wurden mit einer Arthrodese des DRUG und distaler Ellensegmentresektion behandelt und prospektiv untersucht. Ergebnisse: Alle Patienten waren komplett schmerzfrei. Ein schmerzfreies Schnappen über dem Ulnastumpf bestand bei allen Patienten wenn diese unter kräftigem Faustschluss den Unterarm drehten. Die Unterarmdrehfähigkeit konnte in allen Fällen voll wieder hergestellt werden. Die Handgelenkbeweglichkeit war im Vergleich zur Gegenseite eingeschränkt, gegenüber dem präoperativen Befund jedoch in allen Fällen verbessert. Die Knochenheilung erfolgte im allen Fällen ohne Implantatlockerung. Bei einem Patienten bestand nach 9,5 Monaten eine inkonstante Irritation des Ramus dorsalis nervi ulnaris, welche nach Entfernung der Schrauben nicht mehr auftrat. Schlussfolgerung: Bei der seltenen Monarthritis des DRUGes mit intaktem Discus triangularis stellt die Arthrodese des DRUG mit distaler Ellensegmentresektion beim Scheitern konservativer und gelenkerhaltender operativer Maßnahmen oder bestehenden knöchernen Destruktionen mit Einschränkung der Unterarmdrehfähigkeit ein gutes Verfahren zur Verbesserung der Gebrauchsfähigkeit der Hand dar. Introduction: Detructive Monarthritis of the distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) is rare. Patients and methods: Three patients with destructive Monarthritis of the DRUJ were treated by arthrodesis in the technique described by L. Sauvé and M. Kapandji, modified by I. A. Kapandji. Prospective evaluation with a mean follow-up of 12 months was performed. Results: After cast immobilization for 3 weeks and mobilization, bone healing was uneventful. All patients were completely free of pain. Even a painless “snap” at the end of the ulna was mentioned in all, if rotating the forearm with powerful grasp. Rotation of the forearm improved completely. Wrist motion also improved after arthrodesis of DRUJ but did not reach the range of motion of the unaffected hand. Irritation of the ramus dorsalis nervi ulnaris was found in one patient 9.5 months after arthrodesis and disappeared after removal of the screws. Conclusion: Arthrodesis of the DRUJ with distal segmental resection of the ulna seams to be an effective therapy for destructive Monarthritis of the DRUJ after failed non-operative and joint-preserving operative treatment.
-
Die Arthrodese des distalenRadioulnargelenkes mit Ellensegmentresektion bei destruierenderdistaler radioulnärer Monarthritis
Zeitschrift f�r Rheumatologie, 2003Co-Authors: R GaulkeAbstract:Die isolierte destruierende Arthritis des distalen Radioulnargelenkes (DRUG) stellt ein seltenes Krankheitsbild dar. Drei Patienten mit isolierter destruierender Arthritis des DRUG wurden mit einer Arthrodese des DRUG und distaler Ellensegmentresektion behandelt und prospektiv untersucht. Alle Patienten waren komplett schmerzfrei. Ein schmerzfreies Schnappen uber dem Ulnastumpf bestand bei allen Patienten wenn diese unter kraftigem Faustschluss den Unterarm drehten. Die Unterarmdrehfahigkeit konnte in allen Fallen voll wieder hergestellt werden. Die Handgelenkbeweglichkeit war im Vergleich zur Gegenseite eingeschrankt, gegenuber dem praoperativen Befund jedoch in allen Fallen verbessert. Die Knochenheilung erfolgte im allen Fallen ohne Implantatlockerung. Bei einem Patienten bestand nach 9,5 Monaten eine inkonstante Irritation des Ramus dorsalis nervi ulnaris, welche nach Entfernung der Schrauben nicht mehr auftrat. Bei der seltenen Monarthritis des DRUGes mit intaktem Discus triangularis stellt die Arthrodese des DRUG mit distaler Ellensegmentresektion beim Scheitern konservativer und gelenkerhaltender operativer Masnahmen oder bestehenden knochernen Destruktionen mit Einschrankung der Unterarmdrehfahigkeit ein gutes Verfahren zur Verbesserung der Gebrauchsfahigkeit der Hand dar.
Christoph Bohler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
treatment of septic arthritis of the knee a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2016Co-Authors: Christoph Bohler, M Dragana, S Puchner, Reinhard Windhager, Johannes HolinkaAbstract:Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic Monarthritis of the knee.
-
treatment of septic arthritis of the knee a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-british Volume, 2015Co-Authors: Christoph Bohler, M Dragana, S Puchner, Reinhard Windhager, Johannes HolinkaAbstract:Septic arthritis is a therapeutic emergency with a high mortality rate (about 11%)(1). Inadequate treatment can cause permanent joint damage. Management of the septic arthritis includes prompt antibiotic treatment as well as joint-decompression and removal of purulent material(2). It is still discussed controversially and there is little evidence which surgical concept is preferable: arthroscopy with lavage and debridement or open arthrotomy with synovectomy(3,4). The aim of the study was to compare efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic gonarthritis. We evaluated 70 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopy or arthrotomy at our clinic, because of a bacterial Monarthritis of the knee between 2002 and 2010. Our primary outcome was the early recurrence of infection (> 3 months after surgery), which made a second surgery necessary. We compared patients who suffered reinfection and those who did not, in regard to the surgery type as well as potential confounders like comorbidity (measured by Charlson comorbidity index), age, body mass index (BMI), Gachter9s -, Kellgren and Lawrence - and Outerbridge classification, duration of symptoms and inflammatory parameters. Furthermore we evaluated differences of the confounders between the surgery groups. From the 70 patients 41 were treated arthroscopic and 29 with arthrotomy. In total eight patients (11.4%) had to undergo a second surgery because of early reinfection. The rate was significantly higher in patients treated with arthrotomy (n=6; 20.7%) compared to those treated with arthroscopy (n=2; 4.9%) (p=0.041). Whereas we found no significant influence of potential confounders between the reinfection group and the group where primary eradication was achieved. Patients who underwent arthrotomy were significantly older, had more comorbidities (both p Patients with bacterial Monarthritis of the knee who were treated with arthroscopy had a significantly lower reinfection rate than those treated with arthrotomy. As arthroscopy is the less invasive and more sufficient method it should be considered the routine treatment according to our data.
Qiaofeng Wang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Clinical effects of Anerdian type III solution on the treatment of acute gouty Monarthritis
The Journal of practical nursing, 2018Co-Authors: Wen Yang, Li Rong, Yuqing Liu, Qiaofeng WangAbstract:Objective To investigate the effect of Anerdian type III solution on the treatment of acute gouty monoarthritis. Methods Total 108 cases of acute gouty monoarthritis were divided into two groups according to the method of random number table, including 56 cases in the Anerdian group and 53 cases in the Votalin group, respectively. The Anerdian group was applied Anerdian type III solution to compress the swelling joint wet for 30 minutes, while the Votalin group was given Votalin Emulgel for external application in the swollen joint. Then the scores of pain and redness were calculated, and the effects of local treatment were compared directly before and after the treatment, and these variables were also compared after 7 days. Results 24 hours and 72 hours after the treatment, the pain score in the Anerdian group was 3.44±0.89 and 2.43±0.73 (t=2.375, 3.393, P
-
clinical effects of anerdian type iii solution on the treatment of acute gouty Monarthritis
The Journal of practical nursing, 2018Co-Authors: Wen Yang, Li Rong, Yuqing Liu, Qiaofeng WangAbstract:Objective To investigate the effect of Anerdian type III solution on the treatment of acute gouty monoarthritis. Methods Total 108 cases of acute gouty monoarthritis were divided into two groups according to the method of random number table, including 56 cases in the Anerdian group and 53 cases in the Votalin group, respectively. The Anerdian group was applied Anerdian type III solution to compress the swelling joint wet for 30 minutes, while the Votalin group was given Votalin Emulgel for external application in the swollen joint. Then the scores of pain and redness were calculated, and the effects of local treatment were compared directly before and after the treatment, and these variables were also compared after 7 days. Results 24 hours and 72 hours after the treatment, the pain score in the Anerdian group was 3.44±0.89 and 2.43±0.73 (t=2.375, 3.393, P<0.01), while the pain score in the Votalin group was 3.85±0.74 and 3.14±0.68 (t=2.208, 3.120, P<0.01), respectively, which referred to improvement in both groups.And the score of redness in the Anerdian group was 1.57 ± 0.70 and 1.13 ± 0.35 (t=0.589, 0.964, P<0.01), while the score of redness in the Votalin group was 1.95 ± 0.73 and 1.61 ±0.49 (t=0.151, 0.623, P=0.091, P<0.01) respectively. 24 hours and 72 hours after the treatment, the score of redness in the Anerdian group was smaller than that in the Votalin Group (t=3.379, 4.290, P<0.01). In Anerdian group, local treatment showed fully cured in 28 cases, marked effective in 15 cases, effective in 11 cases, not effective in 2 case, and total effective rate was 96.4% (54/56) after 7 days′ treatment, while in Votalin group, local treatment revealed fully cured in 24 cases, marked effective in 11 cases, effective in 8 cases, not effective in 9 case, and total effective rate was 83.0% (44/53). There was statistically significant difference between the two groups in local treatment (χ2=4.019, P<0.05). Conclusion Anerdian type III solution can alleviate the symptoms of acute gouty unilateral arthritis quickly. It hasbetter curative effect on local treatment of acute gouty monoarthritis than Votalin. Key words: Anerdian type Ⅲ solution; Acute gout unilateral arthritis; External application
Reinhard Windhager - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
treatment of septic arthritis of the knee a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2016Co-Authors: Christoph Bohler, M Dragana, S Puchner, Reinhard Windhager, Johannes HolinkaAbstract:Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic Monarthritis of the knee.
-
treatment of septic arthritis of the knee a comparison between arthroscopy and arthrotomy
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-british Volume, 2015Co-Authors: Christoph Bohler, M Dragana, S Puchner, Reinhard Windhager, Johannes HolinkaAbstract:Septic arthritis is a therapeutic emergency with a high mortality rate (about 11%)(1). Inadequate treatment can cause permanent joint damage. Management of the septic arthritis includes prompt antibiotic treatment as well as joint-decompression and removal of purulent material(2). It is still discussed controversially and there is little evidence which surgical concept is preferable: arthroscopy with lavage and debridement or open arthrotomy with synovectomy(3,4). The aim of the study was to compare efficacy of arthroscopy and arthrotomy in patients with septic gonarthritis. We evaluated 70 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopy or arthrotomy at our clinic, because of a bacterial Monarthritis of the knee between 2002 and 2010. Our primary outcome was the early recurrence of infection (> 3 months after surgery), which made a second surgery necessary. We compared patients who suffered reinfection and those who did not, in regard to the surgery type as well as potential confounders like comorbidity (measured by Charlson comorbidity index), age, body mass index (BMI), Gachter9s -, Kellgren and Lawrence - and Outerbridge classification, duration of symptoms and inflammatory parameters. Furthermore we evaluated differences of the confounders between the surgery groups. From the 70 patients 41 were treated arthroscopic and 29 with arthrotomy. In total eight patients (11.4%) had to undergo a second surgery because of early reinfection. The rate was significantly higher in patients treated with arthrotomy (n=6; 20.7%) compared to those treated with arthroscopy (n=2; 4.9%) (p=0.041). Whereas we found no significant influence of potential confounders between the reinfection group and the group where primary eradication was achieved. Patients who underwent arthrotomy were significantly older, had more comorbidities (both p Patients with bacterial Monarthritis of the knee who were treated with arthroscopy had a significantly lower reinfection rate than those treated with arthrotomy. As arthroscopy is the less invasive and more sufficient method it should be considered the routine treatment according to our data.