Surgeries

Background/Objectives: Titanium fixation remains the gold standard for stabilizing mandibular fractures; however, associated complications often necessitate a second surgery for hardware removal. Consequently, biodegradable systems were introduced, though questions persist regarding their mechanical reliability and potential for tissue reactions. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and morbidity of biodegradable versus titanium osteosynthesis systems for the treatment of mandibular fractures. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL. Comparative studies, such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies, were included. The primary outcome was the rate of hardware removal; therefore, a random-effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate a pooled Odds Ratio (OR), while the risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Results: Eight studies, including four RCTs, comprising a total of 369 patients, were included, with most studies judged to be at a high or serious risk of bias due to inadequate randomization, lack of blinding, and confounding co-interventions. The meta-analysis of four RCTs on hardware removal revealed no statistically significant difference between the biodegradable and titanium groups (pooled OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.90), with substantial and statistically significant heterogeneity observed (I² = 66.1%). Qualitative synthesis indicated that biodegradable systems were associated with higher rates of intraoperative screw breakage and longer operative times, while rates of successful bone union were comparable between the two groups. Conclusions: Biodegradable osteosynthesis systems represent a viable alternative to titanium for mandibular fracture fixation, demonstrating similar efficacy in achieving bone union, which is counterbalanced by higher rates of screw breakage and longer operative times. The decision to use a biodegradable system involves a critical trade-off that should be designed for the specific clinical scenario. The high risk of bias and significant heterogeneity limit the certainty of these findings, underscoring the imperative for future high-quality, long-term RCTs.

Background/Objectives: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is an accessible and low-cost diagnostic tool that is seldom used by orthopedic residents. This study aims to assess the efficacy of a POCUS training program within an orthopedic surgery residency curriculum in terms of knowledge retention and clinical usage among the group of residents. Methods: This study included didactic and hands-on teaching sessions. The impact of the teaching sessions was evaluated through surveys (pre-course, immediate post-course, and 6 months post-course). The surveys were divided into three sections: participant’s interest in and usage of POCUS, ultrasound-related knowledge, and perceived limitations related to the usage of ultrasound. All orthopedic residents who attended the teaching sessions and completed all the surveys were included. Results: There were 14 participants. There was a significant increase in interest in POCUS (scale 1 to 5) from 3.36 ± 0.50 in the pre-course survey to 3.93 ± 0.83 in the final post-course survey (p = 0.04). However, there was no significant change in the amount of POCUS usage in clinical settings. Levels of comfort with ultrasound-related procedures significantly increased immediately following the teaching session but did not stay significantly higher after 6 months. When tested on knowledge, the residents’ scores were still significantly greater than they were at the time of the pre-course test at 6 months (p = 0.01). Lack of ultrasound-related knowledge, lack of time, and site culture were the two most prevalent perceived barriers. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that POCUS teaching for orthopedic residents yields long-term benefits in terms of interest and knowledge. However, recurrent teaching sessions and further efforts are required to address perceived obstacles to PoCUS usage and increase clinical implementation.

Background/Objectives: Prepectoral direct-to-implant reconstruction is widely used, but implant rippling often necessitates lipofilling. This study aimed to identify preoperative and perioperative factors associated with delayed lipofilling. Methods: A retrospective cohort of consecutive patients who underwent immediate prepectoral implant reconstruction (April 2023–September 2024) was analyzed. Demographic data, BMI, smoking, comorbidities, oncologic treatments, surgical factors, and tumor location were recorded. Patients were divided according to whether delayed lipofilling was required. Univariate analysis was performed using Mann–Whitney U and Fisher’s exact tests. Results: Fifty-eight patients were included; approximately one-third required lipofilling. Patients who underwent lipofilling were younger and had lower BMI than those who did not. Tumor location was strongly associated with the outcome: upper inner quadrant tumors were consistently linked to delayed lipofilling, whereas upper outer quadrant tumors were more frequently observed in the group not requiring revision. Smoking history and planned radiotherapy showed nonsignificant trends toward higher lipofilling rates. No differences were found for diabetes or corticosteroid therapy. Conclusions: Younger age, low BMI, and tumor location, particularly in the upper inner quadrant, were key factors associated with delayed lipofilling after prepectoral reconstruction. These variables may support preoperative counseling and follow-up planning to better anticipate secondary procedures and optimize aesthetic outcomes.