Clinical outcome and cost comparison of carpal tunnel wound closure with monocryl and ethilon: a prospective study.

This prospective non-randomised two-cohort study compares the use of an absorbable suture (Poliglecrapone [Monocryl]: Group A) and a non-absorbable suture (Polyamide [Ethilon]: Group B) in wound closure after elective carpal tunnel decompression. The primary outcome was scar cosmesis as assessed by the Stonybrook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES); the financial cost of wound closure was compared as a secondary outocome. All fifty patients completed follow-up. At six weeks, there was no significant difference in the two groups regarding scar tenderness (p = 0.5), although residual swelling was more evident in the absorbable group (p = 0.2). The mean SBSES score at six weeks was 4.72 in Group A, and 4.8 in Group B (p = 0.3). The unit cost per closed wound of Monocryl was three times than Ethilon (p < 0.05). Ethilon is thus cost-effective without compromising the cosmetic outcome, and we recommend using this as the preferred suture for closure of carpal tunnel wounds.

Factors influencing length of stay and mortality after first and second hip fractures: an event modeling analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing length of stay and mortality in first and second hip fractures. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study with data analysis. SETTING: The study was conducted at a level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Six hundred and seventy-two patients treated for hip fractures (OTA 31-A, 31-B, 32-A1.1) over 30 months were split into 2 groups. 1FG: Six hundred and ten patients (90.8%) suffered a fracture for the first time. 2FG: Sixty-two patients (9.2%) had previously sustained contralateral fractures. INTERVENTION: Dynamic hip screws or cephalomedullary nails (31-A fractures); cephalomedullary nails (32-A1.1); dynamic hip screws or cannulated screws (undisplaced 31-B fractures); and hemiarthroplasty (displaced 31-B fractures) were used. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative lengths of stay on trauma ward (LOS-T) on the rehabilitation unit (LOS-R) and in hospital (LOS-H) were calculated. Dates of death were recorded. Event analysis and structural equation modeling were used to assess the impact of second fractures, fracture types, age, gender, and ASA grades on these. RESULTS: : The 2 groups were comparable in gender distribution, ASA grades, fracture types, LOS, and mortality at 120 days. 2FG patients were older than 1FG (mean 83.3 vs 80.2 years) with a higher proportion being discharged to institutional care (35.5% vs 18.5%). Event modeling analysis showed that LOS-T was dependent on ASA grade, whereas mortality was dependent on ASA grade, age, and gender. Second fractures were not related to the risks of increased LOS-T, LOS-R, and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Second fractures per se do not increase the risk of longer postoperative stay or higher mortality. Any observed effect on these outcomes in second fractures represents the influence of increasing age. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Multiple trauma and scapula fractures: so what?

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND Scapula fractures are rare and are presumed to indicate severe underlying trauma. We studied injury patterns and overall outcome in patients with multiple injuries with scapula fractures. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective review of patients with multiple injuries (Injury Severity Score [ISS] > or = 16) with chest and musculoskeletal injuries admitted to our institution between 1993 and 1999 to investigate whether the presence of a scapula fracture is a marker of increased morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: There were 1,164 patients admitted with multiple trauma. Seventy-nine (6.8%) of the 1,164 sustained a scapula fracture, forming the study group. The remainder of the patients (n = 1,085) formed the control group of the study. Both groups of patients were similar with regard to age and Glasgow Coma Scale score (age, 42 +/- 17.8 [+/- SD] vs. 40 +/- 22; GCS score, 11.2 +/- 5.1 vs. 11 +/- 5 in the study and control groups, respectively). The overall ISS was significantly higher in those with scapula fractures (27.12 +/- 15.13 vs. 22.8 +/- 14.4, p = 0.01). Patients with scapula fractures also had more severe chest injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale score of 3.46 +/- 1.1 vs. 3.1 +/- 1.0, respectively), but not significantly so. However, the incidence of rib fractures was significantly higher in the patients with scapula fractures (p < 0.05). The incidence and severity of head and abdominal injuries were similar in the two groups. The severity of extremity injuries in patients with scapula fractures was significantly lower (2.4 +/- 0.6 vs. 2.7 +/- 0.7, p = 0.001). The rate of admission, the length of intensive care unit stay, and the overall length of hospital stay were similar in the two groups. The overall mortality rate was 11.4% in patients with scapula fractures and 20% in those without scapula fractures (p = 0.1). CONCLUSION: Patients with scapula fractures have more severe underlying chest injuries and overall ISS. However, this did not correlate with a higher rate of intensive therapy unit admission, length of hospital stay, or mortality.

Medial subtalar dislocation: importance of clinical diagnosis in distinguishing from other dislocations.

In an emergency situation, the clinical picture of ankle and subtalar dislocation may be similar. This may lead to the use of the improper technique of reduction, especially in a subtalar dislocation, resulting in the failure of reduction and further damage to the articular surfaces. A case of medial subtalar dislocation is presented, which was managed as an ankle dislocation and manipulated inappropriately, leading to a failure of reduction. The clinical signs of ankle and subtalar dislocation, including points of differentiation between the two are discussed, and the correct method of reduction of subtalar dislocation is described.