Akin osteotomy is commonly used to correct hallux valgus interphalangeus (HVI) deformity. The preferred implant for fixation remains an area of debate, often influenced by the surgeon\'s inclinations and expertise. This review compares the outcomes of contemporary fixation methods utilized in Akin osteotomy. PubMed served as the primary electronic database for the search. The interventions encompassed the use of screw(s), staple(s), and suture(s). The participants considered were adults aged 18 and above, undergoing Akin osteotomy either as a primary procedure or as an adjunct. Excluded were osteotomies performed via percutaneous or minimally invasive methods. Seven studies involving 590 feet were analysed, showcasing an impressive 99.8% overall union rate. The incidence of overall complications stood at 8.98%, with metal prominence notably higher in the screw fixation group (10.5%). All studies exhibited postoperative improvement in radiological angles. Screw, staple, and suture fixations demonstrated excellent union rates. While screws and staples offer robust osteotomy fixation, they pose risks of metal irritation and prominence. Suture fixation delivers comparable outcomes to the other two stabilization methods at a lower cost.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of posterior malleolar fracture with plate or screw fixation is still controversial. Plate fixation is considered to have better stability but more soft tissue damage; screw fixation is less invasive and may yields lesser blood loss and surgery time. We conducted this meta-analysis to explore intraoperative and postoperative efficacy between plate and screw fixation in posterior malleolar fractured patients.
METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Random-effects model and 95% confidence intervals was used. The outcomes of interest were surgery time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS), bone healing time, full weight bearing time, off bed ambulation time, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), complication rate, and rate of use of syndesmosis screw etc. RESULTS: One randomized clinical trial and fifty-two retrospective cohort studies with a total of 3757 patients (1956 in screw group and 1801 in plate group) were included in the systematic review. Compared to screw group, plate group yielded significantly longer surgery time, more intraoperative blood loss, but shorter length of hospital stay, better AOFAS, better Baird Jackson score, better AOFAS and Baird Jackson excellent-good rate, shorter bone healing time, shorter time enabling full weight bearing, shorter time enabling off bed ambulation, lesser postoperative pain, lesser complication rate, lesser loosening rate, lesser malunion rate, and lesser postoperative osteoarthritis.
CONCLUSIONS: Plate fixation is a favorable alternative to screw fixation in posterior malleolar fractured patients. Although plate fixation was at risk of longer surgery time and more blood loss, it provided better postoperative functional outcome, shorter healing, weight bearing and off bed ambulation time and lesser pain compared to screw fixation.

UNASSIGNED: The Latarjet procedure is a common procedure for treating critical glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder instability. Implants such as the screw and cortical button are widely used. The aim of this study was to compare studies on screw versus button fixation techniques in the Bristow-Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability in terms of clinical outcomes, union rates, and complications.
UNASSIGNED: The PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases were searched to find comparative studies that reported outcomes of using screw versus button fixation in the Bristow-Latarjet procedure following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies that directly compared the screw and button fixation techniques and provided postoperative patient-reported outcomes, union rates, or complications were included. The Methodology Index for Non-Randomized Research (MINORS) criteria were used to assess the quality of the included studies. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes whereas mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Five articles included a total of 877 shoulders. All five studies had level 3 evidence. There was no statistically significant difference between the two techniques using the Walch-Duplay score, visual analog scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, range of motion, and graft union rates. However, the button fixation technique had statistically significantly higher recurrence rates than the screw fixation technique (OR, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.58; p = 0.001).
UNASSIGNED: The screw fixation technique had statistically significantly lower recurrence rates than the button fixation technique. However, there was no significant difference between screw and button fixation techniques regarding postoperative patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, graft union rates, nerve injury rates, infection rates, and reoperation rates.

Sacropelvic (SP) fixation is the immobilization of the sacroiliac joint to attain lumbosacral fusion and prevent distal spinal junctional failure. SP fixation is indicated in numerous spinal conditions (eg, scoliosis, multilevel spondylolisthesis, spinal/sacral trauma, tumors, or infections). Many SP fixation techniques have been described in the literature. Currently, the most used surgical techniques for SP fixation are direct iliac screws and sacral-2-alar-iliac screws. There is currently no consensus in the literature on which technique carries more favorable clinical outcomes. In this review, we aim to assess the available data on each technique and discuss their respective advantages and disadvantages. We will also present our experience with a modification of direct iliac screws using a subcrestal approach and outline the future prospects of SP fixation.

UNASSIGNED: Navigation technologies have improved accuracy and precision in positioning glenoid components during shoulder arthroplasty. The influence of navigation on baseplate screw placement has not been independently investigated. This study aimed to evaluate and synthesize the best scientific evidence on the influence of intraoperative navigation on the length and number of screws for primary baseplate fixation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty procedures.
UNASSIGNED: In August 2022, PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases were accessed. We analyzed the screw purchase length, the number of screws required for the fixation of the baseplate, and the proportion of cases fixed with two screws in all clinical trials, comparing navigation to standard instrumentation for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Following an evaluation of the heterogeneity of the studies, DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models were utilized to merge data from separate studies.
UNASSIGNED: The systematic search revealed a total of 2034 articles. After excluding duplicates and irrelevant studies, 633 shoulder arthroplasties from 6 trials were included in the analysis. The pooled mean difference in screw purchase length was 5.839 mm (95 %CI 4.496 to 7. 182) in favor of navigation (P < .001). In addition, significant differences were also found in the number of screws per case (- 0.547, 95 %CI -0.890 to -0.203, P = .002) and in the proportion of cases fixed with two screws (Odds Ratio 3.182 95 %CI 1.057 to 9.579, P = .040) in favor of the navigation group.
UNASSIGNED: Intraoperative navigation improves the baseplate screw placement, allowing for a greater screw purchase length and fewer screws to achieve primary fixation of the glenoid component during reverse shoulder arthroplasty. It is unclear whether these improvements will increase the longevity of the prosthesis or the clinical outcomes of the patients.

When implants are required in prosthodontics treatment, one of the most important decisions is the choice of the final crown and the type of connection to the implant through the abutment. Hybrid abutments are becoming a primary choice. They are projected and produced with materials whose properties guarantee the required mechanical features (including resistance) and take advantage of the hybrid abutment crown retention between screw and cement. However, a review of the mechanical resistance of the different abutment types and associated materials is still lacking. This review aimed to study the in vitro mechanical efficiency of the hybrid abutments used in oral rehabilitation.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, B-on, and Google Scholar databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS: 75 articles were identified from all databases, and 33 were selected after abstract screening. Thus, 21 studies were included in the review after full-text reading. Among the materials used for crowns, lithium disilicate was, aesthetically, the primary choice for its aesthetic and moderate strength. On the other hand, zirconia showed the best fracture resistance. Regarding the different kinds of abutments, there is still some lack of knowledge about the best design.
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this systematic review, we can conclude that hybrid pillars are an excellent choice for oral rehabilitation through implants, showing improved resistance when including materials such as zirconia and lithium disilicate.

Posterior pelvic ring injuries (i.e., sacro-iliac joint dislocations, fracture-dislocations, sacral fractures, pelvic non-unions/malunions) are challenging injury patterns which require a significant level of surgical training and technical expertise. The modality of surgical management depends on the specific injury patterns, including the specific bony fracture pattern, ilio-sacral joint involvement, and the soft tissue injury pattern. The workhorse for posterior pelvic ring stabilization has been cannulated iliosacral screws, however, trans-sacral screws may impart increased fixation strength. Depending on injury pattern and sacral anatomy, trans-sacral screws can potentially be more beneficial than iliosacral screws. In this article, the authors will briefly review pelvic mechanics and discuss their rationale for ilio-sacral and/or trans-sacral screw fixation.

UNASSIGNED: Lateral condyle fractures are the second most common pediatric elbow fracture. There exist multiple options for internal fixation including buried K-wires, unburied K-wires, and screw fixation. Our study aims to review the current literature and determine if fixation strategy affects outcomes to include fracture union, postoperative range of motion, and need subsequent surgery.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review of Pubmed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases was performed. Included articles involve pediatric patients with displaced lateral condyle fractures treated with internal fixation that reported outcomes to include union rates and complications.
UNASSIGNED: Thirteen studies met inclusion criteria for a total of 1299 patients (472 buried K-wires, 717 unburied K-wires, and 110 screws). The patients\' average age was 5.8 ± 0.6 years, male (64%), and had 16.3 months of follow-up. No differences in union and infection rates were found. Unburied K-wires had the shortest time to union and the greatest elbow range of motion postoperatively.
UNASSIGNED: Our systematic review demonstrates similar outcomes with union and infection rates between all fixation techniques. Unburied K-wires demonstrated a shorter time to union and the greatest postoperative range of motion. Additionally, unburied K-wires may be removed in clinic, decreasing the cost on the healthcare system.
UNASSIGNED: Level 3.

BACKGROUND: Press-fit cementless acetabular cup is widely used in total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, the use of additional screws for the acetabular cup has been extensively debated. The purpose of this review is to compare the stability, revision rate, wear rate, and clinical scores of cementless acetabular cups with and without screws in THA.
METHODS: Comprehensive literature searches of the following databases were performed: Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Web of Science, OVID, Elsevier ClinicalKey, Clinicaltrials.gov, and EMBASE. We searched for trials that compared cementless acetabular cups with screws or without screws, and were published in the English language. We evaluated the stability of the prosthesis by osteolysis and migration. The clinical scores included Harris hip scores (HHS) and pain scores.
RESULTS: Nineteen articles involving 4046 THAs met the inclusion criteria. Our analysis revealed that additional screws did not increase the stability of acetabular cups, and there was no statistical significance between the groups with and without screws in osteolysis and clinically relevant migration. Revision rates showed no significant difference between the groups with and without screws. There was no difference in wear between the two groups. Our analysis showed no difference in pain scores and HHS between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Press-fit without screws could achieve sufficient acetabular cup stability. Acetabular cups without screws showed no difference from acetabular cups with screws in many outcomes. Additional screws are not required for cementless acetabular cups.
METHODS: Level III.

BACKGROUND: Accurate spinal screw placement in spinal instrumentation is of utmost importance to avoid injury to surrounding neurovascular structures. This study was performed to investigate differences in accuracy, operating room time, length of stay, and operative blood loss across studies involving all types of spinal fixation.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus were systematically queried to identify articles that fit the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was performed using R software, and odds ratios and 95% CIs were calculated.
RESULTS: Sixty-nine articles were included in qualitative synthesis, and 35 studies in the meta-analysis, for a total of 8,174 robotically placed screws in 1,492 patients compared to 9,791 conventionally placed screws in 1,638 patients. A total of 9 screw trajectories were studied in the literature, although only 4 had enough evidence to be included in the meta-analysis. Robotic screw placement was more accurate than conventional screw placement (OR 2.24; 95% CI, 1.71-2.94). Robotic placement was not associated with significantly different postoperative length of stay (SMD -0.32; 95% CI, -1.20, 0.51), operative blood loss (SMD -0.25; 95% CI, -0.79, 0.19), or operative duration (SMD 0.08; 95% CI -1.00, 1.39). A total of 8 robotic platforms were found in the literature with accuracy rates above 93%.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic spinal fixation is associated with increased screw placement accuracy and similar operative blood loss, length of stay, and operative duration. These findings support the safety and cost-effectiveness of robotic spinal surgery across the spectrum of robotic systems and screw types.