Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 106-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 56 - 56
2 May 2024
O'Sullivan D Davey M Woods R Kenny P Doyle F Gheiti AC
Full Access

The aim of this study was to analyze and compare clinical, radiological and mortality outcomes of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures using a SPAIRE technique when compared to a pair-matched control cohort who underwent the same procedure using the direct lateral approach.

A retrospective review of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures by a single surgeon using a SPAIRE technique over a two-year period between July 2019 and July 2021 was performed. These were subsequently pair matched in a 5:1 ratio for age, gender, ASA grade and residential status with a control group who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty by 4 other surgeons using a direct lateral approach

The study included a total of 240 patients (40 and 200 pairmatched to SPAIRE and control groups respectively), with a mean age of 81.0 ± 8.2 years (63–99) and a mean follow-up of 12 ± 3 months (3–30). Overall, there was no significant difference in any of the radiological or mortality outcome scores assessed between the SPAIRE and control groups (p > 0.05 for all). There was a significantly lower number of patients in the SPAIRE group who dropped a level of mobility from their pre-injury baseline at 30-days post-operatively (8.1% versus 31.6%; p = 0.003). However, this appeared to have resolved at 120-day follow-up with no significant differences between the groups in terms of those acquiring a new baseline mobility at 120-days post-operatively (2.7% versus 13.2%, p = 0.09).

In cases of cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular neck of femur fractures, the SPAIRE technique appears to offer patients an earlier return to levels of baseline pre-injury mobility when compared to a direct lateral approach.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_7 | Pages 47 - 47
1 Jul 2020
Tohidi M O'Sullivan D Groome P Yach JD
Full Access

Flail chest and multiple rib fractures are common injuries in trauma patients. Several small randomized studies have suggested significant improvements in patient outcomes with surgical fixation, compared to nonoperative management, yet emerging population-level data report some conflicting results. The objectives of this study were to compare the results of surgical fixation and nonoperative management of multiple rib fractures and flail chest injuries and to assess whether effects varied by study design limitations, including risk of confounding by indication.

A comprehensive search of electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science) was performed to identify randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Random effects models were used to evaluate weighted risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD). Risk of confounding by indication was assessed for each study (low, medium, and high risk), and this categorization was used to stratify results for clinical outcomes. Publication bias was assessed.

Thirty-nine studies, with a total of 19,357 patients met inclusion criteria. Compared to nonoperative treatment, surgical fixation of flail chest and multiple rib fractures was associated with decreased risk of death (overall RR 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28–0.56), pneumonia (overall RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52–0.93), tracheostomy (overall RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41–0.93), and chest wall deformity (overall RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.06–0.42). However, many of the observational studies were at risk of confounding by indication, and results varied according to risk of confounding by indication. Differences in ventilator time, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and return to work will be assessed (results pending).

Compared to nonoperative treatment, surgical fixation of flail chest and multiple rib fractures is associated with improved clinical outcomes. Discrepancies between some study results may be due to confounding by indication. Additional prospective randomized trials and high-quality observational studies are required to overcome potential threats to validity and to expand on existing evidence around optimal treatment of these injuries.