Complications following implant removal in patients with proximal femur fractures - an observational study over 16 years.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the proximal femur commonly occur but the majority of orthopaedic surgeons do not consider general hardware removal as a routine necessity. Indications and time interval for hardware removal in this special selected patient group is still controversial. Therefore we performed a retrospective study to address the following questions: 1) Is there a difference between the medically- (infection, mechanical problems, implant failure) and non-medically indicated group (patients demand, meteoro-sensitivity, foreign body sensation) in relation to complications? 2) Is there a correlation regarding time interval between implantation and removal comparing these two groups? 3) Is there a context related refracture rate? 4) Should non-medically indicated implant removal (IR) be performed due to persistent pressure from the patient? HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that non-medically indicated implant removals should be avoided due to a significantly higher number of associated complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 371 consecutive patients with 424 hardware removal procedures following a proximal femur fracture, between 08/1992 and 11/2008, have been included. Study population was divided into two groups according to their indication for implant removal: medically indicated group (MIR) consisted of 299 patients (80.59%) and 72 patients (19.41%) were assigned to the non-medically indicated (NMIR) group. RESULTS: In the NMIR subgroup a total of (n = 21) 28% complications occurred compared to 11.46% in the MIR subgroup; (P < 0.005), 86.51% of IR in the MIR group were performed within 1.5 years, compared to 79.17% in the NMIR group after 2 to 3.5 years (NS). In the MIR group 1 refracture occurred, compared to 4 in the NMIR group (NS). CONCLUSION: Non-medically indicated implant removal should be avoided due to the higher complication rate of 28%. Surgeons and patients should be aware of the imminent complications and therefore implant removal should only be performed for good medical reasons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV. Historical case study.

Delayed recovery and late development of complex regional pain syndrome in patients with an isolated fracture of the distal radius: prediction of a regional inflammatory response by early signs.

We studied prospectively the regional inflammatory response to a unilateral distal radial fracture in 114 patients at eight to nine weeks after injury and again at one year. Our aim was to identify patients at risk for a delayed recovery and particularly those likely to develop complex regional pain syndrome. In order to quantify clinically the inflammatory response, a regional inflammatory score was developed. In addition, blood samples were collected from the antecubital veins of both arms for comparative biochemical and blood-gas analysis. The severity of the inflammatory response was related to the type of treatment (Kruskal-Wallis test, p = 0.002). A highly significantly-positive correlation was found between the regional inflammatory score and the length of time to full recovery (r(2) = 0.92, p = 0.01, linear regession). A regional inflammatory score of 5 points with a sensitivity of 100% but a specificity of only 16% also identified patients at risk of complex regional pain syndrome. None of the biochemical parameters studied correlated with regional inflammatory score or predicted the development of complex regional pain syndrome. Our study suggests that patients with a distal radial fracture and a regional inflammatory score of 5 points or more at eight to nine weeks after injury should be considered for specific anti-inflammatory treatment.

A technique for the placement of a long-term hyperalimentation catheter in the head and neck oncology patient.

The relative safety of silicone rubber catheters allows use of the deep brachial vein for long-term central venous access when other vascular access sites are unavailable or undesirable. After local infiltration, a small incision is made across the medial edge of the brachial biceps and the vein is isolated from the artery and median nerve. An introducer is used to aid in insertion of the catheter. Catheter position is checked with a postoperative radiograph of the chest. Sixty of our patients have had catheters in place from 14 to 200 days, with few complications. There was one catheter-related death from acute bacterial endocarditis and one case of clinical thrombosis. The surgical approach to the deep brachial vein provides a simple and safe method of long-term central venous access in the head and neck oncology patient, whereas regional therapy and treatment planning often preclude use of other more conventional access sites.