(1) Background: Neglected hip dislocation is an uncommon condition, especially in developed countries because dislocations are considered trauma emergencies and thus are treated early. They are usually treated with methods used in commonly occurring dislocations. The aim of this study is to detail a two-stage strategy for neglected hip dislocations in adults applied in a complicated case. (2) Case presentation: We present a complicated case of neglected hip dislocation in a patient with an associated neurological condition. Two-stage open reduction was performed combined with arthrodiastasis and Ilizarov external fixators. After complications requiring a third intervention, the joint was stabilized, and the patient has presented no more episodes to date. (3) Conclusions: Arthrodiastasis has been used to treat these conditions. Comparing it with the other methods described in the literature, it seems to be a good therapeutic strategy, especially in elderly patients. Because of the limited number of studies, we cannot establish the most efficient therapeutic method, but we believe that the described strategy can be useful for patients with this condition.

UNASSIGNED: Knee joint distraction (KJD) is a potential technique for cartilage regeneration in young patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Static distraction has been utilised typically; however, a significant proportion of patients complain of knee stiffness post-distractor removal. The use of a hinged distractor may reduce the duration and severity of post-treatment knee stiffness by maintaining the range of motion during distraction. Furthermore, improved cartilage regeneration has been demonstrated in hinged ankle joint distraction as compared to static, and this may also be demonstrated at the knee. An evidence review was undertaken to inform further research and a potential change in practice.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review of all primary research on hinged knee joint distraction for cartilage regeneration.
UNASSIGNED: An online systematic search of citation databases was conducted. Quality assessment and data extraction were undertaken by two separate researchers.
UNASSIGNED: The literature search returned a small number of relevant studies, of which 7 were included. Three of these were animal studies, two cadaveric and two case series. The study quality was low or very low. There was significant methodological heterogeneity with difficulties encountered in the transfer of constructs from animal and cadaveric studies to humans. Issues faced included difficulties with hinge placement and pin site pain in motion.
UNASSIGNED: The feasibility of hinged knee joint distraction has yet to be proven. Any further research attempting to establish the benefits of hinged-over static knee distraction will have to take construct design considerations into account.
UNASSIGNED: Lineham B, van Duren B, Harwood P, et al. The Feasibility of Hinged Knee Arthrodiastasis for Cartilage Regeneration: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2023;18(1):37-43.

The burden of knee osteoarthritis (OA) is increasing worldwide. Advanced tibiofemoral joint OA in young patients is particularly a problem with inferior results seen with total knee arthroplasty in this patient population. Knee joint distraction (KJD) has been evaluated recently as a joint preserving procedure for young patients with advanced tibiofemoral osteoarthritis, to delay the need for a primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This will decrease the risk for revision TKA later in life. KJD temporarily unloads the knee joint and keeps the tibia and femur separated over a course of 6 weeks. Outcomes of KJD appear promising. Through this article, the authors hope to share from their collective experience as well as the available literature on the basic science, principles of surgery and outcomes of KJD.

UNASSIGNED: This study was designed to test and compare the mechanical performance of the biplanar ArthroSave KneeReviver and a circular frame construct with the intended use of providing a mechanically favourable environment for cartilage regeneration across a knee joint.
UNASSIGNED: Three similar constructs of the two devices were applied to biomechanical testing sawbones, with the knee distracted by 8 mm. The constructs were vertically loaded to 800 N in an Instron testing machine at 20 mm/minute. Tests were conducted in neutral hip flexion and at 12° of hip flexion and extension, to mimic leg position in gait. Displacement measurements were taken from the Instron machine, and three-dimensional joint motion was recorded using an Optotrak Certus motion capture system.
UNASSIGNED: Overall axial rigidity was similar between the two devices (circular frame, 81.6 N/mm ± 5.9; and KneeReviver, 79.5 N/mm ± 25.1 with hip neutral) and similar in different hip positions. At the point of joint contact, the overall rigidity of the circular frame increased significantly more than the KneeReviver (491 N/mm ± 27 and 93 N/mm ± 32, respectively, p <0.001). There was more variability between models in the KneeReviver. There was more off-axis motion in the KneeReviver, mainly due to increasing knee flexion on loading. This was exacerbated with the hip in flexion and extension but remained small, with the maximal off-axis displacement being 7 mm/3°.
UNASSIGNED: The circular frame provides a similar mechanical environment to the novel KneeReviver device, for which most clinical data are available. These findings suggest that both devices appear a viable option for knee joint distraction (KJD). Further clinical data will help inform mode of application.
UNASSIGNED: KJD is a relatively novel technique for use in osteoarthritis (OA), and it remains unclear which distraction devices provide appropriate mechanics. Our testing gives evidence to support either option for further use.
UNASSIGNED: Chowdhury JMY, Lineham B, Pallett M, et al. Comparison of Mechanical Performance between Circular Frames and Biplanar Distraction Devices for Knee Joint Distraction. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2021;16(2):71-77.

UNASSIGNED: The treatment algorithm for end-stage ankle arthritis is imperfect. Young or active patients are challenging to treat as fusion and replacement carry predictable consequences. Ankle distraction arthroplasty is a less commonly utilized surgical procedure for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the ankle. The purpose of this study was to report intermediate-term survival of ankle distraction and to identify factors associated with earlier time to failure.
UNASSIGNED: A single-centre, multi-surgeon cohort of 258 cases of ankle arthritis, treated with ankle distraction or ankle distraction with supramalleolar osteotomy (SMO), was identified. Patients were contacted by phone to determine the status of the ankle (natural vs fused/replaced). Data were collected through chart review. This included patient demographics, medical comorbidities, surgical procedure, and X-ray characteristics including pattern and severity. A Cox regression model was used to determine factors associated with failure during 10 years of follow-up. Risk factors were analysed as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Time to failure was illustrated with Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 144 cases were successfully contacted with median follow-up of 4.57 years. In total, 16.7% of ankles failed (24/144). The 5-year survival was 84% (95% CI: 78-91%). In adjusted Cox regression, female sex (HR = 2.68, p = 0.049) and avascular necrosis (AVN) of the talus (HR = 3.77, p = 0.041) were significantly associated with failure risk.
UNASSIGNED: Avascular necrosis of the talus and male/female gender differences in survival were found to be significant. Our experience shows that ankle distraction is a valid and effective operation for the treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis.
UNASSIGNED: This work is clinically significant in that it demonstrates excellent intermediate-term survival data for hinged ankle distraction for treatment of osteoarthritis of the ankle. Additionally, it evaluated patient and disease characteristics allowing improved patient counselling with regard to survival longevity.
UNASSIGNED: IV cohort study.
UNASSIGNED: Greenfield S, Matta KM, McCoy TH, et al. Ankle Distraction Arthroplasty for Ankle Osteoarthritis: A Survival Analysis. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2019;14(2):65-71.

Bone defects after septic arthritis of the ankle joint result in arthrodesis and severe loss of ankle motion. This must be prevented in young athletes. We report the case of a 17-year-old male patient with large osteochondral defects in the distal tibia plafond after septic arthritis, in whom iliac bone graft and arthrodiastasis were performed to preserve ankle motion. He was diagnosed with septic arthritis of the ankle joint postoperatively at the age of 16 years. After irrigation and hardware removal, C-reactive protein level was normal. However, he experienced continuous pain and could not walk; he was referred to our hospital. Computed tomography showed large osteochondral defects in the medial tibia plafond occupying ∼30% of the plafond articular surface. Simultaneous iliac bone block graft and arthrodiastasis with an external fixator were performed. We placed iliac bone graft into the defect in the medial tibia plafond using the anterior approach, and we placed an external fixator with hinge and tractioned and fixed the ankle joint. One week postoperatively, range of motion training of the ankle was started. We removed the foot ring at 3 months and the external fixator at 4 months postoperatively. The patient started jogging at 8 months and performing long jump at 1 year postoperatively. The Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot ankle/hindfoot scale improved from 56 to 97 points at 2-year follow-up. Despite large osteochondral defects with septic arthritis, arthrodiastasis and iliac bone graft were beneficial for preserving the ankle joint and its function.

UNASSIGNED: Despite medical advances, life-changing articular damage may still occur in patients with JIA. We report a cohort with destructive arthropathy of the ankle treated by surgical arthrodiastasis.
UNASSIGNED: Eight patients (nine ankles) received arthrodiastasis by means of an Ilizarov frame between 2009 and 2013. Patient- and clinician-reported outcome measures were collated prospectively, with retrospective analysis of demographics, disease and pre-surgical treatment.
UNASSIGNED: Pre-surgery, all patients received IA CS (mean 0.8 injections/year) and MTX (mean diagnosis to treatment 3.8 years; two of eight started within 3 months). Seven of eight patients received biologic drugs. Pain scores improved by 56 and 29% (P < 0.005) at 6 and 12 months post-frame removal. American Academy Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ankle-hindfoot scale, Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire-Child and Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire-Parent scores improved by 171, 62 and 80%, respectively (P < 0.005) at 12 months post-frame removal. Patients remained satisfied with surgical treatment for a mean of 13.3 months. There was transient pin site infection in three patients, and all patients had radiological improvement in joint space.
UNASSIGNED: Arthrodiastasis with an Ilizarov frame is a safe, well-tolerated technique that should be considered as a short-term joint-preserving procedure to improve pain and function when damage has occurred. Delays to systemic medical treatment in this cohort would be considered out-with standard modern practice but, although less prevalent, destructive ankle arthropathy continues to occur in JIA, and we believe this study to be relevant. The ankle is particularly susceptible to damage and, even if localized, should be treated early and aggressively with DMARDs and rapid progression to biologic therapies.
UNASSIGNED: Level IV.

Ankle arthrodiastasis offers an option for patients with end-stage primary or posttraumatic ankle osteoarthritis. The process allows for a joint salvage procedure as an alternative to arthrodesis or ankle implant arthroplasty. The distraction within the joint optimizes the intraarticular environment to permit equilibration of hydrostatic pressure, promoting subchondral morphoangiogenesis, and decreases subchondral sclerosis, thereby mitigating pain. This article highlights new advances and useful adjunctive procedures in this interesting approach to the management of ankle pain secondary to loss of functional joint surface.

Hallux rigidus is a degenerative disease of the first metatarsalphalangeal (MTP) joint and affects 2.5% of people over age 50. Dorsal osteophytes and narrowed joint space leads to debilitating pain and limited range of motion. Altered gait mechanics often ensued as 119% of the body force transmit through the 1st MTP joint during gait cycle. Precise etiology remains under debate with trauma being often cited in the literature. Hallux valgus interphalangeus, female gender, inflammatory and metabolic conditions have all been identified as associative factors. Clinical symptoms, physical exam and radiographic evidence are important in assessing and grading the disease. Non-operative managements including nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, intra-articular injections, shoe modification, activity modification and physical therapy, should always be attempted for all hallux rigidus patients. The goal of surgery is to relieve pain, maintain stability of the first MTP joint, and improve function and quality of life. Operative treatments can be divided into joint-sparing vs joint-sacrificing. Cheilectomy and moberg osteotomy are examples of joint-sparing techniques that have demonstrated great success in early stages of hallux rigidus. Arthrodesis is a joint-sacrificing procedure that has been the gold standard for advanced hallux rigidus. Other newer procedures such as implant arthroplasty, interpositional arthroplasty and arthroscopy, have demonstrated promising early patient outcomes. However, future studies are still needed to validate its long-term efficacy and safety. The choice of procedure should be based on the condition of the joint, patient\'s goal and expectations, and surgeon\'s experience with the technique.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy of arthrodiastasis for Legg-Calve-Perthes disease.
METHODS: Arthrodiastasis was conducted using external fixator devices (Orthofix) in 7 patients at least 8 years of age with a diagnosis of Legg-Calve-Perthes disease. The average follow-up was 80 months (range, 32 to 149 months), and their average age was 9.1 years (range, 8 to 12 years). The results of treatment were evaluated by measuring the degree of hip pain and the range of motion of the hip at 6 months after the operation and comparing the values with preoperative measurements. Radiological recovery was evaluated by the epiphyseal index and compared with the preoperative values. At the final follow-up, clinical and radiological results were evaluated using the Iowa hip score and the Stulberg classification.
RESULTS: On the clinical evaluation performed at 6 months after arthrodiastasis, the degree of pain decreased by 1.8 points on average, and the average flexion, internal rotation, and abduction increased by 35°, 16°, and 11°, respectively. Based on radiological findings, the epiphyseal index showed a remarkable increase of 6.6 on average (from 19 preoperatively to 26 postoperatively). At the final follow-up, the average Iowa hip score improved from 65 points preoperatively to 84 points. There were 1 Stulberg class I hip, 2 Stulberg class II hips, 3 Stulberg class III hips, 1 Stulberg class IV hip, and no Stulberg class V hip.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that arthrodiastasis using an external fixator can be a relatively promising surgical procedure for the treatment of late-onset Legg-Calve-Perthes disease.