Lisfranc injuries account for 0.2% of all fractures and have been linked to poorer functional outcomes, in particular resulting in post-traumatic arthritis, midfoot collapse and chronic pain. This study assesses the longitudinal functional outcomes in patients with low and high energy Lisfranc injuries treated both operatively and non-operatively. Patients above 16 years with Lisfranc injuries from January 2008 and December 2017 were identified through the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes (VOTOR) registry. Follow-up performed at 6, 12 and 24 months through telephone interviews with response rate of 86.1%, 84.2% and 76.2% respectively. Longitudinal functional outcome data using Global Outcome Assessment, EQ-5D-5L, numerical pain scale, Short-Form 12, the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule and return to work status were collected. Univariate analysis was performed and variables showing a significant difference between groups ( 745 patients included in this retrospective cohort study. At 24 months, both the operative and non-operative groups demonstrated similar functional outcomes trending towards an improvement. Mixed effect regression models for the EQ items for mobility (OR 1.80, CI 0.91 – 3.57), self-care (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.09-3.49), usual activities (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.99-1.03), pain (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.61-1.89), anxiety (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.72-2.34) and pain scale (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.51 – 2.22) and return to work (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.56-2.91) between groups were very similar and not statistically significantly different. We concluded that there was no statistically significant difference between operative and non-operative patients with low and high energy Lisfranc injuries. Current clinical practices in Lisfranc injury management are appropriate and not inadvertently causing any further harm to patients. Future research comparing fracture patterns, fixation types and corresponding functional outcomes can help determine gold standard Lisfranc injury management.
The Lisfranc fracture dislocation of the tarsometatarsal joint (TMTJ) is a complex injury with a reported incidence of 9.2 to 14/100,000 person-years. Lisfranc fixation involves dorsal bridge plating, transarticular screws, combination or primary arthrodesis. We aimed to identify predictors of poor patient reported outcome measures at long term follow up after operative intervention. 127 patients underwent Lisfranc fixation at our Level One Trauma Centre between November 2007 and July 2013. At mean follow-up of 10.7 years (8.0-13.9), 85 patients (66.92%) were successfully contacted. Epidemiological data including age, gender and mechanism of injury and fracture characteristics such as number of columns injured, direction of subluxation/dislocation and classification based on those proposed by Hardcastle and Lau were recorded. Descriptive analysis was performed to compare our primary outcomes (AOFAS and FFI scores). Univariate analysis and multivariate regression analysis was done adjusted for age and sex to compare the entirety of our data set. P<0.05 was considered significant. The primary outcomes were the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot Score and the Foot Function Index (FFI). The number of columns involved in the injury best predicts functional outcomes (FFI, P <0.05, AOFAS, P<0.05) with more columns involved resulting in poorer outcomes. Functional outcomes were not significantly associated with any of the fixation groups (FFI, P = 0.21, AOFAS, P = 0.14). Injury type by Myerson classification systems (FFI, P = 0.17, AOFAS, P = 0.58) or open versus closed status (FFI, P = 0.29, AOFAS, P = 0.20) was also not significantly associated with any fixation group. We concluded that 10 years post-surgery, patients generally had a good functional outcome with minimal complications. Prognosis of functional outcomes is based on number of columns involved and injured. Sagittal plane disruption, mechanism and fracture type does not seem to make a difference in outcomes.
We describe a novel single incision approach and its safety in the largest reported series of Lisfranc injuries to date. Via separate subcutaneous windows it is possible to access the medial three rays of the foot for bridge plating, without the concern of narrow skin bridges between multiple incisions. A retrospective review identified all 150 patients who underwent a Lisfranc ORIF via the modified dorsal approach at the Royal Melbourne Hospital between January 2011 and June 2016. All patients were operated by a single surgeon. Removal of metalwork (ROM) was routinely undertaken at six months post-operatively via the same incision. Medical recored were reviewed to record patient demographics, mechanism of injury and surgical details. Outpatient notes were reviewed to identify wound-related complications including; delayed wound healing, superficial infection, wound dehiscence, deep infection, complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), neuroma and impaired sensation. Median follow-up was 1012 days (range 188–2141).Introduction
Methods
The aim of the study was to highlight the absence of an important pitfall in the Advanced Trauma Life Support protocol in application of rigid collar to patients with potentially unstable cervical spine injury. We present a case series of two patients with ankylosed cervical spines who developed neurological complications following application of rigid collar for cervical spine injuries as per the ATLS protocol. This has been followed up with a survey of A&E and T&O doctors who regularly apply cervical collars for suspected unstable cervical spine injuries. The survey was conducted telephonically using a standard questionnaire. 75 doctors completed the questionnaire. A&E doctors = 42, T&O = 33. Junior grade = 38, middle grade = 37. Trauma management frontline experience >1yr = 50, <1yr = 25. Of the 75 respondents 68/75 (90.6%) would follow the ATLS protocol in applying rigid collar in potentially unstable cervical spine injuries. 58/75 (77.3%) would clinically assess the patient prior to applying collar. Only 43/75 (57.3%) thought the patients relevant past medical history would influence collar application. Respondents were asked whether they were aware of any pitfalls to rigid collar application in suspected neck injuries. 34/75 (45.3%) stated that they were NOT aware of pitfalls. The lack of awareness was even higher 17/25 (68%) amongst doctors with less that 12 months frontline experience. When directly asked whether ankylosing spondylitis should be regarded as a pitfall then only 43/75 (57.3%) answered in the affirmative. We would like to emphasise the disastrous consequences of applying a rigid collar in patients with ankylosed cervical spine. The survey demonstrates the lack of awareness (∼ 50%) amongst A&E and T&O doctors regarding pitfalls to collar application. We recommend the ATLS manual highlight a pitfall for application of rigid collars in patients with ankylosed spines and suspected cervical spine injuries.
The British Scoliosis Society published a document in 2008 which set out the minimum standards for paediatric spinal deformity services to achieve over a period of time. But how do the UK paediatric spinal deformity centres measure up to these benchmarks? We performed a telephonic survey, contacting every UK spinal deformity centre. The questionnaire probed how each unit compared to the recommended standards.Introduction
Methods
Retrospective review of fusion rates using Grafton DBM/allografts only in AIS. Medical records of 30 consecutive patients at an average age of 19(18-24)were reviewed. All patients had segmental fixation with dual rod and pedicle screw construct followed by decortication supplemented with matrix strips/allograft chips. Minimum follow up 1.5 years, average of 2 years (1.5-3). First follow up at 3 months postoperatively and than 6 months subsequently. All patients were evaluated using criteria described by Betz et al for “possible pseudoarthrosis” which included persistent back pain, defects in the fusion mass, loosening of pedicle screws, junctional kyphosis and curve progression of more than 10 degrees from initial standing postoperative PA views. There were no infections. Average time to clinically and radiographically evident fusion was 12 months (range 10-16). Radiographically visible unfused facet joints were encountered in 3 patients towards the end of the construct. One patient had extension of the construct to treat junctional kyphosis. Other two remained asymptomatic. None had Progression of deformity. One patient developed pars defect at level below construct and was treated with extension of fusion.Purpose
Methods
Retrospective review of growth sparing spinal instrumentation. Medical records of 30 children with spinal deformity treated were evaluated. There were 14 male and 16 female patients at an average age of 4.9 years (1-14) at the time of presentation. These included 18 idiopathic, 11 congenital and a 14 year old with delayed growth having GH treatment. All patients underwent dual growing rod construct using hook and pedicle screw instrumentation. Extensions were carried out at approximately 6 monthly intervals. Average follow up was 4.2 years (2-8.5) with an average of 7.3(3-15) extension/exchange procedures per patient. Average immediate postoperative Cobb angle was 29(15-55) from a preoperative Cobb of 68(55-100) and this was maintained to a final mean Cobb angle of 30(15-60). Average gain in T1-S1 length was 5.7(3.5-9.8) cm. Five patients had final fusion at an average age of 15.5 years. There were no infections following primary operation. Out of 249 procedures including extensions/exchange, there were 9(4.5%) episodes of deep infection in 7 patients requiring debridement. Four patients (13%) had revisions for rod breakage/screw loosening/hook pullout/junctional kyphosis and three(10%) had prominent implants.Purpose
Methods and results
To review the medium-term results of the Dynesys stabilisation system used in 113 consecutive patients with discogenic back pain. 113 consecutive patients with discogenic back pain were treated with Dynesys as the sole intervention. Inclusion criteria included mri proven disc degeneration and an improvement in symptoms following an injection into the disc with local anaesthetic and steroid (spinal disc probing). Patients were followed up for a minimum of 5 years, with outcome measures including SF-36, Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual pain analogue scores (VPAS). Additional factors reviewed included previous spinal operations, complications, loosening and revision rates with subsequent outcomes. Mean pre-operative ODI was 49.5, SF-36 was 37.6 and VPAS back pain was 60.9. At one year post operatively, these scores were 36.9, 49.4 and 39.8, at five years follow up, the scores were 33.3, 51.8 and 40.1 respectively. We note wide variations in our results. Several significant factors appear to contribute to the outcome of surgery. These include undergoing surgery before the age of 43, no more than 2-level disc degeneration, leg pain less than VPAS 4, and no previous spinal surgery. 19 patients had screw loosening evident on plain film x-rays (4 requiring removal), and 2 patients had screw breakages. 19 patients had implant removal for failure and 2 patients went on to have a fusion procedure.Purpose of Study
Methods and Results
To investigate current practice of thromboprophylaxis in major UK spinal centres for both trauma and elective surgery, and to asses compliance with NICE guidelines A telephonic survey was carried out which comprised of questions relating to current practice of thromboprophylaxis in major spinal units across the UK. Questions probed practice with regard to trauma versus elective surgery, agents used, timing of prophylaxis, length of treatment and whether practice has changed since the introduction of NICE guidelines.Purpose of Study
Methods
To highlight the absence of an important pitfall in the Advanced Trauma Life Support protocol in application of rigid collar to patients with potentially unstable cervical spine injury. We present a case series of two patients with ankylosed cervical spines who developed neurological complications following application of rigid collar for cervical spine injuries as per the ATLS protocol. This has been followed up with a survey of A&E and T&O doctors who regularly apply cervical collars for suspected unstable cervical spine injuries. The survey was conducted telephonically using a standard questionnaire. 75 doctors completed the questionnaire. A&E doctors = 42, T&O = 33. Junior grade = 38, middle grade = 37. Trauma management frontline experience >1yr = 50, <1yr = 25. Of the 75 respondents 68/75 (90.6%) would follow the ATLS protocol in applying rigid collar in potentially unstable cervical spine injuries. 58/75 (77.3%) would clinically assess the patient prior to applying collar. Only 43/75 (57.3%) thought the patients relevant past medical history would influence collar application. Respondents were asked whether they were aware of any pitfalls to rigid collar application in suspected neck injuries. 34/75 (45.3%) stated that they were NOT aware of pitfalls. The lack of awareness was even higher 17/25 (68%) amongst doctors with less that 12 months frontline experience. When directly asked whether ankylosing spondylitis should be regarded as a pitfall then only 43/75 (57.3%) answered in the affirmative.Aim of Study
Study Method
On 7 July 2005, four bombs were detonated on the London transport system. Three of these bombs exploded almost simultaneously at 08:50h affecting the underground tube network at Aldgate, King's Cross and Edgware Road stations. The fourth bomb exploded at 09:47h on a double-decker bus in Tavistock Square. There were 54 deaths in total at the scenes and over 700 injured. 194 patients were brought to the Royal London Hospital. 167 were assessed in a designated minor injuries unit and discharged on the same day. 27 patients were admitted of whom 7 required ITU care, 1 died in theatre and 1 died post-operatively. The median Injurity Severity Score (ISS) in this group of patients was 6 (range 0-48) and the mean ISS was 12. The general pattern of injury in the critically ill patients was of mangled lower limbs and multiple, severely contaminated fragment wounds. Hepatitis B prophylaxis was administered to those patients with wounds contaminated by foreign biological material. 11 primary limb amputations were performed in 7 patients. 9 limb fasciotomies, 5 laparotomies and 1 sternotomy were carried out. 3 patients had blast lung injury. All patients who underwent primary amputations and debridement received further regular inspections in theatre. These inspections formed the majority of our theatre work. Under no circumstance was initial reconstructive surgery attempted. Delayed primary closure and split skin grafting of all wounds was completed by the end of the second week. There have been no sepsis-related deaths. Our experience at The Royal London has allowed us to revisit the principles of blast wound management in a peacetime setting. A number of lessons were learned regarding communication and resource allocation. A multi-disciplinary approach with the successful execution of a major incident plan is the key to managing an event of this magnitude.
In our cohort, clinical indications were:
t-test was used for comparison between preoperative and postoperative scores and p-value was used to show the significance.
Patients with stenosis performed better when the procedure involved adjunct decompression. Similarly, results of decompression and fusion were better than Dynesys alone in patients with spondylolisthesis.
Dynesys was successfully controlled symptoms of DDD in the intermediate term. Dynesys can be used as surgical treatment for symptomatic ASD. Dynesys alone in the treatment of spondylolysthesis resulted in a 45% re-operation rate, and we believe it should not be recommended as an indication. Dynesys alone is not recommended as a treatment for symptomatic spinal stenosis.
• Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD)
271 patients
• Spondylolisthesis
55 patients
• Adjacent segment disease (ASD)
30 patients
• Spinal canal stenosis
18 patients
Modic changes(M) have been described in association to Degenerative Disc Disease(DDD). Type-I represents the inflammatory phase whereas Type-II describes fatty changes within the vertebral marrow and endplate. Type-III is more advanced degeneration and it indicates marked sclerosis adjacent to endplates.
Adjacent endplate levels showed worsening of M0 to M2 in 11 patients while no change was seen in 35 levels. Only 4 levels with M2 were seen, of which 3 levels did not change and 1 level continued to M3. 2 M3 improved to M2.
