Hai Huang

Background: With the increasing number of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty(THA) in recent years, the incidence of periprosthetic acetabular fractures is increasing, which is one of the most serious complications after THA. Periprosthetic acetabular fracture caused by trauma is rare, and it requires orthopedic surgeons to deal with acetabular fracture and component loosening at the same time. This article summarizes 5 cases of periprosthetic acetabular fracture that have undergone surgical treatment, we propose the reverse press-fit technology to increase the stability of fixation for this clinical rare diseases. And the literature for treatment recommendations is reviewed.Case presentation: A total of 5 patients (3 female) were included, the average patient age at the time of injury was 66.2 years (range 54–78 years). All patients received surgical treatment, 4 cases were treated with open reduction and internal fixation(ORIF), 1 case was treated with revision surgery. There were no postoperative complications. All patients could walk independently on the latest follow-up.Conclusions: The surgical treatment option of periprosthetic acetabular fracture is ORIF or revision surgery, and the purpose is to make the component stabilized. The reverse press-fit technology could improve the fixation strength between the component and bone, and it can be performed in appropriate situation.

Background: It is difficult to judge the stability of lateral compression type-1 (LC-1) pelvic fracture, as it is often based on static images of the pelvis. Compared with the traditional experience strategy, ultrasonography examination may be able to distinguish operative and conservative patients before definitive treatment. However, in previous studies, we have not compared the outcomes between traditional experience strategy (TES group) and combined ultrasonography examination (CUE group). Thus, the aim of the study is comparing the differences between TES and CUE strategy, to identify the value of ultrasonography examination. Methods: Medical records system for patients with LC-1 pelvic fractures who were treated with TES and CUE strategy were included. Patients’ baseline characteristics, treatment strategy, and function were recorded at follow-up. Functional outcomes were evaluated using the Majeed grading system. Results: In total, 77 patients with LC-1 pelvic fractures were included in the study. There were 42 and 35 patients in TES and CUE group, respectively. Compared to TES group (69 %), there were less proportion patients chosen the operative treatment in CUE group (43 %, P = 0.021). The volume of intraoperative blood loss in CUE operative group was more than TES operative group (P = 0.037). There were more patients with complete sacral fracture in CUE operative group than TES operative group (P = 0.002). The Majeed scores in CUE conservative group was higher than TES conservative group (P = 0.008). The overall Majeed scores in CUE group was higher than that in TES group (P = 0.039). Conclusions: The ultrasonography examination could relatively accurately identify the unstable LC-1 pelvis than the traditional experience strategy, the operative rate could be reduced and the overall function of LC-1 patients could be improved under the ultrasonography examination. Level of evidence: Level III.

Lateral compression type1 (LC-1) pelvic fractures represent a wide spectrum of heterogeneous injuries. These include both stable and unstable patterns; however, determining whether a LC-1 fracture is stable or unstable is a challenge, and the method used to evaluate fracture stability is complicated. We prospectively collected and analyzed data from 22 patients with LC-1 pelvic fractures, who underwent ultrasonography and a pelvic compression and separation test, in order to evaluate the role of ultrasonography in determining fracture stability and assist decision-making for treatment strategy. Twenty-two patients (15 men and 7 women) were included in the study. Following an ultrasound examination, 10 patients were classified into the stable group and 12 into the unstable group. In total, 13 patients received conservative treatment and 9 underwent surgery. At follow-up, there were no differences in fracture healing times or fracture-related complications between the two groups. The Majeed score was comparable between the two groups and most patients recovered well. There was a moderate degree of consistency in Kappa values (Kappa = 0.571, P = 0.01) between the classification of stability and the final treatment received. In addition, the sensitivity of ultrasonography was 66.67% and the specificity was 76.92%. In conclusion, ultrasonography is a useful tool for diagnosing the stability of LC-1 pelvic fractures and assists the determination of treatment strategy. Left-right mobility ≥ 0.3 cm may be used as the criterion for determining instability. ChiCTR-DDD-16008722.

Inflammation plays a crucial role in kidney damage after crush syndrome (CS). Several researchers report that high mobility group box-1 protein (HMGB1) may be the vital trigger in kidney damage, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) are involve in this pathophysiological process, but their biological roles are unclear. This study aimed to explore the relationship between HMGB1, JNK, and TNF-α in kidney damage. The crush injury model was established using weight compression. The reliability of the crush injury model was determined by hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining. Western blot was used to detect the expression of HMGB1, JNK, and TNF-α, and TUNEL was used to mark apoptotic cells in the renal cortex. The results showed that the highest expression of HMGB1 in muscle was 12 h after CS. JNK and TNF-α increased and peaked at 1 day after CS in kidneys. Western blot analysis revealed that anti-HMGB1 antibody could downregulate the expression of JNK and TNF-α. Anti-TNF-α could downregulate activation of JNK, and SP600125 could downregulate expression of TNF-α in the kidneys. In addition, anti-HMGB1 antibody, anti-TNF-α antibody, and SP600125 could reduce cellular apoptosis in the renal cortex. It is possible that JNK and TNF-α commonly contribute to kidney damage by assembling a positive feedback cycle after CS, leading to increased apoptosis in the renal cortex. HMGB1 from the muscle may be the trigger.