Background. Despite the known multifactorial nature of scaphoid wrist fracture non-union, a possible genetic predisposition for the development of this complication remains unknown. This pilot study aimed to address this issue by performing Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) analysis of specific genes known to regulate fracture healing. Materials and Methods. We reviewed 120 patients in a retrospective case-control study from the Hand Surgery Department of Asepeyo Hospital. The case group comprised 60 patients with confirmed scaphoid wrist non-union, diagnosed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Computed Tomography (CT). The control group comprised 60 patients with scaphoid fracture and complete bone consolidation. Sampling was carried out with a puncture of a finger pad using a sterile, single-use lancet. SNPs were determined by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using specific, unique probes with the analysis of the melting temperature of hybrids. The X2 test compared genotypes between groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysed the significance of many covariates and the incidence of scaphoid wrist non-union. Results. We found significant differences in subjects who had a smoking habit (p=0.001), high blood pressure (p<0.001), and surgical treatment (p=0.002) in patients with scaphoid non-union. There were more Caucasians (p=0.04) and males (p=0.001) in the case group. Falls were the main mechanism of fracture. The CC genotype in GDF5 (rs143383) was more frequent in patients with scaphoid non-union compared to the controls (p=0.02). CT was prevalent in the controls (p=0.02). T allele in GDF5 was more frequent in patients without non-union (p=0.001). Conclusions. Individuals who were carriers of the CC genotype in GDF5 showed higher susceptibility to suffering scaphoid wrist non-union. Furthermore, being a carrier of CT and T allele suggests that this could be behave as a protection factor against non-union. This is the first clinical study to investigate the potential existence of genetic susceptibility to scaphoid wrist fracture non-union. Level of evidence. Level III, Cross Sectional Study, Epidemiology Study

In-office surgeries have the potential to offer high quality medical care in a more efficient, cost-effective setting than outpatient surgical centers for certain procedures. The primary concerns with operating on patients in the office setting are insufficient sterility and lack of appropriate resources in case of excessive bleeding or other surgical complications. This study serves to investigate these concerns and determine whether in-office hand surgeries are safe and clinically effective. A retrospective review of patients who underwent minor hand operations in the office setting between December 2020 and December 2021 was performed. The surgical procedures included in this analysis are needle aponeurotomy, trigger finger release, mass/foreign body removal and reduction of hand/wrist fracture with or without percutaneous pinning. No major complications requiring extended observation or hospital admission occurred. 122 of the 132 patients (92.4%) were successfully treated with no complications and only mild symptoms within one month of surgery. Five patients (3.8%) returned to the office for pain, inflammation and/or stiffness of the affected finger, with two of the five returning due to osteoarthritis and/or pseudogout flare-ups. Five additional patients returned due to incomplete treatment with continued presence of Dupuytren's contracture (3), trigger finger (1) or infected foreign body (1). One patient (0.8%) developed infection, due to incomplete removal of an infected foreign body, which was subsequently treated with antibiotics and complete foreign body removal. The absence of major complications and high success rate for minor hand procedures shows the high degree of safety and efficacy which can be achieved via the in-office setting for select procedures. While proper patient selection is key, our result shows the in-office procedure room setting can offer the necessary elements of sterility and hemostatic support for several common hand surgeries

Distal radius fractures (DRF) are very common injuries. National recommendations (British Orthopaedic Association, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)) exist in the UK to guide the management of these injuries. These guidelines provide recommendations about several aspects of care including which type of injuries to treat non-operatively and surgically, timing of surgery and routine follow-up. In particular, current recommendations include considering immobilizing patients for 4 weeks in plaster for those managed conservatively, and operating on fractures within 72 hours for intra-articular injuries and 7 days for extra-articular fractures. With increased demands for services and an ageing population, prompt surgery for those presenting with distal radius fractures is not always possible. A key factor is the need for prompt surgery for hip fracture patients. This study is an audit of the current standard of care at a busy level 2 trauma unit against national guidelines for the management of DRFs. This retrospective audit includes all patients presenting to our emergency department from June to September 2018. Patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of a closed distal radius fracture and follow-up in our department were included in the study. Those with open fractures were excluded. Data was retrieved from clinical coding, electronic patient records, and IMPAX Client (Picture archiving and communication system). The following data was collected on patients treated conservatively and those managed surgically:- (1)Time to surgery for surgical management; (2)Period of immobilization for both conservative and operative groups. 45 patients (13 male, 32 female) with 49 distal radius fractures (2 patients had bilateral injuries) were included. Patients had mean age 63 years (range 19 to 92 years) 30 wrists were treated non-operatively and 19 wrists treated surgically (8 K-wires, 10 ORIF, 1 MUA). Mean time to surgery in the operative group was 8 days (range 1 – 21 days, median 7 days). Mean time to surgery for intra-articular fractures was 7 days (range 1 – 21) and 12 days for extra-articular fractures (range 4 – 20). Mean immobilization period in those treated in plaster is 6 weeks (range 4 – 13 weeks, median 5.6 weeks). At busy level 2 trauma units with limited theatre capacity and a high volume of hip fracture admissions, time to surgery for less urgent injuries such as wrist fractures is often delayed. National guidelines are useful in helping to guide management however their standards are often difficult to achieve in the context of increasing populations in urban areas and an ageing population

Background. We reproduced a frequently cited study performed at our University Hospital that was published in the British Medical Journal in 1981 assessing the extent of “snow and ice” fractures during the winter period. Methods. As per the original study, four days of snow and ice were identified as well as two control periods when snow and ice wasn't recorded; four days within the same year, with a similar amount of sunshine hours, and four days one calendar year later. The distribution of fractures according to age and sex in addition to the anatomical location were examined in relation to the presence of snow and ice as well as comparisons with the index study 33 years ago. Results. A total of 293 patients with fractures were identified. Whilst the relative risk was not of the magnitude 33 years ago, we found a significant overall increase in fractures on snow and ice days in the age groups over 30 years old compared with both control periods. In addition, and consistent with the study 33 years ago, there was more than twice the number of forearm and wrist fractures than during the control periods. Conclusion. A significant increase and similar distribution of fractures in relation to the presence of snow and ice continue to be identified. This appears to be despite preventative recommendations made 33 years ago. Level of evidence. III - Evidence from case, correlation, and comparative studies