Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective study. Parameters such as patient data, injury details, osteosynthesis implant system information, stability of fracture fragments, occlusion and complications were evaluated at different time intervals and logistic regression applied to determine the association of these factors with complications.
Results: Five hundred and ninety-three patients with mandibular fractures were included in this study (male 87.9% and female 12.1%), age range of 13-72 years (median = 22 years). Most fractures were caused by motor vehicle accidents (85.8%), assault (6.2%) and falls (4.7%). Parasymphyseal fractures were the most common (50.1%), followed by angle (35.2%) and body of mandible (25%). Median time interval between injury and intervention was 7 days (IQR 4-10). Median duration of follow-up from date of surgery was 72 days (IQR 30-230). 76.9% (456) were completely free of complications. Most complications (46%) occurred in the intermediate post-surgical period (1-6 weeks). Median interval period between surgery and complication was 15 days (IQR 7-67.5). Nerve injury and surgical site infection were the most common complications at 6.7% and 5.7%, respectively. There was a significant difference between the plating system in terms of complication outcome (p = 0.017).
Conclusion: Whilst the miniplate dimensions may be similar across different manufacturers, the complication outcome may differ between systems.
Methods: This is a cross-sectional study in which all the elderly patients who underwent early primary total knee replacement due to trauma around the knee at the Segamat Hospital between January 2015 and June 2019 were identified. Data were collected from clinical and operative notes. The clinical outcomes of these patients were evaluated by the range of motion of the knee and the Knee Society Score (KSS).
Results: Ten patients were identified to have undergone this procedure. Six patients sustained supracondylar femur fractures, two patients had tibial plateau fractures and two patients had concurrent supracondylar femur and tibial plateau fractures. The mean follow-up duration was 22.3 ± 13.9 months, the mean knee score was 87.7 ± 10.0 and the mean functional knee score was 56 ± 41.9.
Conclusion: In this cohort, good short-term outcomes close to pre-fracture condition was noted in patients who did not suffer from any complications during the post-operative period. Two patients who had surgical site infection had lower functional knee scores. Another two patients with lower knee scores experienced surgical site infection of the distal tibia and contralateral fixed flexion deformity of the knee. Early primary total knee replacement remains a viable option in treating fractures around the knee in the elderly. Infection, which in this study affected 20% of the patients, is the main deterring factor in performing this procedure.
STUDY DESIGN: Clinical audit report.
PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY: Hospital Sultanah Aminah Johor Bahru, Malaysia, from March 2016 to May 2017.
METHODOLOGY: Data were collected retrospectively from all 127 patients who underwent CABG with saphenous vein grafts, either with CVH technique (n=68), or MIVH technique (n=59) performed with Vasoview system. The rate of wound dehiscence was evaluated. Patients with severe wound dehiscence that required readmission and surgical intervention were identified for further evaluation.
RESULTS: There was total 26.8% of wound dehiscence in our study, which was not appreciably different between two groups (p=0.092). Patient with severe wound breakdown that required surgical intervention was significantly less in MIVH group (1/59, 1.7%) compared to CVH group (8/68, 11.8%, p=0.037). There was no significant difference in readmission rate between MIVH and CVH group (p=0.574).
CONCLUSION: There is significant reduction in severity of wound dehiscence post-saphenous vein harvesting among CABG patients with MIVH technique. However, there is no statistical difference in wound dehiscence and readmission rate between MIVH and CVH technique.
METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3, multicentre randomised trial, patients aged 21-80 years with cT3 or cT4 gastric cancer undergoing curative resection were enrolled at 22 centres from South Korea, China, Japan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Patients were randomly assigned to receive surgery and EIPL (EIPL group) or surgery alone (standard surgery group) via a web-based programme in random permuted blocks in varying block sizes of four and six, assuming equal allocation between treatment groups. Randomisation was stratified according to study site and the sequence was generated using a computer program and concealed until the interventions were assigned. After surgery in the EIPL group, peritoneal lavage was done with 1 L of warm (42°C) normal 0·9% saline followed by complete aspiration; this procedure was repeated ten times. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done assuming intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02140034.
FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2012, and Aug 3, 2018, 800 patients were randomly assigned to the EIPL group (n=398) or the standard surgery group (n=402). Two patients in the EIPL group and one in the standard surgery group withdrew from the trial immediately after randomisation and were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. At the third interim analysis on Aug 28, 2019, the predictive probability of overall survival being significantly higher in the EIPL group was less than 0·5%; therefore, the trial was terminated on the basis of futility. With a median follow-up of 2·4 years (IQR 1·5-3·0), the two groups were similar in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio 1·09 [95% CI 0·78-1·52; p=0·62). 3-year overall survival was 77·0% (95% CI 71·4-81·6) for the EIPL group and 76·7% (71·0-81·5) for the standard surgery group. 60 adverse events were reported in the EIPL group and 41 were reported in the standard surgery group. The most common adverse events included anastomotic leak (ten [3%] of 346 patients in the EIPL group vs six [2%] of 362 patients in the standard surgery group), bleeding (six [2%] vs six [2%]), intra-abdominal abscess (four [1%] vs five [1%]), superficial wound infection (seven [2%] vs one [<1%]), and abnormal liver function (six [2%] vs one [<1%]). Ten of the reported adverse events (eight in the EIPL group and two in the standard surgery group) resulted in death.
INTERPRETATION: EIPL and surgery did not have a survival benefit compared with surgery alone and is not recommended for patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
FUNDING: National Medical Research Council, Singapore.