Aims: The purpose of this study is the evaluation of the ultrasound screening process for DDH in a population of neonates from the prefecture of Chania, in Western Crete, an area with a history of excessively high incidence of DDH. Methods: Within the period between 1/7/99 and 1/7/01 (24 months) 1247 neonates (2494 hips) were examined clinically and ultrasonograþcally (transverse, oblique, dynamique views), all babies whose parents both descend from this area for generations. They were referred by a paediatrician for one or more of the following reasons: limited hip abduction (48%), hip laxity (6%), positive family DDH history (27%), musculoskeletal congenital abnormalities (11%), breech delivery (5.1%), paediatricianñs or parentsñ insecurity (18%).Results: We had the following þndings: signiþcant dysplasia-Graf III in 3.7%, milder dysplasia Ð Graf IIc, d in 7.2%, immature but satisfactory hips Ð Graf IIa, b in 19.3% and normal hips in 69.5% of the hips. Double diapers (sheets) were used in 43%, Frejka in 3% and Pavlik harness in 4.2% of the cases. In two cases the dysplasia persisted and we had to use a spica cast. Satisfactory results have been observed in all but one case. X-ray control was necessary in six children. Conclusion: Hip ultrasound, in experienced hands, is a safe, quick, well tolerated, non-inventory method for DDH screening, treatment and follow-up in neonates Ð babies in their þrst year of life.

NHS Patients can wait up to 15 months for non-urgent spine surgery. The intended procedure is determined by the outpatient MRI scan. Do changes occur within the spine during the wait for surgery? Would the changes affect the operative decision?

In a prospective study, 105 patients listed for elective lumbar spine surgery at a district general hospital If the MRI scan is over 6 months old, a second scan is performed prior to surgery. Changes that alter the operative decision are noted.

44% Discectomy, 17% decompression, and 19% fusion plus decompression patients cancelled surgery due to improvement in symptoms. None of the spinal fusion patients cancelled.

14% discectomy; 12.5% decompression; 25% fusion; 19% fusion plus decompression and 65% fusion plus discectomy patients had different procedures after the second MRI.

Changes seen include disc resolution, prolapse at a new level, progressive modic changes and compression at other levels.

We do not support the fact that patients may have to wait upto 18 months before having elective spinal surgery. However, we found that significant numbers of discectomy and decompression patients found that their symptoms improved enough to decline surgery. No patient that had been listed for fusion alone got better.

Due to changes seen on the second MRI scan, 1 in 6 operations were different to the initial planned procedure. Could a surgeon failing to request a further up to date scan prior to surgery therefore be considered negligent?

Objective: NHS Patients can wait up to 18 months for non-urgent spine surgery. The intended procedure is determined by the outpatient MRI scan. Do changes occur within the spine during the wait for surgery? Would the changes affect the operative decision?

Design: A Prospective study.

Subjects: 105 patients listed for elective lumbar spine surgery at a district general hospital

Outcome Measures: If the MRI scan is over six months old, a second scan is performed prior to surgery. Changes that alter the operative decision are noted.

Results: Forty-four percent discectomy, 17% decompression, and 19% fusion plus decompression patients cancelled surgery due to improvement in symptoms. None of the spinal fusion patients cancelled. Fourteen percent discectomy; 12.5% decompression; 25% fusion; 19% fusion plus decompression and 65% fusion plus discectomy patients had different procedures after the second MRI. Changes seen include disc resolution, pro-lapse at a new level, progressive modic changes and compression at different levels.

Conclusions: We do not support the fact that patients may have to wait up to 18 months before having elective spinal surgery. However, a significant numbers of discectomy and decompression patients found that their symptoms improved enough to decline surgery. No patient who had been listed for fusion alone got better. Due to changes seen on the second MRI scan, one in six operations were different to the initial planned procedure. Could a surgeon failing to request a further up to date scan prior to surgery therefore be considered negligent?