Dr Damian Muñoz

Dr Damian Muñoz
Curso mínima invasiva south beach

domingo, 27 de abril de 2014

Arthroscopic Surgery of the Elbow; Indications, Contra-Indications, Complications and Operative Technique

Arthroscopic Surgery of the Elbow; Indications, Contra-Indications, Complications and Operative Technique

Arthroscopic Surgery of the Elbow; Indications, Contra-Indications, Complications and Operative Technique
DownloadDownload as PDF (Size:47KB) Full-Text HTML PP. 219-223   DOI: 10.4236/ss.2011.25049
Arthroscopy of the elbow was first described by Burman in 1931. In this first article about arthroscopy of the elbow in the journal of bone and joint surgery, he concluded that the elbow joint was not suitable for arthroscopy; the joint was too small and the neurovascular structures in the anterior compartment of the elbow were close. In 1932 he revised his original article with some technical modifications and slowly arthroscopy of the elbow was performed more often. In the late 1980’s arthroscopic surgery of the elbow became more and more popular. In this article an overview is given of the indications for elbow arthroscopy, the surgical technique is described in detail and the possible complications are highlighted.

Cite this paper
F. Rahusen, O. Surgeon and D. Eygendaal, "Arthroscopic Surgery of the Elbow; Indications, Contra-Indications, Complications and Operative Technique," Surgical Science, Vol. 2 No. 5, 2011, pp. 219-223. doi:10.4236/ss.2011.25049.

martes, 22 de abril de 2014

Discusión entre pares / 63 yr male...quadriparetic...ASIA C...bowel/bladder involved..

63 yr male...quadriparetic...ASIA C...bowel/bladder involved...what will b adequate surgical decompr and stabilizn?

  • Sandeep Sonone Plan on radiological picture wud C4C5 corpectomy with C3 to C6 fusion .same stage or second stage post fusion fron C3 to C6 .
    10 horas · Me gusta · 1
  • Pravin Padalkar Sandeep Sonone why c4 c5 corpectomy. It is hardly causing any compression from front
  • Abhishek Ray Sandeep sir...was wondering whether to include C6...don't want to see in post op CT that compression us still persisting...
  • Senthil T. Nathan I would do a c4/c5 corpectomy , c6/7decompression, ACDF c3-c7 , post fusion as stage 2
  • Abhishek Ray Senthil..just sceptical abt adding 2 more potential non union sites...tell me, would u use a fibula or cage?
  • Ali Öner C3-4 disc removal and decompression, c5 corpectomy or c5-6 disc removal and decompression. 

    Besides decompression surgery, The main goal should be re-arrangement of cervical lordosis, either by long plate (c3-c6), or if not possible, posterior instrumentation should be added.

    By this way, patient will need less corpectomy & Lilly have less chance of pseudoarthrosis.
    6 horas · Editado · Me gusta · 3
  • Niranjan Kavadi I think I would do C4 and 5 corpectomy and take that C6 superior osteophyte then cage and plate. C3 to C6 posterior same day or next couple of days depending on patient condition.
  • Deepak Joshi On this film I think Patient needs decompression at c3-4 and behind c 5 , hybrid construct with ACDF c3-4 and corpectomy c5 with plate c3-6 and then PSIF
  • Vedant Vaksha Patient is melopathic with signal changes & loss of CSF around cord at C3-4, but at the same time shows signal changes at C4-5 & C5-6 also. CSF is present at those levels, but I suspect that there may be dynamic stenosis with associated kyphosis at all...Ver más
    3 horas · Editado · Me gusta · 3
  • Swetabh Verma To b honest, this is a tough case to manage and with myelomalacic changes and asia c score, the prognosis is guarded..with respect to the mr image, there is more anterior compression at c3-4 and down c6-7 as seen by obliteration of csf sleeve..also as ...Ver más
  • Pravin Padalkar This spine need primarily correction of alignment and decompression at C34. I would prefer minimum possible to achive goal . C34 C45 ACDF C6 Corpectomy long plate in front And 2nd stage posterior instrumentation
  • Advance Lumbar Spine Technique Get dynamic xrays done. Also show parasagittal and axial T2 images at C3-4 to rule out facet effusion indicating instability.

lunes, 21 de abril de 2014

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery



Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

by Dr. Alpesh Patel

For many people, talk of surgery sends shivers up and down their spine. When it comes to low back  and neck surgery, many people think of pain and lengthy recoveries. Thankfully, we can tell our patients that spine surgery has …
Read More »

The maturation of grafted bone after posterior lumbar interbody fusion with an interbody carbon cage


The maturation of grafted bone after posterior lumbar interbody fusion with an interbody carbon cage

a prospective five-year study

  1. T. Kanemura, MD, DMSc, Orthopaedic Surgeon, Director of Spine Center1;
  2. Y. Ishikawa, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon1;
  3. A. Matsumoto, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon1;
  4. G. Yoshida, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon1;
  5. Y. Sakai, MD, DMSc, Orthopaedic Surgeon2;
  6. Z. Itoh, MD, DMSc, Orthopaedic Surgeon3;
  7. S. Imagama, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon3; and
  8. N. Kawakami, MD, DMSc, Orthopaedic Surgeon, Director of Orthopaedic Surgery4
+ Author Affiliations
  1. 1Konan Kosei Hospital, Konan Kosei Spine Center, 137 Oomatsubara, Takaya-cho, Konan, Aichi 483-8704, Japan.
  2. 2National Center of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 35 Gengo Moriokacho, Obu, Aichi 475-8511, Japan.
  3. 3Nagoyal University Graduate School of Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 65 Turumai, Showa-ku, Nagoya 466-8550, Japan.
  4. 4Meijo Hospital, Spine Center, 1-3-1 Sannomaru, Naka-ku, Nagoya 460-0001, Japan.
  1. Correspondence should be sent to Dr T. K. Kanemura; e-mail:spinesho@konan.jaaikosei.or.jp


We evaluated the maturation of grafted bone in cases of successful fusion after a one- or two-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using interbody carbon cages. We carried out a five-year prospective longitudinal radiological evaluation of patients using plain radiographs and CT scans. One year after surgery, 117 patients with an early successful fusion were selected for inclusion in the study. Radiological evaluation of interbody bone fusion was graded on a 4-point scale. The mean grades of all radiological and CT assessments increased in the five years after surgery, and differences compared to the previous time interval were statistically significant for three or four years after surgery. Because the grafted bone continues to mature for three years after surgery, the success of a fusion should not be assessed until at least three years have elapsed. There were no significant differences in the longitudinal patterns of grafted bone maturity between iliac bone and local bone. However, iliac bone grafting may remodel faster than local bone.


  • No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
  • Supplementary material. Tables showing i) the grading system of interbody bone fusion sites of radiographs and CT scans, ii) the kappa values for inter- and intra-observer agreement for each radiological assessment, and iii) the proportion of grading of levels in the remodelling status of the grafted bone to the trabecular bone on CT scans are available with the electronic version of this article on our website www.jbjs.org.uk
  • Received May 16, 2011.
  • Accepted August 3, 2011.