The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. Orthopaedic departments have adopted business continuity models and guidelines for essential and non-essential surgeries to preserve hospital resources as well as protect patients and staff. These guidelines broadly encompass reduction of ambulatory care with a move towards telemedicine, redeployment of orthopaedic surgeons/residents to the frontline battle against COVID-19, continuation of education and research through web-based means, and cancellation of non-essential elective procedures. However, if containment of COVID-19 community spread is achieved, resumption of elective orthopaedic procedures and transition plans to return to normalcy must be considered for orthopaedic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic also presents a moral dilemma to the orthopaedic surgeon considering elective procedures. What is the best treatment for our patients and how does the fear of COVID-19 influence the risk-benefit discussion during a pandemic? Surgeons must deliberate the fine balance between elective surgery for a patient’s wellbeing versus risks to the operating team and utilization of precious hospital resources. Attrition of healthcare workers or Orthopaedic surgeons from restarting elective procedures prematurely or in an unsafe manner may render us ill-equipped to handle the second wave of infections. This highlights the need to develop effective screening protocols or preoperative COVID-19 testing before elective procedures in high-risk, elderly individuals with comorbidities. Alternatively, high-risk individuals should be postponed until the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection is minimal. In addition, given the higher mortality and perioperative morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery, the decision to operate must be carefully deliberated. As we ramp-up elective services and get “back to business” as orthopaedic surgeons, we have to be constantly mindful to proceed in a cautious and calibrated fashion, delivering the best care, while maintaining utmost vigilance to prevent the resurgence of COVID-19 during this critical transition period. Cite this article:
Management of bisphosphonate-associated subtrochanteric
fractures remains opinion- or consensus-based. There are limited
data regarding the outcomes of this fracture. We retrospectively reviewed 33 consecutive female patients with
a mean age of 67.5 years (47 to 91) who were treated surgically
between May 2004 and October 2009. The mean follow-up was 21.7 months
(0 to 53). Medical records and radiographs were reviewed to determine
the post-operative ambulatory status, time to clinical and radiological
union and post-fixation complications such as implant failure and
need for second surgery. The predominant fixation method was with an extramedullary device
in 23 patients. 25 (75%) patients were placed on wheelchair mobilisation
or no weight-bearing initially. The mean time to full weight-bearing
was 7.1 months (2.2 to 29.7). The mean time for fracture site pain
to cease was 6.2 months (1.2 to 17.1). The mean time to radiological
union was 10.0 months (2.2 to 27.5). Implant failure was seen in
seven patients (23%, 95 confidence interval (CI) 11.8 to 40.9).
Revision surgery was required in ten patients (33%, 95 CI 19.2 to
51.2). A large proportion of the patients required revision surgery
and suffered implant failure. This fracture is associated with slow
healing and prolonged post-operative immobility. Cite this article:
