RESUMO
PURPOSE: Distal radius fractures are the most common upper limb fractures in adults (up to 18% of all fractures in the Emergency Department). Conservative management is possible for the majority, the preferred surgical technique being volar plate fixation. Dorsal bridge plating (DBP) is an alternative method of treatment for complex fractures. DBP acts as an internal fixator and can be used in patients needing early rehabilitation. This systematic review assesses the demographics, functional and radiological outcomes and complications of using DBP in patients with distal radius fractures compared to volar plate fixation. METHODS: A literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE and Google Scholar was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Seven hundred and sixty-one articles were found; 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. Cadaveric studies and case studies of less than five patients were excluded. Primary outcome measures were functional and radiological outcomes. Complications were recorded as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-four patients were included in the study with an average age of 54.8 years (53.9% male and 46.1% female). Weighted mean follow-up was 55.2 weeks; the mean time to plate removal was 17.3 weeks with a mean DASH score of 25.7. The weighted range of movement was 46.9° flexion, 48.8° extension, 68.4° pronation and 67.5° supination. The radiological parameters show satisfactory outcomes with a mean radial height of 10mm, volar tilt of 3.1°, ulnar variance of 0.5mm and radial inclination of 18.8°. The complication rate was 11.4%. Digital stiffness was the most common complication but improved if tenolysis was performed at plate removal. CONCLUSIONS: DBP is a good alternative to volar plating for complex distal radius fractures. The functional outcomes showed a slight loss of range of movement, whereas the radiological outcomes were within recommended limits. A significant disadvantage of the plate is the need for further surgical removal.
RESUMO
Introduction: Nosocomial COVID-19 increases morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing surgical procedures. This study assesses the consenting process in patients admitted for surgical procedures with regard to risks of contracting nosocomial COVID-19 infection during the three lockdown periods in the United Kingdom.Methods: Retrospective review of consecutive surgical patients admitted to our tertiary referral centre for surgical procedures during the lockdown periods in the United Kingdom. Data from our hospital's electronic theatre database cross-referenced with the online surgical operative, admission and discharge records were reviewed by three independent reviewers.Discussion: A total of 180 patients (104 males and 76 females) were studied. No patients tested positive perioperatively for COVID-19. The first lockdown had a significantly larger proportion of consultants consenting (P < 0.001). Surgeons consented patients for risk of COVID-19 infection in 34.4% of cases, COVID-19-related illness in 33.9%, inpatient Intensive Care Unit (ITU) admission secondary to COVID-19 infection and risk of death due to COVID-19 in 0.0% and risk of death secondary to inpatient COVID infection in 1.1%.Conclusion: As surgical activity continues and COVID-19 persists, surgeons should be vigilant and ensure proper documentation for consent regarding COVID-19-related complications in line with the Royal College of Surgeons of England guidelines.
