Comparison of the prognosis of intertrochanteric fracture with different surgical methods in elderly: a retrospective survival analysis / 中国骨伤

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To determine the difference of post-operative mortality between ORIF (open reduction internal fixation) and hip replacement for the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture in elderly by using survival analysis.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>The clinical data of 110 patients above 60 years old who underwent surgical treatment (ORIF or hip replacement) for the intertrochanteric fracture between April 2003 and May 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Among the patients, 83 cases were treated with ORIF (ORIF group), there were 32 males and 51 females, aged from 61.44 to 98.75 years old with an average of (78.52 ± 7.98) years old; and 27 cases were treated with hip replacement (arthroplasty group), there were 8 males and 19 females, aged from 71.82 to 96.54 years old with an average of (79.99 ± 6.11) years old. A survival analysis was performed on the clinical data by using SPSS 110 software. The survival rate of 1-year,2-year, 5-year and the mean survival time for the total patients, the mortality rate of 1-year, 2-year in each group, the survival rate of 1-year, 2-year and mean survival time and survival curve in each group were included.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>All wounds achieved primary healing and no deaths were found in stay hospital. All patients were followed up from 1 to 125 months with an average of (46.93 ± 29.53) months. Among all 110 cases, 31 were dead and 79 survived. The survival rate of 1-year, 2-year and 5-year was (90.7 ± 2.8)%, (82.5 ± 3.9)% and (57.6 ± 6.5)%, respectively,while the ensemble mean survival time was (84.137 ± 5.902) months. The mortality rate of 1-year, 2-year in ORIF group was 7.2% and 12.0%, respectively; and in arthroplasty group, there was 14.8% and 25.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference in mortality rate of 1-year and 2-year between two groups. According to the survival analysis of the ORIF group, the survival rate of 1-year, 2-year was (92.6 ± 2.9)%, and (85.8 ± 4.3)%, respectively, and the mean survival time was (87.508 ± 6.063) months. In arthroplasty group, the survival rate of 1-year, 2-year was (85.2 ± 6.8)% and (73.9 ± 8.5)%,and the mean survival time was (67.294 ± 11.180) months. There was significant difference in mean survival time between two groups (P < 0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>ORIF can achieve a better postoperative survival compare with hip replacement in treating intertrochanteric fracture in elderly.</p>

Clinical analysis of revision after primary hip replacement in the early stage / 中华外科杂志

<p><b>OBJECTIVES</b>To analyze the reason of revisions no more than 5 years after primary hip replacement, and to discuss the methods how to prevent and manage.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Retrospectively review 11 cases with revision no more than 5 years after primary total hip replacement from January 2002 to June 2007. The reasons for revision were as follows: 2 cases were recurrent dislocation due to malposition of acetabular prosthesis; 5 cases were loosening of acetabular prosthesis; 1 case was abrasion of the native acetabulum by bipolar femoral head; 2 cases were periprosthetic femoral fractures and 1 case was periprosthetic infection. The average follow-up time was 36 months. Each patient was assessed according to Harris hip score. The revision procedures including liner only, acetabular prosthesis only, or both acetabular prosthesis and femoral prosthesis depending on the reasons for revision, two-stage revision was performed on 1 case with periprosthetic infection.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The average of Harris hip score was increased from 46 (28 to 62) preoperatively to 86 (75 to 96) at follow up. The complication occurred in 2 cases: one was postoperative haematoma formation who was performed further surgery for clearance of haematoma, another was slight instability of the hip joint who was accepted skin traction for 3 weeks.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>The main reason for revision after primary total hip replacement is related to uncorrected insert of acetabular prosthesis. Improving surgical technique of insert of acetabular prosthesis is important in primary total hip replacement.</p>

Reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament with hamstring tendon autografts under arthroscopy / 中国骨伤

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate therapeutic effects for reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament(ACL)with hamstring tendon autografts and bioabsorbable interference screws fixation under arthroscopy.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Thirty-one patients with ACL rupture were verified through arthroscopy. There were 27 patients were male and 4 patients were female, ranging in age from 17 to 40 years,with an average of 25 years. Among the patients, 26 patients combined with meniscus injuries, 3 patients with injuries of articular cartilage and 16 patients with I to II degree degeneration of articular cartilage. All the patients were performed ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts under arthroscopy and the reconstructed ligaments were fixed with bioabsorbable interference screws.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>No severe complications occurred at early stage after operation. Thirty patients were followed up and ranged from 9 to 39 months,with an average of (19 +/- 9.0) months. Lysholm score significantly increased from average of 54.6 +/- 16.6 preoperatively to average of 92.5 +/- 5.7 at the end of follow-up period (t = 11.84, P < 0.01). Twenty-six patients restored to normal activity.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>ACL reconstructed with hamstring tendon autografts under arthroscopy has advantages of minimal trauma and satisfactory outcomes.</p>