Improving patient and staff safety by minimising radiation exposure during trauma surgery: A simple and validated predictive model.

INTRODUCTION: Minimising radiation exposure, from fluoroscopic equipment during trauma surgery is crucial to safe-guarding patients and staff. This aim of this study was to identify variables associated with increased radiation exposure for 3 of the most common trauma procedures. Secondly, we aimed to derive an internally and externally validated mathematical model for predicting radiation exposure for these procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively recorded radiation exposure from 270 sliding hip screw (SHS), ankle and wrist fixation procedures. Patient demographics, fracture severity, surgeon and radiographer grade were assessed using univariate and multivariate analyses. A mathematical model was then created and externally assessed for validity from another unit. RESULTS: With regards to the analysis of radiation exposure when fixing wrist fractures, a significant regression equation was found (F (3, 86) = 62.2, p < 0.001), with an adjusted R2 of 0.69. Patients' predicted radiation exposure (cGY/cm2) was therefore equal to the positive result of: 81.916(Fracture severity) + 43.426(Surgical grade) + 23.490 (radiographer grade)-203.89.With regards to the analysis of radiation exposure when fixing ankle fractures, a significant regression equation was found, (F (3, 83) = 15.49, p < 0.001), with an adjusted R2 of 0.34. Patients' predicted radiation exposure (cGY/cm2) was therefore equal to the positive result of: 39.541(Fracture severity) + 51.937(Surgical grade) + 37.702 (radiographer grade)-124.558 SHS (F (3, 89) = 25.29, p < 0.001), R2 of 0.44.61.338(Fracture severity) + 60.945(Surgical grade) + 35.491 (radiographer grade)-105.501. These predictive models were successfully externally validated. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated a workable and externally validated model for accurately predicting the likely radiation exposure using common and easily collectable variables. These models could be used to modify practuce and minimise the radiation exposure to patients and staff.

Epsilon-aminocaproic acid versus tranexamic acid in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis study.

INTRODUCTION: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery can be associated with significant blood loss. Among the problems associated with such blood loss is the need for transfusions of banked blood [1]. Transfusions not only have a financial consequence but also carry a small risk of disease transmission to the patient. Antifibrinolytics have been successfully used to reduce transfusion requirements in elective arthroplasty patients. The objective of this meta-analysis is to determine which of tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA) is more effective for reducing peri-operative blood loss, and lessening the need for blood transfusion following knee arthroplasty surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases were searched for relevant articles published between January 1980 to January 2018 for the purpose of identifying studies comparing TXA and EACA for TKA surgery. A double-extraction technique was used, and included studies were assessed regarding their methodological quality prior to analysis. Outcomes analysed included blood loss, pre- and post-operative haemoglobin, number of patients requiring transfusion, number of units transfused, operative and tourniquet time, and complications associated with antifibrinolytics. RESULTS: Three studies contributed to the quantitative analysis of 1691 patients, with 743 patients included in the TXA group and 948 in the EACA group. Estimated blood loss was similar between the two groups [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.50, 0.04; Z = 1.69; P = 0.09]. There were no differences between the two groups regarding the percentage of patients requiring transfusion (95% CI 0.14, 4.13; Z = 0.31; P = 0.76). There was no difference in the pre- and post-operative haemoglobin difference between the two groups (95% CI -0.36, 0.24; Z = 0.38; P = 0.70). There was no difference in the average number of transfused units (95% CI -0.53, 0.25; Z = 0.71; P = 0.48). There was no difference in the operative (95% CI -0.35, 0.36; Z = 0.04; P = 0.97) or tourniquet time (95% CI -0.16, 0.34; Z = 0.72; P = 0.47). Similarly, there was no difference in the percentage of venous thromboembolism between the two groups (95% CI 0.17, 2.80; Z = 0.51; P = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not demonstrate TXA to be superior to EACA. In fact, both antifibrinolytic therapies demonstrated similar efficacy in terms of intra-operative blood loss, transfusion requirements and complication rates. Currently EACA has a lower cost, which makes it an appealing alternative to TXA for TKA surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Lateral X-ray for proximal femoral fractures - Is it really necessary?

INTRODUCTION: Historically routine work up of a patient with a proximal femoral fracture always included anterior-posterior (AP) and a lateral film of the hip. The aim was to define the role of the lateral X-ray in the assessment and surgical planning of proximal femur fractures. METHODS: Radiographs of 320 consecutive patients with proximal femoral fractures who were admitted over a 12 months period were divided into lateral and AP views. Two blinded reviewers independently assessed the AP view alone and then the AP plus the lateral view. Fracture classification was noted for each X-ray and then compared with intraoperative diagnosis which was our study's gold standard. A 2 × 2 contingency square table and Pearson's x(2) test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The rate of correct classification by the reviewers enhanced by the assessment of the lateral X-ray in addition to the AP view for intracapsular fractures (p = 0.018) but not for extracapsular fractures (p = 0.29). Operative management did not change for intracapsular fractures which appeared displaced on initial AP view after reviewing the lateral X-ray. The only advantage of obtaining a lateral view in intracapsular fracture was the detection of displacement were the fracture appeared to be undisplaced on initial AP view. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides statistical evidence that one view is adequate and safe for majority of proximal femoral fractures. The lateral radiograph should not be performed on a routine basis thus making considerable saving in time and money, and avoiding unnecessary radiation exposure and discomfort to the patient.