Injury
-
Knee dislocation is a rare but potentially devastating injury. Quoted rates of associated vascular compromise vary dramatically between 3.3% and 64%, and the best approach to investigate and diagnose such an injury remains controversial. We aim to evaluate our own 4-year experience of knee dislocation and vascular injury as a UK Major Trauma Centre and vascular hub. ⋯ Our rates of vascular injury are in line with the most recent and largest study to date. Non-invasive investigation and selective angiography has been safe in identifying significant vascular compromise, however, there is inconsistency in management pathways, and too much reassurance attributed to the presence of pedal pulses on initial examination. Safety and consistency could be improved with the introduction of a formalised evidence-based protocol for the initial evaluation of knee dislocation and vascular injury.
-
Internal or external fixation of the femur is common following trauma. Neurovascular structures around the shaft of the femur are at risk, particularly the superficial femoral artery (SFA). Damage to this structure, when it is medial to the femur, can occur during the lateral approach, when drills, pins or screws are inserted. This anatomical study aims to delineate a safe zone for operative intervention to the shaft of the femur with respect to the SFA, and describe the relationship between this zone and the width and length of the femur. ⋯ There is a safe zone along the medial shaft of the femur, which can be estimated intraoperatively using anatomical reference points.
-
Segmental tibial fractures are complex injuries associated with significant soft tissue damage that are difficult to treat. This study aimed to identify the most effective method of treating segmental tibial fractures. ⋯ IMN has the fastest time to fracture union, however there are concerns regarding an increased deep infection rate in open segmental tibial fractures. In this subgroup, the data suggests CEF provides the most satisfactory results. However, the available literature does not provide sufficient detail to make this statement with certainty. We recommend a randomised controlled study to further investigate this challenging problem.
-
Providing current, reliable and evidence based information for clinicians and researchers in a synthesised and summarised way can be challenging particularly in the area of traumatic brain injury where a vast number of reviews exists. These reviews vary in their methodological quality and are scattered across varying sources. In this paper, we present an overview of systematic reviews that evaluate the pharmacological interventions in traumatic brain injury (TBI). By doing this, we aim to evaluate the existing evidence for improved outcomes in TBI with pharmacological interventions, and to identify gaps in the literature to inform future research. ⋯ The evidence from high quality systematic reviews show that there is currently insufficient evidence for the use of magnesium, monoaminergic and dopamine agonists, progesterone, aminosteroids, excitatory amino acid inhibitors, haemostatic and antifibrinolytic drugs in TBI. Anti-convulsants are only effective in reducing early seizures with no significant difference between phenytoin and leviteracetam. There is no difference between propofol and midazolam for sedation in TBI patients and ketamine may not cause increased ICP. Overviews of systematic review provide informative and powerful summaries of evidence based research.
-
Evaluation of the long-term performance of implants used in trauma surgery relies on post-marked clinical studies since no registry based implant assessment exists. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the evidence of performance of implants currently used for treating proximal femoral fractures (PFF) in Denmark. ⋯ The clinical evidence behind the current implants used for proximal femoral fractures is weak considering the number of implants used worldwide. Sporadic evaluation is not sufficient to identify long term problems. A systematic post market surveillance of implants used for fracture treatment, preferable by a national register, is necessary in the future.