Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury among Patients with Knee Injury Visiting the Out-patient Department of Orthopaedics of a Tertiary Care Centre: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.

Introduction: Anterior cruciate ligament injury diagnoses are often missed at initial presentation. Though better diagnosed by physical examinations when done by orthopaedics surgeons, proper history is also important in diagnosing it. This study aimed to find the prevalence of anterior cruciate ligament injury among patients with knee injury visiting the out-patient Department of Orthopaedics of a tertiary care centre. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted on patients visiting the out-patient Department of Orthopaedics of a tertiary care centre within the study period from 31 January 2019 to 1 February 2020, after obtaining clearance from the Institutional Review Committee [Reference number: 321(6-11-E)2/075/076]. The anterior cruciate ligament injury diagnosis was made using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging scan. They were inquired about the specific history features at the time of injury: leg giving way, inability to continue the activity, massive swelling of knee joint within 6 hours, and 'pop' heard or felt. Point estimate and 95% Confidence Interval were calculated. Results: Among 127 cases of knee injury, anterior cruciate ligament injury was found in 109 (85.83%) (79.76-91.89, 95% Confidence Interval). History of the leg giving way, inability to continue the activity, massive swelling of the knee and 'pop' heard or felt were present in 90 (82.60%), 92 (84.40%), 91 (83.50%), and 86 (78.90%) cases of anterior cruciate ligament injury respectively. At least two history features were present in 104 (95.41%) cases. Conclusions: The prevalence of anterior cruciate ligament injury was found to be similar to the published studies. Keywords: anterior cruciate ligament; diagnosis; history; orthopaedics.

Non-neoplastic indications and outcomes of the proximal and distal femur megaprosthesis: a critical review.

PURPOSE: Megaprosthesis or endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal and distal femur is a well-established modality for treatment of tumors. The indications for megaprosthesis have been expanded to the treatment of some non-neoplastic conditions of the knee and hip, with the severe bone loss associated with failed arthroplasty, communited fractures in the elderly with poor bone quality, and resistant non-union. Th aim of this study is to find out whether megaprosthesis of the knee and hip is successful in the treatment of non-neoplastic condtions. The study comprises a review of the indications, complications, and outcomes of megaprosthesis of the proximal and distal femur in non-neoplastic conditions of the knee and hip joints. METHODS: We extensively reviewed the literature on non-neoplastic indications for megaprosthesis of the proximal and distal femur after performing a detailed search of the Pubmed database using the medical subject heading (MeSH) terms 'proximal femur replacement' or 'distal femur replacement' and 'hip or knee megaprosthesis.' The data obtained after the structured search were entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The frequency distribution of the demographic data, indications, complications, and outcome was calculated. RESULT: We included ten studies (seven proximal femur replacement and three distal femur replacement) of 245 proximal femur and 54 distal femur mega prostheses for treatment of non-neoplastic conditions. Bone loss in failed arthroplasty, either due to periprosthetic fracture or deep infection, was the most common indication for megaprosthesis. Dislocation was the most common complication after proximal femur megaprosthesis, and infection was the leading cause of complications after distal femur megaprosthesis. CONCLUSION: Megaprosthesis for treatment of non-neoplastic conditions around the distal and proximal femur is a viable option for limb salvage, with an acceptable long-term outcome. Although the complications and survival rates of megaprosthesis in non-neoplastic conditions are inferior to a primary arthroplasty of the hip and knee but are comparable or better than the mega prosthetic replacement in the neoplastic conditions. Proximal femoral megaprosthesis has higher dislocation rates and requirement for revision compared to distal femoral megaprosthesis. However, the proximal femoral megaprosthesis has lower rates of infection, periprosthetic fractures, and soft tissue complications, as compared to distal femoral megaprosthetic replacement. Both associated with aseptic loosening but not statistically significant.

Changes in patient admissions after the 2015 Earthquake: a tertiary hospital-based study in Kathmandu, Nepal.

Literature on earthquake impact on hospital admissions is lacking, particularly in low-resource settings. Our aim was to study the pattern of admissions before and after the 2015 earthquake in a tertiary hospital in Nepal. We used routine hospital data from 9,596 admissions, and defined four periods: pre-earthquake (pre-EQ), acute (EQ1), post-acute (EQ2), and post-earthquake (post-EQ). We compared length of hospital stay (LOS) across the study periods using negative binomial regressions. We used logistic regressions to study changes in probability of admission for diagnostic categories, and Generalized Additive Models to model the difference in number of admissions compared to pre-EQ baseline. LOS was longer in EQ1 than during pre-EQ, in particular for injury-related admissions. In EQ1, the odds of injury admissions increased, while they decreased for the majority of other diagnoses, with the odds of pregnancy-related admissions remaining low until post-EQ. The number of admissions dropped in EQ1 and EQ2, and returned to pre-EQ trends in post-EQ, accumulating 381 admissions lost (CI: 206-556). Our findings suggest that hospital disaster plans must not only foresee injury management after earthquakes, but also ensure accessibility, in particular for pregnant women, and promote a quick return to normality to prevent additional negative health outcomes.

Clinical and demographic profile of admitted victims in a tertiary hospital after the 2015 earthquake in Nepal.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, an earthquake killing 9,000 and injuring 22,000 people hit Nepal. The Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital (TUTH), a reference tertiary hospital, was operational immediately after the earthquake. We studied the profile of earthquake victims admitted in TUTH and assessed what factors could influence hospital length of stay. METHODS: An earthquake victim dataset was created based on patient records, with information on sex, age, date of admission and discharge, diagnosis, and surgical intervention. We performed an initial descriptive overview of the earthquake victims followed by a time-to-event analysis to compare length of hospital stay in different groups, using log rank test and cox regression to calculate Hazard Ratios. RESULTS: There were in total 501 admitted victims, with the peak of admissions occurring on the fifth day after the earthquake. About 89% had injury as main diagnosis, mostly in lower limbs, and 66% of all injuries were fractures. Nearly 69% of all patients underwent surgery. The median length of hospital stay was 10 days. Lower limb and trunk injuries had longer hospital stays than injuries in the head and neck (HR = 0.68, p = 0.009, and HR = 0.62 p = 0.005, respectively). Plastic surgeries had longer hospital stays than orthopaedic surgeries (HR = 0.57 p = 0.006). Having a crush injury and undergoing an amputation also increased time to discharge (HR = 0.57, p = 0.013, and HR = 0.65 p = 0.045 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Hospital stay was particularly long in this sample in comparison to other studies on earthquake victims, indirectly indicating the high burden TUTH had to bear to treat these patients. To strengthen resilience, tertiary hospitals should have preparedness plans to cope with a large influx of injured patients after a large-scale disaster, in particular for the initial days when there is limited external aid.