Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (5)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = preoperative corticosteroid injection

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
10 pages, 1094 KB  
Article
Clinical Outcomes of Radial Collateral Ligament Repair in Recalcitrant Lateral Epicondylitis with Mild Elbow Instability Following Repeated Steroid Injections
by Sang Won Moon, Darryl D’Lima and Jin-Young Bang
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(18), 6474; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14186474 - 14 Sep 2025
Viewed by 347
Abstract
Background: Lateral epicondylitis is a common degenerative condition of the elbow, often managed conservatively. However, a subset of patients who had recalcitrant symptoms and repeated corticosteroid injections may develop subtle lateral elbow instability, particularly involving the radial collateral ligament (RCL). This study aimed [...] Read more.
Background: Lateral epicondylitis is a common degenerative condition of the elbow, often managed conservatively. However, a subset of patients who had recalcitrant symptoms and repeated corticosteroid injections may develop subtle lateral elbow instability, particularly involving the radial collateral ligament (RCL). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of RCL repair combined with open ECRB debridement in patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis and mild instability. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 92 patients who underwent surgery for recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis between 2016 and 2022. Twelve patients with imaging and intraoperative findings of mild lateral instability underwent open RCL repair with or without LUCL augmentation (unstable group). The remaining 80 patients without instability underwent arthroscopic ECRB release and drilling (stable group). Pre- and postoperative outcomes were assessed using VAS, MEPS, DASH, and range of motion. Comparative analyses were performed between the two groups. Results: All unstable patients had a history of repeated steroid injections (mean 3.4) for 18 months. Postoperatively, pain scores (VAS) improved from 6.8 to 1.4, MEPS increased from 53 to 91, and DASH decreased from 47.1 to 13.8. No major complications or recurrent instability were observed at one-year follow-up. Subgroup analysis revealed that older age, previous surgery, and a greater number of injections were significantly associated with instability. Conclusions: RCL repair combined with ECRB debridement yields favorable clinical outcomes in patients with recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis and mild instability, especially those who had a history of repeated corticosteroid injections. Proper evaluation and surgical repair of underlying ligament pathology may improve outcomes in this subset of patients. Favorable clinical outcomes were defined as improvements compared to preoperative baseline scores. These outcomes were compared to preoperative scores and exceeded MCID thresholds where applicable. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Orthopedics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 2930 KB  
Review
Preoperative Risk Factors for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Narrative Review of the Literature
by Ludovico Lucenti, Gianluca Testa, Alessia Caldaci, Fabio Sammartino, Calogero Cicio, Martina Ilardo, Marco Sapienza and Vito Pavone
Healthcare 2024, 12(6), 666; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12060666 - 15 Mar 2024
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 6289
Abstract
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) poses a challenging complication for many patients undergoing arthroplasty, and the literature identifies numerous risk factors. A comprehensive understanding of the primary risk and protective factors for PJI is valuable for surgeons. This article aims to compile and summarize [...] Read more.
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) poses a challenging complication for many patients undergoing arthroplasty, and the literature identifies numerous risk factors. A comprehensive understanding of the primary risk and protective factors for PJI is valuable for surgeons. This article aims to compile and summarize the key risk factors for PJI documented in the literature. Some risk factors are related to the nutritional status of patients, with obesity, weight loss, hypovitaminosis, and malnutrition being frequently reported. Pathologies affecting patients also contribute to PJI risk, including septic arthritis, hepatitis, diabetes, urinary tract infections, anemia, hypothyroidism, osteoporosis, and dental pathologies. Unhealthy habits, such as tobacco and drug abuse, are significant factors. Previous corticosteroid injections may also play a role in infection development. A few protective factors are also reported in the literature (use of statins, preoperative decolonization, and preadmission skin preparation). The identification of risk factors and the implementation of evidence-based preoperative protocols are essential steps in reducing the incidence of PJI. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 523 KB  
Systematic Review
Do Preoperative Corticosteroid Injections Increase the Risk of Infection after Shoulder Arthroscopy or Shoulder Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review
by Ludovico Lucenti, Flora Maria Chiara Panvini, Claudia de Cristo, Damiano Rapisarda, Marco Sapienza, Gianluca Testa and Vito Pavone
Healthcare 2024, 12(5), 543; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12050543 - 24 Feb 2024
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3298
Abstract
Introduction: Corticosteroid injections have demonstrated short-term benefits for shoulder pain. This symptomatic treatment method is used in various inflammatory conditions that affect the shoulder joint. Corticosteroid joint injections are not without risks and complications. Adverse effects have been documented, including damage to the [...] Read more.
Introduction: Corticosteroid injections have demonstrated short-term benefits for shoulder pain. This symptomatic treatment method is used in various inflammatory conditions that affect the shoulder joint. Corticosteroid joint injections are not without risks and complications. Adverse effects have been documented, including damage to the articular cartilage, tendon rupture, and attenuation of the subject’s immune response. The aim of this study was to examine the timing of preoperative corticosteroid injections on infectious outcomes of shoulder arthroscopies and shoulder arthroplasty. Materials and Methods: In accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), the PubMed, Cochrane, and Science Direct databases were systematically reviewed by two independent authors in January 2024. After full-text reading and checking the reference lists, 11 article were included. Results: Patients who received a shoulder injection within three months prior to undergoing shoulder arthroplasty exhibited a markedly elevated incidence of infection. In addition, a significantly increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) at 90 days postoperatively in patients who received CSIs (corticosteroid injections) within 1 month prior to shoulder arthroplasty was found. Different authors consider CSI injections within the 2 weeks prior to shoulder arthroscopy surgery principally associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection. Discussion: There is still no consensus on the correct timing of preoperative CSIs in both arthroscopic and arthroplasty procedures. The literature does not identify whether the number of preoperative injections could increase the risk of periprosthetic infection. Obesity, sex, and smoking did not have a significant effect on PJIs; alcohol abuse could be considered as a risk factor for PJIs with CSIs. Both in prosthetic surgeries and in arthroscopy procedures, modifiable and unmodifiable factors play secondary roles. The risk of postoperative infection is greater within 3 months, although it is almost comparable at one- and two-year follow-ups. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 633 KB  
Review
Risk Factors and Corresponding Management for Suture Anchor Pullout during Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair
by Xiangwei Li, Yujia Xiao, Han Shu, Xianding Sun and Mao Nie
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(22), 6870; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11226870 - 21 Nov 2022
Cited by 18 | Viewed by 5925
Abstract
Introduction: Due to the aging of the population, the incidence of rotator cuff tears is growing. For rotator cuff repair, arthroscopic suture-anchor repair has gradually replaced open transosseous repair, so suture anchors are now considered increasingly important in rotator cuff tear reconstruction. There [...] Read more.
Introduction: Due to the aging of the population, the incidence of rotator cuff tears is growing. For rotator cuff repair, arthroscopic suture-anchor repair has gradually replaced open transosseous repair, so suture anchors are now considered increasingly important in rotator cuff tear reconstruction. There are some but limited studies of suture anchor pullout after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. However, there is no body of knowledge in this area, which makes it difficult for clinicians to predict the risk of anchor pullout comprehensively and manage it accordingly. Methods: The literature search included rotator cuff repair as well as anchor pullout strength. A review of the literature was performed including all articles published in PubMed until September 2021. Articles of all in vitro biomechanical and clinical trial levels in English were included. After assessing all abstracts (n = 275), the full text and the bibliographies of the relevant articles were analyzed for the questions posed (n = 80). Articles including outcomes without the area of interest were excluded (n = 22). The final literature research revealed 58 relevant articles. Narrative synthesis was undertaken to bring together the findings from studies included in this review. Result: Based on the presented studies, the overall incidence of anchor pullout is not low, and the incidence of intraoperative anchor pullout is slightly higher than in the early postoperative period. The risk factors for anchor pullout are mainly related to bone quality, insertion depth, insertion angle, size of rotator cuff tear, preoperative corticosteroid injections, anchor design, the materials used to produce anchors, etc. In response to the above issues, we have introduced and evaluated management techniques. They include changing the implant site of anchors, cement augmentation for suture anchors, increasing the number of suture limbs, using all-suture anchors, using an arthroscopic transosseous knotless anchor, the Buddy anchor technique, Steinmann pin anchoring, and transosseous suture repair technology. Discussion: However, not many of the management techniques have been widely used in clinical practice. Most of them come from in vitro biomechanical studies, so in vivo randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed to see if they can help patients in the long run. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advancements in Sports Medicine)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 4541 KB  
Article
Autologous Microfragmented Adipose Tissue for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: Real-World Data at Two Years Follow-Up
by Daniele Screpis, Simone Natali, Luca Farinelli, Gianluca Piovan, Venanzio Iacono, Laura de Girolamo, Marco Viganò and Claudio Zorzi
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(5), 1268; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051268 - 25 Feb 2022
Cited by 28 | Viewed by 3656
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to assess, prospectively, the safety, clinical effectiveness, and feasibility of a single intra-articular injection of microfragmented adipose tissue in different stages of knee osteoarthritis (OA). The study included patients (aged 18–70 years), affected by OA (Kellgren–Lawrence I-IV). [...] Read more.
The purpose of the present study was to assess, prospectively, the safety, clinical effectiveness, and feasibility of a single intra-articular injection of microfragmented adipose tissue in different stages of knee osteoarthritis (OA). The study included patients (aged 18–70 years), affected by OA (Kellgren–Lawrence I-IV). Unselected patients were evaluated before and prospectively after 6, 12, and 24 months from the injection. Visual analog scale (VAS) and knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) were used for clinical evaluations. A total of 202 patients were eligible. The mean follow-up time in the cohort of patients was 24.5 ± 9.6 months. Total KOOS significantly improved from pre-operative baseline levels to 6-month follow-up (p < 0.001), and again between 6- and 12-month follow-ups (p < 0.001). The VAS showed a prompt reduction at 6 months (p < 0.001 vs. baseline), but then it increased again at 12 months compared to the 6-month assessment (p < 0.001), even though it remained lower than baseline (p < 0.001). At 24 months, patients with KL-IV demonstrated a lower improvement compared to baseline; patients that had undergone previous corticosteroid injections had a greater risk to further injection treatment. The collected clinical results suggest that MFAT may represent a safe and effective treatment for OA symptoms, offering a low-demanding and minimally invasive treatment. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop