Materials and Methods: In this study, medical records of 47 patients who underwent a two-stage surgical procedure for intra-articular distal tibia fractures accompanying soft tissue injury were retrospectively examined. Delta frame was applied in all cases within 24 hours following admission to the emergency department in accordance with AO principles. Those cases where fibular plate was applied during the initial stage and the second stage were classified as Group 1 and Group 2 in order to compare recorded data between the two groups.
Results: According to the results of the study, there were 25 cases in Group 1 and 22 cases in Group 2 in which fibular plate was applied at the first stage and the second stage, respectively. The mean follow-up was found as 27.7±7.0 months in Group 1 and 28.2±6.2 months in Group 2 (p=0.778). No difference was found between the two groups in terms of the age, sex, hospital stay, the time between two surgical procedures, tibiofibular angle and AOFAS scoring (p>0.05).These two groups were also similar in mechanism of injury, Denise-Weber or AO classification, rates of tibiofibular malalignment on post-operative CT, fibular rotation, intra-articular tibial step-off, tibial varus-valgus duration of union, rate of infection, fibular angulation and the presence of the flap/graft/debridement (p>0.05).
Conclusion: In conclusion, two-stage surgical procedure in intra-articular distal tibiofibular fractures may be an effective method decreasing soft tissue complications. The timing of the open reduction and internal fixation of the fibula at different stages may not necessarily have an impact on the success of the post-operative tibial reduction, the total duration of surgery, syndesmosis malalignment or soft tissue complications.
METHODS: Forty-one patients above 60 years of age and an acute displaced fracture of the femoral neck were randomly allocated to treatment by either unipolar or bipolar hemiarthroplasty, in the Department of Orthopaedics, between September 2009 and October 2012. Functional outcome was assessed and compared using Harris hip score and radiological parameters with a follow-up of one year.
RESULTS: The two groups of patients with mean age of 67.3 in bipolar group and 75.6 in unipolar group did not differ in their pre-injury characteristics and perioperative parameters. The mean Harris hip score in bipolar and unipolar groups was 86.18±12.18 and 79.79±15.55, respectively (p=0.183); range of motion was 210.63±28.39 and 181.58±37(p=0.015) with bipolar and unipolar groups, respectively. Functional activities were better in the bipolar group. Complications like painful hip, posterior dislocation, periprosthetic fracture and acetabular erosion were encountered in unipolar prostheses.
CONCLUSION: The use of bipolar endoprosthesis in the management of displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly was associated with better mean Harris hip score and incidence of complications was limited. Hence, bipolar would be a better option in elderly patients with fracture neck of femur.
KEY WORDS: Unipolar; Bipolar; Hemiarthroplasty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve consecutive patients with severe myelopathy (JOA-score less than 11) from ventral CVJ compression were operated between 2014-2020 using a tubular retractor assisted transoral decompression.
RESULTS: All patients improved neurologically statistically (p=0.02). There were no posterior pharynx wound infections or rhinolalia. There was one case with incomplete removal of the lateral wall of odontoid and one incidental durotomy.
CONCLUSIONS: A Tubular retractor provides adequate access for decompression of the ventral compression of CVJ. As the tubular retractor pushed away the uvula, soft palate and pillars of the tonsils as it docked on the posterior pharyngeal wall, the traditional complications associated with traditional transoral procedures is completely avoided.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty oncological cases treated with massive bone resection and the implant of a megaprosthesis were included in our study. Among them, 22 [(GGroup A) received one gram of vancomycin powder on the surface of the implant and another gram on the surface of the muscular fascia]. The remaining 28 did not receive such a treatment (Group B). The rest of surgical procedures and the follow-up were the same for the two groups. Patients underwent periodical outpatient visits, radiographs and blood exams' evaluations. Diagnosis of PJIs and adverse reactions to topical vancomycin were recorded.
RESULTS: None of the cases treated with topical vancomycin developed infections, whereas 6 of the 28 cases (21.4%) who did not receive the powder suffered from PJIs. These outcomes suggest that cases treated with VP had a significantly lower risk of post-operative PJI (p=0.028). None of our cases developed acute kidney failures or any other complication directly or indirectly attributable to the local administration of VP.
CONCLUSIONS: The topical use of vancomycin powder on megaprosthetic surfaces and the overlying fascias, alongside with a correct endovenous antibiotic prophylaxis, can represent a promising approach in order to minimise the risk of periprosthetic infections in orthopaedic oncology surgery.