header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXVII | Pages 465 - 465
1 Sep 2012
Cook A Howieson A Parker M
Full Access

Introduction

Debate still exists as to the optimum method of fixation for subtrochanteric femoral fractures. Meta-analysis of studies comparing cephalocondylic nails with extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures have suggested that further investigation is required in this area. We present the outcome of the largest series to date of subtrochanteric fractures treated by both methods and with a minimum of one year follow-up.

Methods

244 patients with a subtrochanteric femur fracture were treated at one centre over a 21 year period were prospectively studied. 75 were treated with an extramedullary fixation implant and 168 with an intramedullary nail. Surviving patients were followed up till one year from injury.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 93-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 301 - 301
1 Jul 2011
Hachem M Jones J Pathak G Howieson A
Full Access

Background: PIP joint surface replacement has been shown to be effective in the treatment of arthritis. We performed a retrospective review to evaluate the clinical results and functional outcome of pyrocarbon proximal interphalangeal joint replacement, motion preserving and function in selected patients.

Method: The patients who underwent pyrocarbon PIP joint arthroplasty by the two senior authors were reviewed. Clinical assessment included range of motion, degree of pain and deformity pre and post operatively. Independent functional scores were collected. Radiographs were reviewed for evidence of loosening, fracture and dislocation. Patient overall satisfaction was assessed.

Results: 25 patients had 27 pyrocarbon PIP joint replacements between 2004 and 2008. Of these patients, there were 21 female (84%) and 4 male (16%) with average age of 62.5 (43–78). Indications for surgery were pain and loss of function. The preoperative diagnosis was post traumatic osteoarthritis in 9 (33.3%) and primary osteoarthritis in 18 (66.7%). The average arc of motion preoperatively was 42.3 (5–60), and the average postoperative one was 74.3 (45–100). Pain was relieved in majority of patients. 23 patients (92%) were satisfied completely with the procedure. Pain was relieved in the majority of cases and we had 2 dislocations requiring revision to silicone joint replacement and 2 adhesions/stiffness requiring tenolysis. There were no infections.

Conclusion: Our experience of pyrocarbon PIP joint replacement over the 4 years showed this implant is useful for relief of pain and function. A technically demanding procedure, it improves arc of motion, corrects deformity and achieves satisfactory function. We had 7 % revision rate and longer term follow-up is required.