RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare total hip prosthesis (THP), partial hip prosthesis (PHP), and proximal femoral nail (PFN) patients in terms of the chosen anesthetic method. METHODS: A total of 850 patients who underwent hip surgery were divided into 3 groups according to the operation type: PHP (n=281), PFN (n=393), and THP (n=176). The type of anesthesia administered, interventions during anesthesia, and complications were retrospectively evaluated. The groups were compared in terms of patient age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores, chosen anesthetic method, operation duration, colloid use during operation, use of antihypertensive medication, use of vasoconstrictor medication, development of hypotension, blood transfusion administered, development of cardiac arrest, requirements for intensive care after operation, and use of a central catheter. RESULTS: In the THP group, the mean age of patients was significantly lower as compared to the PHP and PFN groups. The duration of operation was lower in the PFN group as compared to the other two groups. In the THP group, general anesthesia was significantly high, while in the PFN group, regional anesthetic administration was high. While colloid use was greater in the PFN group, the blood transfusion rate was higher in the THP group. The use of antihypertensive medication was higher in the THP group as compared to the other groups. CONCLUSION: Although all three anesthetic methods could be used in hip surgery, the type of anesthesia should be chosen according to the type of hip surgery considering the duration of operation, age of the patient, and blood lost during the operation.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation, who had been treated with repair of the Bankart lesion without capsuler plication. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The study included 22 shoulders of 22 patients (16 males and 6 females) with a mean age of 28 years, who underwent Bankart repair between 2011 and 2014. Patients with bilateral shoulder instability, multiple instability, >25% glenoid bone loss, and those with a history of shoulder surgery were not included in the study. The average follow-up time was 21.2 months. Evaluation was made of the preoperative number of dislocations, postoperative recurrence, functional status, and daily activity performance of the patients. Shoulder range of motion was measured. The results were evaluated using the Rowe shoulder score and the Oxford shoulder instability score. RESULTS: Recurrence was observed in only one patient who had a shoulder dislocation after trauma, thus giving a recurrence rate of 4.5%. Shoulder range of motion was full in all except that one patient. The mean Rowe shoulder score was 95.5 (excellent) and Oxford shoulder stability score was 44.6 (excellent). CONCLUSION: No recurrent shoulder dislocation was observed in patients who underwent Bankart repair surgery. Plication was not performed with the Bankart repair. Close to full range of motion was obtained in all patients. In conclusion, Bankart repair alone can be considered to be sufficient for the treatment of traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability.
