Do we still need autopsy in times of modern multislice computed tomography?-Missed diagnoses in the emergency room.

INTRODUCTION: In spite of increasing quality of emergency room (ER) assessment in trauma patients and improved accuracy of modern multislice computed tomography (MSCT), the number of potentially missed diagnoses is still controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the initial findings of ER assessment and MSCT to the findings during autopsy in trauma patients not surviving the first 48 h after admission. We hypothesized that autopsy was more accurate than MSCT in diagnosing potentially fatal diagnoses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2004 and September 2007, all trauma patients undergoing ER treatment in our institution who deceased within 48 h after admission were analyzed regarding diagnoses from initial ER assessment, including MSCT, and diagnoses from autopsy. Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Autopsy reports were compared to diagnoses of ER assessment and MSCT. Missed diagnoses (MD) and missed potentially fatal diagnoses (MPFD) were analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients with a mean age of 53.2 years were included into the study. Sixty-three percent were male. Autopsy revealed at least one missed diagnosis in 25% of the patients, with the thoracic area accounting for 67% of these. At least one MPFD was found in 4.1% of the patients, all of them being located in the thorax. Total numbers of MD and MPFD were significantly lower for the newer CT generation (64 MSCT, N = 11), compared to older one (4 MSCT, N = 26). CONCLUSIONS: As determined by autopsy, modern multislice computed tomography is an accurate method to diagnose injuries. However, 25% of all diagnoses, and 4.1% of potentially fatal diagnoses are still missed in trauma patients, who deceased within the first 48 h after admission. Therefore, autopsy seems to be necessary to determine potentially missed diagnoses for both academic and medicolegal reasons as well as for quality control.

Total wrist arthrodesis for septic wrist arthritis and loss of the bony carpus following percutaneous pinning of the fifth carpometacarpal joint: a case report.

We report on a patient who developed septic wrist arthritis with destruction of the entire carpus due to osteomyelitis following percutaneous pinning of a fifth metacarpal base fracture. Arthrodesis was performed using a 6 cm vascularized iliac bone graft. This case report may sharpen the surgeon's awareness of risks in orthopedic surgeries, even though the procedure seems to be rather simple and the patient is young and seems to be healthy.

[Bony Bankart lesions]. / Die ossäre Bankart-Läsion.

Fractures of the anteroinferior glenoid rim, termed bony Bankart lesions, have been reported to occur in up to 22% of first time anterior shoulder dislocations. The primary goal of treatment is to create a stable glenohumeral joint and a good shoulder function. Options for therapeutic intervention are largely dependent on the chronicity of the lesion, the activity level of the patient and postreduction fracture characteristics, such as the size, location and number of fracture fragments. Non-operative treatment can be successful for small, acute fractures, which are anatomically reduced after shoulder reduction. However, in patients with a high risk profile for recurrent instability initial Bankart repair is recommended. Additionally, bony fixation is recommended for acute fractures that involve more than 15-20% of the inferior glenoid diameter. On the other hand chronic fractures are generally managed on a case-by-case basis depending on the amount of fragment resorption and bony erosion of the anterior glenoid with high recurrence rates under conservative therapy. When significant bone loss of the anterior glenoid is present, anatomical (e.g. iliac crest bone graft and osteoarticular allograft) or non-anatomical (e.g. Latarjet and Bristow) reconstruction of the anterior glenoid is often indicated.

Summary of Meta-Analyses Dealing with Single-Row versus Double-Row Repair Techniques for Rotator Cuff Tears.

BACKGROUND: Several meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials have been performed to analyze whether double-row (DR) rotator cuff repair (RCR) provides superior clinical outcomes and structural healing compared to single-row (SR) repair. The purpose of this study was to sum up the results of meta-analysis comparing SR and DR repair with respect on clinical outcomes and re-tear rates. METHODS: A literature search was undertaken to identify all meta-analyses dealing with randomized controlled trials comparing clinical und structural outcomes after SR versus DR RCR. RESULTS: Eight meta-analyses met the eligibility criteria: two including Level I studies only, five including both Level I and Level II studies, and one including additional Level III studies. Four meta-analyses found no differences between SR and DR RCR for patient outcomes, whereas four favored DR RCR for tears greater than 3 cm. Two meta-analyses found no structural healing differences between SR and DR RCR, whereas six found DR repair to be superior for tears greater than 3 cm tears. CONCLUSION: No clinical differences are seen between single-row and double-row repair for small and medium rotator cuff tears after a short-term follow-up period with a higher re-tear rate following single-row repairs. There seems to be a trend to superior results with double-row repair in large to massive tear sizes.

[Current concepts for treatment of massive rotator cuff tears]. / Aktuelle Behandlungskonzepte für Massenrupturen der Rotatorenmanschette.

The ideal treatment for massive rotator cuff tears is influenced by the morphology and chronicity of the tear, tissue quality, the degree of concomitant osteoarthritis, and patient-specific factors. Traditionally, massive rotator cuff tears have wrongly been equated with irreparable tears. A variety of improvements in surgical technique and materials now permit successful arthroscopic management of many massive rotator cuff tears when non-operative management has failed. This study provides an overview of the current treatment options for large and massive rotator cuff tears, including their expected outcomes. Finally, a possible treatment algorithm is suggested.

Allograft augmentation in proximal humerus fractures.

OBJECTIVE: Achieve stable fixation to initially start full range of motion (ROM) and to prevent secondary displacement in unstable fracture patterns and/or weak and osteoporotic bone. INDICATIONS: (Secondarily) displaced proximal humerus fractures (PHF) with an unstable medial hinge and substantial bony deficiency, weak/osteoporotic bone, pre-existing psychiatric illnesses or patient incompliance to obey instructions. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Open/contaminated fractures, systemic immunodeficiency, prior graft-versus-host reaction. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Deltopectoral approach. Identification of the rotator cuff. Disimpaction and reduction of the fracture, preparation of the situs. Graft preparation. Allografting. Fracture closure. Plate attachment. Definitive plate fixation. Radiological documentation. Postoperative shoulder fixation (sling). POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Cryotherapy, anti-inflammatory medication on demand. Shoulder sling for comfort. Full active physical therapy as tolerated without pain. Postoperative radiographs (anteroposterior, outlet, and axial [as tolerated] views) and clinical follow-up after 6 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: Bony union and allograft incorporation in 9 of 10 noncompliant, high-risk patients (median age 63 years) after a mean follow-up of 28.5 months. The median Constant-Murley Score was 72.0 (range 45-86). Compared to the uninjured contralateral side, flexion was impaired by 13 %, abduction by 14 %, and external rotation by 15 %. Mean correction of the initial varus displacement was 38° (51° preoperatively to 13° postoperatively).

Lack of fifth anchoring point and violation of the insertion of the rotator cuff during antegrade humeral nailing: pitfalls in straight antegrade humeral nailing.

Antegrade nailing of proximal humeral fractures using a straight nail can damage the bony insertion of the supraspinatus tendon and may lead to varus failure of the construct. In order to establish the ideal anatomical landmarks for insertion of the nail and their clinical relevance we analysed CT scans of bilateral proximal humeri in 200 patients (mean age 45.1 years (sd 19.6; 18 to 97) without humeral fractures. The entry point of the nail was defined by the point of intersection of the anteroposterior and lateral vertical axes with the cortex of the humeral head. The critical point was defined as the intersection of the sagittal axis with the medial limit of the insertion of the supraspinatus tendon on the greater tuberosity. The region of interest, i.e. the biggest entry hole that would not encroach on the insertion of the supraspinatus tendon, was calculated setting a 3 mm minimal distance from the critical point. This identified that 38.5% of the humeral heads were categorised as 'critical types', due to morphology in which the predicted offset of the entry point would encroach on the insertion of the supraspinatus tendon that may damage the tendon and reduce the stability of fixation. We therefore emphasise the need for 'fastidious' pre-operative planning to minimise this risk.