Risk Factors for Failure After Surgery in Patients With Diabetic Foot Syndrome.

Background: In the present study, we aimed to identify risk factors for failure (defined as reoperation within 60 days) after debridement or amputation at the lower extremity in patients with diabetic foot syndrome and to develop a model using the significant risk factors to predict the success rate at different levels of amputation. Methods: Between September 2012 and November 2016, we performed a prospective observational cohort study of 174 surgeries in 105 patients with diabetic foot syndrome. In all patients, debridement or the level of amputation, need for reoperation, time to reoperation, and potential risk factors were assessed. A cox regression analysis, dependent on the level of amputation, with the endpoint reoperation within 60 days defined as failure and a predictive model for the significant risk factors were conducted. Results: We identified the following 5 independent risk factors: More than 1 ulcer (hazard ratio [HR] 3.8), peripheral artery disease (PAD, HR 3.1), C-reactive protein >100 mg/L (HR 2.9), diabetic peripheral neuropathy (HR 2.9), and nonpalpable foot pulses (HR 2.7) are the 5 independent risk factors for failure, which were identified. Patients with no or 1 risk factor have a high success rate independent of the level of amputation. A patient with up to 2 risk factors undergoing debridement will achieve a success rate of <60%. However, a patient with 3 risk factors undergoing debridement will need further surgery in >80%. In patients with 4 risk factors a transmetatarsal amputation and in patients with 5 risk factors a lower leg amputation is needed for a success rate >50%. Conclusion: Reoperation for diabetic foot syndrome occurs in 1 of 4 patients. Risk factors include presence of more than 1 ulcer, PAD, CRP > 100, peripheral neuropathy, and nonpalpable foot pulses. The more risk factors are present, the lower the success rate at a certain level of amputation. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective observational cohort study.

The Interdisciplinary Approach: Preventive and Therapeutic Strategies for Diabetic Foot Ulcers.

The appropriate treatment of the common diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in diabetic patients demands enormous human, organizational and financial resources that are finite. Interdisciplinary teams of medical and surgical specialists, as well as allied health professionals, can help to reduce the consumption of these resources, optimize treatment, and prevent DFUs. They consist primarily of vascular surgeons, endocrinologists, and orthopedic foot and ankle surgeons and are closely supported when required by infectious diseases specialists, plastic surgeons, wound care specialist nurses, podiatrists, and orthotists. A timely interdisciplinary team review in each clinic session decreases the number of hospital visits for the oftentimes-handicapped diabetic patients significantly. The interdisciplinary team clinic setup has also been shown to reduce the risk of amputations, length of hospital staz and mortality rates.

Evidence for operative treatment of talar osteochondral lesions: a systematic review.

Purpose: Operative treatment of talar osteochondral lesions is challenging with various treatment options. The aims were (i) to compare patient populations between the different treatment options in terms of demographic data and lesion size and (ii) to correlate the outcome with demographic parameters and preoperative scores. Methods: A systemic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. The electronic databases Pubmed (MEDLINE) and Embase were screened for reports with the following inclusion criteria: minimum 2-year follow-up after operative treatment of a talar osteochondral lesion in at least ten adult patients and published between 2000 and 2020. Results: Forty-five papers were included. Small lesions were treated using BMS, while large lesions with ACI. There was no difference in age between the treatment groups. There was a correlation between preoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score and change in AOFAS score (R = -0.849, P < 0.001) as well as AOFAS score at follow-up (R = 0.421, P = 0.008). Preoperative size of the cartilage lesion correlates with preoperative AOFAS scores (R= -0.634, P = 0.001) and with change in AOFAS score (R = 0.656, P < 0.001) but not with AOFAS score at follow-up. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, a comparison of the outcome between the different operative techniques was not possible. Conclusion: Patient groups with bigger lesions and inferior preoperative scores did improve the most after surgery. Level of evidence: IV.

The pararectus approach-a versatile option in pelvic musculoskeletal tumor surgery.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic tumors are usually resected through the utilitarian pelvic incision, an extended ilioinguinal/iliofemoral approach. The pararectus approach, an intrapelvic anatomical approach with extraperitoneal access to the pelvis, has been established previously for the treatment of pelvic and acetabular fractures. However, it has not been used to address pelvic tumors. The study aimed at investigating the feasibility of this approach for pelvic tumor surgery and the possibilities of combining this approach with standard approaches to the hip joint. METHODS: Thirteen patients that underwent pelvic tumor resections were retrospectively reviewed. Tumor resections were performed through the pararectus (n = 10) or extended pararectus approach (n = 3). In six of those cases, the pararectus approach was combined with extrapelvic approaches including the modified Gibson (n = 4), the Kocher-Langenbeck (n = 1), and the trochanteric flip approach (n = 1). The mean follow-up was 32.6 ± 9.1 months. RESULTS: In all cases, the tumor resections were carried out according to the preoperative plan. In seven of 13 cases, wide resections were performed; six of 13 cases were planned close resections. Four cases of major complications were observed (vascular injury, deep infection, iliac vein thrombosis, total hip arthroplasty dislocation). Minor complications were observed in two cases. One tumor recurred locally. At the final follow-up, 10 patients were alive, eight of those without evidence of disease. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated the suitability of the pararectus approach for pelvic tumor resections. The possibility to combine the approach with standard approaches to the hip joint allowed for single-stage reconstructions of the pelvis and the hip joint without sacrificing surgical margins and function. The pararectus approach is a versatile option adding to the established approaches for musculoskeletal tumor surgery of the pelvis.

Spine radiography in the evaluation of back and neck pain in an orthopaedic emergency clinic.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the recommendations of national and international societies for the treatment of patients with acute neck and back pain, still too many radiologic examinations were performed. The purpose of this study was to analyze and optimize diagnostics and treatment of patients with acute back pain. METHODS: The medical records of 484 patients presented to the emergency clinic with acute neck or back pain were analyzed for clinical history, physical examination, radiographic findings and therapy. RESULTS: Radiographs of the lumbar, cervical, or thoracic spine were performed in 338 cases (70%). Radiographs were normal in 142 patients (42%) and degenerative changes were identified in 123 patients (36%). Only 2 patients (0.4%) had radiographic findings that had direct therapeutic relevance: 1 patient with metastatic disease and 1 patient with posttraumatic C1-C2 instability. For most patients without sensorimotor deficits and absent specific indications for radiography ("red flags"), therapy was not affected by the results of radiography. CONCLUSIONS: Plain radiography of the spine was unnecessary in most patients initially evaluated with non-specific acute back pain and does not improve the clinical outcome. The implementation of national and international guidelines is a slow process, but helps to reduce costs and to protect patients from unnecessary ionizing radiation exposure.