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











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc ; 57(4): 176-182, 2023 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37482790

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the current study is to meta-analyze the randomized controlled trials in the literature comparing pronator quadratus repair versus no repair alongside volar plating of distal radius fractures. METHODS: A search of the PUBMED/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library databases was performed. Any randomized con- trolled trials comparing pronator quadratus repair versus no repair alongside volar plating of distal radius fractures were included. The relevant information was collected by 2 blinded reviewers using a predetermined data sheet. Clinical outcomes were compared, with all statistical analyses performed using Review Manager Version 5.3. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials with 273 patients were included. There was no significant difference in the range of motion in flexion-extension, ulnar-radial deviation, or pronation-supination. There was a significant difference in favor of the no repair group for Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score (MD [Mean Difference]: 2.63, P < .0001) and pronation strength (MD: 13, P < .0001). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the visual analog scale score. There were 3 complications relating to pronator quadratus repair, in which patients developed carpal tunnel syndrome requiring a release. There was no significant difference in the re-operation rate. CONCLUSION: This study found that pronator quadratus repair when performing volar plating for distal radius fractures did not result in a significant improvement in functional outcome, range of motion, or strength. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I, Systematic Review of Level 1 Studies, Level I, Therapeutic Study.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas del Radio , Fracturas de la Muñeca , Humanos , Fracturas del Radio/cirugía , Placas Óseas , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Fijación Interna de Fracturas/efectos adversos , Rango del Movimiento Articular
2.
Vascular ; 31(6): 1128-1133, 2023 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35759405

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication in vascular surgery, and is associated with increased patient morbidity, readmission and reintervention. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of closed-incision negative pressure wound therapy (CiNPWT) upon rate of SSI and length of hospital stay. METHODS: This study was reported in line with the STROBE guidelines. We assessed the baseline incidence of SSI from a 12-month retrospective cohort and, following a change in practice intervention with CiNPWT, compared to a 6-month prospective cohort. The primary endpoint was incidence of SSI (according to CDC-NHSN guidelines) while secondary endpoints included length of hospital stay, readmission, reintervention and Days Alive and Out of Hospital (DAOH) to 90-days. RESULTS: A total of 127 groin incisions were performed: 76 (65 patients) within the retrospective analysis and 51 (42 patients) within the prospective analysis (of whom 69% received CiNPWT). The primary endpoint of SSI was seen in 21.1% of the retrospective cohort and 9.8% of the prospective cohort (p = .099). Readmission was found to be significantly associated with the retrospective cohort (p = .016) while total admission (inclusive of re-admission) was significantly longer in those in the retrospective cohort (p = .013). DAOH-90 was 83 days (77-85) following introduction of the CiNPWT protocol as compared to the retrospective cohort (77 days (64-83), p = .04). CONCLUSION: Introduction of CiNPWT was associated with a reduced length of hospital stay and improved DAOH-90. Further trials on CINPWT should include patient-centred outcomes and healthcare cost analysis.


Asunto(s)
Ingle , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica , Humanos , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/diagnóstico , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/epidemiología , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Vasculares/efectos adversos , Vendajes
3.
Cureus ; 13(5): e14841, 2021 May 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33959465

RESUMEN

Background Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the treatment modality of choice in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms. This has resulted in endograft utilization within instructions for use (IFU) and in cases with proximal neck anatomy outside of IFU. Purpose To identify whether graft selection influences outcomes following EVAR outside of IFU. Methodology A retrospective analysis was conducted from previously published data for 636 patients, collated from the Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global Post-Market Registry (ENGAGE) and the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT). Patients were recruited into the ENGAGE registry between 2009 and 2011 and into the GREAT registry between August 2010 and October 2016. In ENGAGE, they received the Medtronic Endurant stent graft (Medtronic Vascular Inc, Dublin, Ireland) for infrarenal AAA repair while patients analyzed in GREAT received the Gore Excluder stent-graft (W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Arizona). Analyses were performed to evaluate all-cause mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, endoleak occurrence, and surgical reintervention rates between the two cohorts. Results Of the 636 patients, 225 were from ENGAGE (mean age 73 years) and 411 were from GREAT (mean age 75 years). 17.8% were treated outside of IFU in the ENGAGE registry, while 12.4% were treated outside IFU in the GREAT cohort. Five-year freedom from all-cause mortality was similar in both cohorts (65.6% vs. 63.8%). The rate of type IA endoleak development was lower in the Excluder cohort, although this may have been impacted by the fact that only endoleaks that underwent reintervention were recorded within GREAT analysis (Endurant 10.6% vs. Excluder 7.0%). The reintervention rate was 16% at five years following the Endurant aortic graft while it was 13.3% at five years with the Excluder. Conclusion Treatment outside of IFU, be it with a suprarenal or an infrarenal fixation device, is associated with worse outcomes. This analysis reinforces the importance of the consideration of either fenestrated or open repair in those aneurysms that fail to satisfy IFU while endovascular repair in such a setting should be reserved as a last resort strategy.

4.
Cureus ; 13(4): e14584, 2021 Apr 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33889469

RESUMEN

Background Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are far more common in male than female gender, although they appear to have a more aggressive pathophysiology in females. Given the lower incidence of AAA in females, it has been difficult to assess the impact of graft selection for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in this cohort. Purpose To identify whether graft selection influences outcomes following AAA endoluminal repair in female patients. Methodology A retrospective analysis of published data for 711 female patients was conducted, collating data from three cohorts - Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global post-market registry (ENGAGE), Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) and U.S. Zenith multicenter trial in combination with the Zenith female registry. Patients were recruited into the ENGAGE registry between 2009 and 2011, the GREAT registry between August 2010 and October 2016, and into the Zenith registry between 2000 and 2003. Patients from ENGAGE received the Medtronic Endurant stent graft for infrarenal AAA repair, patients analysed in GREAT received the Gore Excluder stent graft and the Zenith group received the Cook Zenith stent graft. Analyses were performed to evaluate all-cause mortality, aorta-related mortality, endoleak occurrence and surgical reintervention rates between the three cohorts. Results Of the 711 females, 133 were from ENGAGE (mean age 76 years), 538 were from GREAT (mean age 75 years) and 40 were from Zenith (mean age 74 years). The rates of co-morbidities between the three groups were broadly similar except for atherosclerotic disease which was more commonly observed in those treated with the GORE Excluder. The rate of endoleaks was lower when the Excluder stent was utilised as compared to the other two stents (Excluder 6.7% vs. Zenith 12.5% vs. Endurant 35.3%) even considering the limited follow-up of the Zenith group to two years as compared to five years for both ENGAGE and GREAT. All-cause mortality was similar in all three groups across the period examined while aorta-related mortality was uncommon. Reintervention rate was 15% at two years following the utilisation of the Zenith aortic graft while the rate of intervention at five years was broadly similar between ENGAGE and GREAT. Conclusion The newer generation, lower profile aortic endografts appear to have provided a safe and successful tool in the management of AAA in female patients, despite more complex aortic anatomy with shorter infrarenal neck length and larger aortic neck angulation.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA