Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Knee Surg ; 36(11): 1111-1115, 2023 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35820430

RESUMO

Despite the rising prevalence of arthroplasty and aging population, limited data exist regarding differences in periprosthetic fracture clinical outcomes compared with native counterparts. This study compares differences in hospital treatment, morbidity, and mortality associated with periprosthetic distal femur fractures at an urban level 1 trauma center. We retrospectively reviewed all adult AO/OTA type 33 fractures (526) that presented to our institution between 2009 and 2018. In total, 54 native and 54 periprosthetic fractures were matched by age and gender. We recorded demographics, operative measures, length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and mortality. We used McNemar's and paired t-tests for analysis where appropriate (p < 0.05) (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY; IBM Corp.). The average age at injury was 74 years ± 12 (native) compared with 73 years ± 12 (periprosthetic). After 1:1 matching, the groups had similar body mass index (31.01 vs. 32.98, p = 0.966 for native and periprosthetic, respectively) and mechanisms of injury with 38 native and 44 periprosthetic (p = 0.198) fractures from low-energy falls. Both groups had 51/54 fractures managed with open reduction internal fixation with a locking plate. The remaining were managed via amputation or intramedullary nail fixation. Mean operative time (144 minutes (±64) vs. 132 minutes (±62), p = 0.96) and estimated blood loss (319 mL (±362) vs. 289 mL (±231), p = 0.44) were comparable between the native and periprosthetic groups, respectively. LOS: 9 days ± 7 (native) versus 7 days ± 5 (periprosthetic, p = 0.31); discharge disposition (to skilled nursing facility/rehab): n = 47 (native) versus n = 43 (periprosthetic, p = 0.61); and mortality: n = 6 (native) versus n = 8 (periprosthetic, p = 0.55). No significant differences were observed. We found no statistical differences in morbidity and mortality in periprosthetic distal femur fractures treated over 10 years at a level 1 trauma center. Native and periprosthetic AO/OTA type 33 distal femur fractures are serious injuries with similar outcomes at a level 1 trauma center.


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Fraturas Femorais Distais , Fraturas do Fêmur , Fraturas Periprotéticas , Adulto , Humanos , Idoso , Fraturas Periprotéticas/etiologia , Fraturas Periprotéticas/cirurgia , Fraturas do Fêmur/cirurgia , Fixação Interna de Fraturas , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fêmur/cirurgia , Placas Ósseas , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Laryngoscope ; 132(6): 1172-1176, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34313344

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To identify risk factors for pneumonia incidence in patients with dysphagia undergoing a videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) in an outpatient tertiary-care center. STUDY DESIGN: Historical cohort study. METHODS: All individuals undergoing a VFSS between 10/02/13 and 07/30/15 were identified and followed historically for 2 years. Demographic information, medical history, and fluoroscopic data were collected. The 2-year incidence of pneumonia was obtained from the medical records and telephone interview. The incidence of pneumonia and death were calculated and risk factors for pneumonia and mortality were ascertained. RESULTS: 689 patients were followed for 2 years. The mean age (±standard deviation) of the cohort was 65 (±15.5) years. 49% (338/689) were female. The most common causes of dysphagia were cricopharyngeus muscle dysfunction (270/689), head and neck cancer (175/689), and neurodegenerative disease (56/689). The incidence of pneumonia was 22% (153/689). The incidence of death was 11%. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder [COPD] (odds ratio [OR] = 2.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33-4.19), hypertension (OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.23-2.73), tracheotomy status (OR = 2.96, 95% CI: 1.09-7.99), and vallecular residue (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.24-2.85) were all significantly associated with an elevated risk of pneumonia. Kidney disease (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.02-9.9), COPD (OR = 3.27, 95% CI: 1.65-6.49), vallecular residue (OR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.35-4.1), male gender (OR = 2.21, 95% CI: 1.25-3.92), and low body mass index (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.19) were independent adjusted risk factors for death. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of aspiration pneumonia (22%) and death (11%) within 2-years of a VFSS was high. The greatest adjusted risk factors for incident pneumonia were tracheotomy (OR = 3.0), COPD (OR = 2.4) and vallecular residue (OR = 1.9). The greatest adjusted risk factors for death were COPD (OR = 3.3), vallecular residue (OR = 2.3), and male gender (OR = 2.2). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 132:1172-1176, 2022.


Assuntos
Transtornos de Deglutição , Doenças Neurodegenerativas , Pneumonia Aspirativa , Pneumonia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Coortes , Deglutição/fisiologia , Transtornos de Deglutição/complicações , Transtornos de Deglutição/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pneumonia/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Aspirativa/complicações , Pneumonia Aspirativa/etiologia , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/complicações , Estudos Retrospectivos
3.
Orthop J Sports Med ; 9(10): 23259671211030204, 2021 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34660821

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared clinical outcomes between the traditional Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability and the congruent arc modification to the Latarjet procedure. PURPOSE: To systematically evaluate the literature for the incidence of recurrent instability, clinical outcomes, radiographic findings, and complications for the traditional Latarjet procedure and the congruent arc modification and to compare results of each search. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We included studies published between January 1990 and October 2020 that described clinical outcomes of the traditional Latarjet and the congruent arc modification with a follow-up range of 2 to 10 years. The difference in surgical technique was analyzed using a chi-square test for categorical variables, while continuous variables were evaluated using a Student t test. RESULTS: In total, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria: 20 studies describing the traditional Latarjet procedure in 1412 shoulders, and 6 studies describing the congruent arc modification in 289 shoulders. No difference between procedures was found regarding patient age at surgery, follow-up time, Rowe or postoperative visual analog scores, early or late complications, return-to-sport timing, or incidence of improper graft placement or graft fracture. A significantly greater proportion of male patients underwent glenoid augmentation using the congruent arc modification versus traditional Latarjet (P < .001). When comparing outcomes, the traditional Latarjet procedure demonstrated a lower incidence of fibrous union or nonunion (P = .047) and broken, loose, or improperly placed screws (P < .001), and the congruent arc modification demonstrated improved outcomes with regard to overall return to sport (P < .001), return to sport at the same level (P < .001), incidence of subluxation (P = .003) or positive apprehension (P = .002), and revision surgery for recurrent instability (P = .027). CONCLUSION: Outcomes after the congruent arc modification proved at least equivalent to the traditional Latarjet procedure in terms of recurrent instability and return to sport, although early and late complications were equivalent. The congruent arc procedure may be an acceptable alternative to traditional Latarjet for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss; however, long-term outcomes of this procedure are needed.

4.
Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil ; 2(2): e153-e159, 2020 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32368752

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to better understand the technique, outcomes, and complications after percutaneous superficial medial collateral ligament (sMCL) lengthening during knee arthroscopy to address isolated medial meniscal pathology. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using a PRISMA checklist. The inclusion criteria consisted of English-language articles or articles with English-language translations documenting the use of percutaneous sMCL lengthening during arthroscopic knee surgery to treat isolated meniscal pathology (repair vs meniscectomy) with reported postoperative outcomes and complications. RESULTS: Four studies met the inclusion criteria, consisting of a total of 192 patients undergoing percutaneous sMCL lengthening. No perioperative complications related to iatrogenic chondral damage, fracture, or additional meniscal injury were reported. Mild postoperative pain at the medial needle tract site lasting up to 15 days after surgery was reported in 52% of patients (46 of 88). At final follow-up, laxity on valgus stress testing showed a range from 0 to 1.1 mm with a range from -0.3° to 0.9° of radiographic medial joint space widening compared with preoperative radiographs. The length of follow-up ranged from 1.5 to 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: The percutaneous "pie-crusting" technique remains the most commonly reported technique to lengthen the sMCL during arthroscopic meniscal surgery. Percutaneous lengthening represents a safe and effective method of increasing medial joint space visualization, with no reported perioperative or postoperative complications and with minimal, likely clinically insignificant residual joint laxity after surgery on valgus stress testing at final follow-up compared with preoperative values. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA