Orthopedics and 3D technology in Turkey: A preliminary report.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, we present the use of case specific three-dimensional (3D) printed plastic models and custom-made acetabular implants in orthopedic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2018 and September 2020, surgeries were simulated using plastic models manufactured by 3D printers on the two patients with pilon fractures. Also, custom-made acetabular implants were used on two patients with an acetabular bone defect for the revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). RESULTS: More comfortable surgeries were experienced in pilon fractures using preoperative plastic models. Similarly, during the follow-up period, the patients that applied custom-made acetabular implants showed a fixed and well-positioning in radiographic examination. These patients did not experience any surgical complications and achieved an excellent recovery. CONCLUSION: Preoperative surgical simulation with 3D printed models can increase the comfort of fracture surgeries. Also, custom-made 3D printed acetabular implants can perform an important task in patients treated with revision THA surgery due to severe acetabular defects.

Monocular loss of vision following an open tibial fracture: a case of Enterococcus casseliflavus endogenous endophthalmitis.

Rare intraocular complication in a healthy immunocompetent patient with an atypical organism following presumed haematogenous spread after a highly contaminated open tibial fracture.

Calcaneal skeletal traction versus elastic intramedullary nailing of displaced tibial shaft fractures in children.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes and complications of patients who underwent either the calcaneal skeletal traction (CST) or the elastic intramedullary nails (EIN) procedure. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data of patients who underwent EIN or CST surgery for tibia shaft fracture at our center from 2013 to 2018. The patient demographics, fracture characteristics, radiographic information, length of hospital stay, and medical expenses were recorded. All patients were clinically followed-up until they started to walk or for at least 6 months. The treatment outcomes and postoperative complications of the two procedures were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 186 patients who underwent EIN and CST were included in the study. The EIN patients had more low-energy mechanism of injury. In radiographic evaluation, significant differences were observed in distributions of fracture classification and location. Moreover, associated fibula fractures were higher in the EIN group than in the CST group. The CST procedure had faster surgical time, cast duration and lower expenses, and longer hospitalization time. Although they required more clinical visits, patients in the EIN group began exercising and endured weight-bearing earlier than those in the CST group. The average time for bone healing was 68.5 days in the EIN group, and 69.6 days in the CST group. However, the CST provided slight better results of coronal correction than EIN. Moreover, CST patients had less malalignment (> 5°) in complications. None had delay union, nonunion, and shortening over 10 mm at final assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Both EIN and CST patients showed similar treatment outcomes. Hence, not only the characteristics of the patient and fracture, but also the individual's situation and expectation should be considered when choosing the best approach.

Modern treatment of tibial shaft fractures: Is there a role today for closed treatment?

PURPOSE: The decision to attempt closed treatment on tibial shaft fractures can be challenging. At our institution, we attempt treatment of nearly all closed, isolated tibial shaft fractures. The purpose of this study was to report the results of 10 years of experience to develop a tool to identify patients for whom non-operative treatment of tibial shaft fractures may be a viable option METHOD: This was a retrospective review of patients with tibial shaft fracture seen at a level 1 trauma center over 10 years. Patients with closed, isolated injuries underwent sedation, closed reduction, long-leg casting, and outpatient follow-up. Patients were converted to surgery for inability to obtain or maintain acceptable alignment or patient intolerance. Radiographic characteristics and patient demographics were extracted. Logistic regression analysis was used to develop a model to predict which patient and injury characteristics determined success of nonoperative treatment. RESULTS: 334 patients were identified with isolated, closed tibial shaft fractures, who were reduced and treated in a long leg cast. 234 patients (70%) converted to surgical treatment due to inability to maintain alignment, patient intolerance, and nonunion. In a regression model, coronal/sagittal translation, sagittal angulation, fracture morphology, and smoking status were shown to be significant predictors of success of nonoperative treatment (p < 0.05). We developed a Tibial Operative Outcome Likelihood (TOOL) score designed to help predict success or failure of closed treatment. The TOOL score can be used to identify a subsegment of patients with injuries amenable to closed treatment (38% of injuries) with a nonoperative success rate over 60%. CONCLUSION: Non-operative treatment of tibial shaft fractures is feasible, although there is a relatively high conversion rate to operative treatment. However, it is possible to use injury characteristics to identify a cohort of patients with a higher chance of success with closed treatment, which is potentially useful in a resource-constrained setting or for patients who wish to avoid surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level 3.