To determine the outcome of the use of Bone Morphogenetic Protein 7 (BMP7) as a replacement for bone graft in a limb reconstruction unit Retrospective case note and imaging review was performed on a cohort of 71 consecutive patients from October 2009 to October 2012 in whom BMP7 was used to achieve union. The patients were identified from a pharmacy database. Factors analysed included the perceived indication, location in the skeleton, age, comorbidities, type of procedure (non-union, fusion, docking site etc), complications and need for revision surgery.Statement of purpose
Methods
UK personnel have been deployed in Afghanistan since 2001 and over this time a wealth of experience in contemporary war surgery has been developed. Of particular note in the latter Herrick operations the injury pattern suffered by personnel is largely blast wounds, primarily from improvised explosive devices. With the development of improved body armour, previously unsurvivable blasts now result in a large number of traumatic amputations, predominantly affecting the lower limb. Faced with this, deployed medical personnel in the Role 3 facility, Camp Bastion, have developed, by a process of evolution, a standard process for timely management of these injuries. We present a documented schema and photographic record of the ‘Bastion’ process of management of traumatic amputation through the resuscitation department, radiology, theatres and post-operatively. In resuscitation the priority is control of catastrophic haemorrhage with exchange of CAT tourniquets to Pneumatic tourniquets. While undergoing a CT, time can be used to complete documentation. In theatre a process of social debridement & wash then sterile prep followed by formal debridement allows rapid management of the amputated limbs. This work provides a record of current best practice that generates maximum efficiency of personnel and time developed over a large number of procedures. This allows reflection both now in relation to continuing Herrick operations and when military medical services are faced with a future conflict and an inevitable change in injury patterns.
The Rotaglide+ knee arthroplasty was introduced in 2000 as a successor to the Nuffield and Rotaglide knees. Both prosthesis were used in our unit and data was collected prospectively on sex, diagnosis, range of motion, pain score and American knee association score (AKSS). All operations were done under the care of one Surgical team (BBM) using the same instrumentation and the same pathway. Between 1987 and 2000 444 primary Nuffield were performed. 278 primary Rotaglide+ knees between 2000 and 2006. 65% of Nuffields implanted were in female candidates and 55% in the Rotaglide+. 75% of Nuffields were performed for Osteoarthritis, 69% in the Rotaglide+, this reflects the authors growing interest in inflammatory arthritis. Pre-operative functional range of motion and pain scores were similar. Both series showed a significant and sustained improvement in pain score, and walking time. Similar improvement was seen in range of motion. Comparison of the two series showed the Nuffield knee scored better on AKSS at year’s one and two and on pain score at year one but other than this outcomes were similar for both series. Revision rate in the Nuffield series is 9% at 25 years and in the Rotaglide+ series 4% at 8 years. This compares favourably with other published knee series’. Despite being introduced as an improved design the Rotaglide+ fails to demonstrate any improvement in function and pain compared to its predecessor the Nuffield knee. Knee surgeons need to maintain a healthy cynicism of manufacturers ‘improved’ implants.
Failure of non-operative management was deemed as non-union or poor patient tolerance of halo, and occurred in 4 patients (17%). All four had type II odontoid peg fractures, and had transarticular screw fixation. One postoperative complication of screw fracture was recorded.