RESUMO
Objectives: Intra-articular hip injections (IHI) are routinely performed for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The procedure can be performed via either an anterior or a lateral approach with fluoroscopic guidance being widely practised. There is a risk of radiation exposure associated with fluoroscopy assisted IHI. This may be influenced either by the surgical approach or the patient's body mass index (BMI) or both. This study was undertaken to compare the relationships of the respective approaches to BMI, fluoroscopic exposure time (FET) and radiation dose (RD). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted comprising 74 patients who underwent IHI with 37 patients in each group (anterior and lateral). Patients were assessed pre-operatively and post operatively for any complications. The intra-operative radiation dose, fluoroscopic exposure time and BMI data were collected and analyzed. Results: The mean age of the patients in anterior and lateral groups was 61.18±14.08 and 67.21±14.39 years respectively. No complications were noted in either group. However, there was a significant increase in FET (P=0.002) and RD (P<0.001) in patients with BMI ≥ 30. In the lateral group, this trend was markedly noted with increase in FET (P<0.001) and RD (P<0.001) in patients with BMI ≥ 30. On the other hand, in the anterior group there was no statistically significant increase in FET (P=0.155) and only a moderate increase in RD (P=0.020) in patients with BMI ≥ 30. Conclusion: Both anterior and lateral approaches to fluoroscopic guided IHI are equally safe in terms of complications involved. There is statistically significant increase in both radiation dose and fluoroscopic exposure time in patients with BMI ≥ 30. This is more pronounced in lateral approach. The anterior approach is most effective in reducing both radiation dose and fluoroscopic exposure time, more so in patients with BMI of 30 and above.
RESUMO
Introduction: COVID-19 pandemic created extreme pressure situation on health care services across the globe with shortage of medical staff and beds. The management of fragility fracture also affected significantly. The distal radius fractures (DRFs) are one of the common frailty fractures. There was a significant shift in the treatment of such injuries with new guidelines leaning toward more of non-operative management. Case Report: A retrospective cross-sectional study of DRFs (DRF) treated during COVID pandemic for a period of 1 year in the United Kingdom. This included all radiologically confirmed cases of DRFs with isolated adult injuries excluding polytrauma, same limb other injuries, associated neurovascular injuries, and age below 18 years. All patient's data were collected from hospital records retrospectively from April 2020 to March 2021. There were a total of 179 patients with distal radius fracture, of which 141 (78.8%) were females and 38 (21.2%) males. The mean age was 68.2 years (SD 68.20 ± 15.63) and there were greater number of patients with intra-articular fracture. There were 28.5% (Grades 1 and 2, Group I) extra-articular fractures; 69.8% (Grades 3-8, Group II) were intra-articular fractures and 3 Barton's fractures (Group III) accounted to 1.7%. 137 patients were (76.5%) treated to non-operatively and 42 (23.5%) were treated surgically. 135 (75.4%) patients had good and 43 (24%) satisfactory clinical outcomes. 3 (1.6%) patients required osteotomy for malunited fractures. Fracture grade I and II is significantly associated with non-operative procedure (100.0% vs 84.3%) with P < 0.001. Conclusion: This study confirmed that non-operative treatment is still a good option even in intra-articular fractures. Surgical fixation should be considered in young patients and those with higher grade of fracture classification and greater angulation at presentation. A virtual physiotherapy is still a good option.
