[Distal femoral fractures]. / Distale Femurfraktur.

CLINICAL ISSUE: Fractures of the distal femur represent rare but serious injuries with a high 1­year mortality. An increasingly older patient population requires adapted treatment concepts. STANDARD TREATMENT PROCEDURE: Surgical treatment using angular stable plating and retrograde nailing is the standard procedure. Conservative treatment is only indicated in cases of low demands and high perioperative risks of the patient. TREATMENT INNOVATIONS: Primary double plate osteosynthesis and primary implantation of a distal femoral replacement represent new treatment procedures and show promising initial results in the collective of geriatric patients. DIAGNOSTIC WORK-UP: Conventional radiographs in 2 planes and computed tomography with multiplanar and 3D reconstructions should be performed to enable an adequate assessment of the indications and treatment planning. PERFORMANCE: Nonunion rates of plate and nail osteosyntheses range from 4% to 10%. No significant differences in long-term results can be observed. The results regarding double plate osteosynthesis and distal femoral replacement so far do not show any disadvantages compared to the existing procedures but there is still insufficient data for general recommendations. ASSESSMENT: Complex fractures with extensive reconstructive procedures and treatment by distal femoral replacement should be performed in specialized centers. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: The gold standard is still surgical treatment by means of minimally invasive angular stable plate or retrograde nail osteosynthesis. Complex fracture forms require individual treatment planning considering all currently available treatment options.

[Primary radial head arthroplasty in trauma : Complications]. / Primäre posttraumatische Radiuskopfprothetik : Komplikationen.

Radial head fractures are common injuries in elbow trauma. Non-displaced fractures are best treated conservatively. Simple but displaced fractures require anatomic reduction and fixation, typically using screws. The treatment course for complex fractures with multiple fragments is still being debated, as results are less predictable. Radial head resection is not advised if concomitant injuries of the coronoid process or the collateral ligaments with instability are present. Favorable outcomes following open reduction and fixation using plates were reported recently. However, complication rates are very high. Radial head replacement is a valuable tool in treating complex fractures of the radial head with predominantly good and excellent results. Patients who suffer radial head fractures are typically of a younger age, resulting in high functional demands. Certainly, unspecific and specific complications related to radial head arthroplasty were reported in up to 40 % of cases in an acute fracture setting. This article highlights common complications in radial head arthroplasty and aims to present strategies to avoid them.

IABP before cardiac surgery: clinical benefit compared to intraoperative implantation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine whether preoperative compared to intraoperative intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) is advantageous regarding 30-day and 2-year survival in high-risk patients (acute myocardial infarction, severely impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), low output syndrome) undergoing coronary surgery. METHODS: In the years 2004 to 2008, 156 consecutive patients undergoing coronary surgery with IABP support (119 preoperative, 37 intraoperative IABP) were observed. Applying Fisher's exact test, as well as Wilcoxon and median tests, possible group differences were evaluated. After univariate analysis, models of logistic regression and Cox-regression were built. RESULTS: Preoperative hemodynamic state and risk profile of the two patient groups were comparable: patients with preoperative IABP showed a similar level of urgency (21.9% vs. 18.9% emergencies), cardiogenic shock (8.4% vs. 10.8%), inotropes (8.4% vs. 8.1%), impaired LVEF (30.3% vs. 29.7%) and ventilation (5.9% vs. 5.4%) compared to patients with intraoperative IABP. Nevertheless, patients with intraoperative IABP demonstrated a significantly higher 30-day mortality rate (37.8% vs. 5.9%) and 2-year mortality rate (54.0% vs. 18.1%) compared to patients with preoperative IABP. Logistic regression revealed that patients with intraoperative IABP have a 16-times higher 30-day mortality rate after coronary surgery (OR: 16.386, 95% CI: 4.858-55.266) than patients with preoperative IABP. Two-year mortality (OR: 9.317, 95% CI: 3.430 to 25.311) and survival time were significantly better in patients with preoperative IABP therapy. CONCLUSION: Considering the significant benefit for patients with preoperative compared to intraoperative IABP and the absence of vascular problems after IABP insertion, the results of this study indicate a more liberal indication for IABP in high-risk patients before coronary bypass surgery.