Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Orthop Traumatol ; 25(1): 5, 2024 Jan 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38282098

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Intramedullary tibial nailing (IMN) is the gold standard for stabilizing tibial shaft fractures. IMN can be performed through an infra- or suprapatellar approach. PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare the rate of fasciotomies for acute compartment syndrome between infra- and suprapatellar approaches. METHODS: A total of 614 consecutive patients who were treated with IMN for tibial fracture between October 2007 and February 2020 were included in the study. The approach used for IMN was determined by the operating surgeon. Infrapatellar IMN was performed with the knee in deep flexion position, with or without calcaneal traction. Suprapatellar IMN was performed in straight or semiflexed position. The diagnosis of compartment syndrome was based on clinical analysis, but for some patients, a continuous compartment pressure measurement was used. The primary outcome was the rate of peri- and postoperative compartment syndrome treated with fasciotomies. RESULTS: The study sample included 513 patients treated with infrapatellar IMN and 101 patients treated with suprapatellar IMN technique. The mean age of the patients was 44.7 years (infrapatellar technique) and 48.4 years (suprapatellar technique). High energy trauma was seen in 138 (27%) patients treated with infrapatellar technique and in 39 (39%) patients treated with suprapatellar technique. In the suprapatellar group (n = 101), there were no cases of peri- or postoperative compartment syndrome treated with fasciotomies. In the infrapatellar group (n = 513), the need for fasciotomies was stated in 67 patients, 31 patients (6.0%) perioperatively and in 36 patients (7.0%) postoperatively. The rate of fasciotomies (0/101 versus 67/513 cases) differed significantly (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the fracture morphology or patient demographics between the study groups. CONCLUSIONS: The suprapatellar technique is recommended over the infrapatellar approach in the treatment of tibial shaft fractures. The rate of peri- and postoperative compartment syndrome and the need for fasciotomies was significantly lower with the suprapatellar technique. The major cause of increased rate of peri- or postoperative acute compartment syndrome with infrapatellar IMN technique is presumably associated with the positioning of the patient during the operation.


Asunto(s)
Fijación Intramedular de Fracturas , Fracturas de la Tibia , Humanos , Adulto , Fijación Intramedular de Fracturas/métodos , Fasciotomía , Clavos Ortopédicos , Fracturas de la Tibia/cirugía , Tibia/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos
2.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ; 140(10): 1423-1429, 2020 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32140830

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Injury of the tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint complex, known as Lisfranc injury, covers a wide range of injuries from subtle ligamentous injuries to severely displaced crush injuries. Although it is known that these injuries are commonly missed, the literature on the accuracy of the diagnostics is limited. The diagnostic accuracy of non-weight-bearing radiography (inter- or intraobserver reliability), however, has not previously been assessed among patients with Lisfranc injury. METHODS: One hundred sets of foot radiographs acquired due to acute foot injury were collected and anonymised. The diagnosis of these patients was confirmed with a CT scan. In one-third of the radiographs, there was no Lisfranc injury; in one-third, a nondisplaced (< 2 mm) injury; and in one-third, a displaced injury. The radiographs were assessed independently by three senior orthopaedic surgeons and three orthopaedic surgery residents. RESULTS: Fleiss kappa (κ) coefficient for interobserver reliability resulted in moderate correlation κ = 0.50 (95% CI: 0.45- 0.55) (first evaluation) and κ = 0.58 (95% CI: 0.52-0.63) (second evaluation). After three months, the evaluation was repeated and the Cohen's kappa (κ) coefficient for intraobserver reliability showed substantial correlation κ = 0.71 (from 0.64 to 0.85). The mean (range) sensitivity was 76.1% (60.6-92.4) and specificity was 85.3% (52.9-100). The sensitivity of subtle injuries was lower than severe injuries (65.4% vs 87.1% p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis of Lisfranc injury based on non-weight-bearing radiographs has moderate agreement between observers and substantial agreement between the same observer in different moments. A substantial number (24%) of injuries are missed if only non-weight-bearing radiographs are used. Nondisplaced injuries were more commonly missed than displaced injuries, and therefore, special caution should be used when the clinical signs are subtle. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.


Asunto(s)
Traumatismos de los Pies/diagnóstico por imagen , Radiografía , Humanos , Diagnóstico Erróneo , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Cirujanos Ortopédicos/normas , Cirujanos Ortopédicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Radiografía/normas , Radiografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/normas , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/estadística & datos numéricos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA