Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term results of Cincinnati incision release in resistant clubfoot. Methods: 130 children with clubfoot deformity were treated at Our lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, during the four year period from January, 1994, toDecember, 1997. A Cincinnati release was performed on 41 feet in 32 patients with a resistant club-foot deformity. All the children had a previous hind foot release at the age of three months. At the time of surgery the children were aged between 9 months and 1.5 years with one exception. The average follow-up period was 60 months.

This approach enabled the surgeon to correct the deformity in all planes simultaneously, with a clearer visualization of the anatomical structures.

Emphasis was placed on correcting the foot position to neutral and in particular avoiding over-correction. The corrected foot position was maintained by inserting three pins at the time of surgery, which were removed 6 weeks later. Serial casts were used for a period of 16 weeks. Tarso-pronator boots were used to maintain correction in the ambulant child. Results: Parent satisfaction with the operation was very high and the children tolerated the procedure well with no significant post- operative complications. Using the Magone functional rating system 81% of the feet was good or excellent, with 19% fair results. There were no poor results in our series. All the children were pain free and no child suffered from limitation of daily activities. Conclusion: We conclude that the Cincinnati incision release technique is an effective method of correcting the deformity in resistant clubfeet. With meticulous attention to surgical technique complications can be minimized.

A prospective trial of proximal femoral nail versus dynamic hip screw for unstable intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. Introduction: The proximal formal nail (PFN) is purposed to have superior bio-mechanical properties to the dynamic hip screwwhen use in the treatment of unstable intertrochantric fractures of the femur. Objective: To compare the outcome of PFN and DHS fixation of unstable proximal femoral fractures. Methods: The authors conducted a prospective study of 70 consecutive patients presenting to the orthopaedic department with acute AO/ASIF 31 -A2 and A3 fractures. Patient underwent either PFN or DHS fracture fixation depending on surgeon experience and preference. Patients were all followed up for 6 months. The main outcome measures were operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, radiographic fracture union, com-plication rates, independent mobility and residual hip pain at 6 months. Result: The two groups exhibited similar demographic characteristics, premorbid mobility and fracture severity. Operation duration was similar in the two groups although blood loss was significantly less in the PFN groups (PFN 200mls; DHS 375mls). There was a significant difference in length of hospital stay (PFN 8 days; DHS 14 days). Radiographic signs of fracture healing at 3 months were 88% PFN and 83% DHS. Three patients in the DHS groups suffered failure of fixation with screw cut out There were no implant failures or failure of fixation in the PFN groups. At 3 month PFN follow up mobility was greater in the PFN group (Wheelchair bound/walking frame/stick/no aide: group = 0%/20%/49%/14%). At 6 months both groups showed similar mobility. Persistent sever hip pain at 6 months was PFN 3% and DHS 9%. Conclusion: The proximal femoral nail may be used successfully in the fixation of unstable femoral fractures with similar result to the DHS for mobility at 6 months. There may be advantages over the DHS in term of reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stay.