First Metatarsophalangeal Joint Arthrodesis Using an Intraosseous Post and Lag Screw With Immediate Bearing of Weight.

Arthrodesis is the gold standard procedure for advanced arthrosis of the first metatarsophalangeal joint. Having a strong construct is preferable for allowing immediate bearing of weight, which facilitates patient rehabilitation. Plate and screw fixation is currently in favor but can lead to prominent metalware necessitating removal. The aim of this study is to report the results of a series of 54 first metatarsophalangeal joint arthrodeses performed in 52 patients treated with an implant composed of an intraosseous post and lag screw. All of the patients had a minimum follow-up of 1 year, and the indication for the surgery was end-stage hallux rigidus in 44 (81.5%) feet, severe hallux valgus in 8 (14.8%) feet, and rheumatoid arthritis in 2 (3.7%) feet. Arthrodesis was achieved in 52 (96.3%) feet at a mean of 61 ± 16 (range 39 to 201) days with nonunion observed in 2 (3.7%) feet; neither of the 2 patients had known risk factors. Metalware impinging on soft tissues necessitating removal was observed in 3 (5.6%) feet, and there were no cases of loss of position or implant breakage. The mean Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire score improved from 46.4 ± 13.3 to 18.4 ± 9.4 (p < .001) at latest follow-up. In conclusion, our results suggest the intraosseous post and lag screw device was safe and effective, and it can be considered an alternative method of stabilizing the first metatarsophalangeal joint when undertaking arthrodesis surgery.

Predictors for perioperative blood transfusion in elderly patients with extra capsular hip fractures treated with cephalo-medullary nailing.

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to determine predictive factors and requirement for perioperative blood transfusion in elderly patients with extra capsular hip fractures treated with cephalo-medullary device. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with extra capsular hip fractures treated with cephalo-medullary nailing were included in the study. Age, sex, ASA grade, timing of surgery, preoperative and postoperative haemoglobin, length of hospital stay, fracture type, number of units transfused and 30-day mortality were recorded. RESULTS: The mean age was 82.3 years. Forty-seven patients underwent a short nail and 32 patients a long nail; 53.4% patients required blood transfusion postoperatively. Transfusion was required in 71.8% of the long nails (p < 0.05), 65.8% patients above the age of 80 (p < 0.05), 100% of the patients with hemoglobin below 90 g/L and 20 patients with a ASA grade of 3 (p < 0.05). 78.5% patients with A2 fracture and 75% of A3 fractures needed blood transfusion (p > 0.05). Length of hospital stay in non-transfusion group was 13 days and in transfusion group was 19 days (p < 0.05). 55.1% operated within 36 h and 47.6% operated after 36 h of admission needed transfusion (p > 0.05). Thirty-day mortality in patients needing blood transfusion was 5% and in non-transfusion group was 3.7% (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patient age, ASA grade, preoperative haemoglobin and length of nail are reliable predictors for perioperative blood transfusion in extra capsular hip fractures in elderly patients treated with cephalo-medullary nailing and reinforce a selective transfusion policy.

Risk of ionising radiation to trainee orthopaedic surgeons.

We undertook this study to determine the amount of scattered radiation received by the primary surgeon, assistant and patient during dynamic hip screw fixation for proximal femoral fractures. Data was collected from fifty patients. Five registrars were included as operating surgeon and four senior house officers as assistant surgeon. Radiation was monitored by thermo luminescent dosimeters placed on the surgeon and assistant. The approximate distance of surgeon and assistant from the operative site was measured. A dosimeter on the unaffected hip of patients measured the radiation to the patient. The results show that the surgeon's dominant hand receives the highest dose of radiation and radiation exposure is dependent on the experience of the operator. Our study concludes that exposure to radiation during this procedure is well below the toxic levels; however greater awareness is needed for harmful effects of exposure to long term low dose radiation.

A Comparison of Two Designs of Postoperative Shoe on Function, Satisfaction, and Back Pain After Hallux Valgus Surgery.

Background. The reverse camber shoe is commonly used after hallux valgus corrective surgery to offload the forefoot but is associated with back pain and poor compliance. Recent designs of postoperative shoes may obviate the need for a reverse camber. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of a reverse camber shoe and a noncambered shoe with transitional rigidity after hallux valgus correction. Methods. A cohort of 80 feet was prospectively studied undergoing surgery at a single NHS trust. The first 40 feet received the reverse cambered Jura Medical Off-loader Heel shoe and the subsequent 40 feet received the noncambered DonJoy Podalux shoe. No demographic differences existed between the groups and data were collected at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 6 months. The Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), a 5-question survey and dichotomous question about back pain was used to assess clinical outcome and radiographs were reviewed by 2 orthopaedic surgeons to monitor for loss of correction. Results. Both groups experienced comparable improvements in MOXFQ and shoe satisfaction from 2 weeks compared with 6 weeks. Six patients experienced back pain in the reverse cambered shoe group and none in the noncambered shoe group. Five patients stopped using the reverse cambered shoe during the first 6 weeks after surgery and none stopped using their prescribed noncambered shoe. No loss of corrections were observed in either group. Conclusion. Both shoe designs gave equal foot specific functional and radiological outcomes, but the noncambered shoe with transitional rigidity was associated with less back pain and better compliance. Levels of Evidence: Level II: Prospective comparative study.