No abstract

Background Templating is an important aspect of preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty and can help determine the size and positioning of the prosthesis. Historically, templating has been performed using acetate templates over printed radiographs. As a result of the increasing use of digital imaging, surgeons now either obtain additional printed radiographs solely for templating purposes or use specialized digital templating software, both of which carry additional cost. Questions/purposes The purposes of this study was to compare acetate templating of digitally calibrated images on an LCD monitor to digital templating in terms of (1) accuracy; (2) reproducibility; and (3) time efficiency.Methods Acetate onlay templating was performed directly over digital radiographs on an LCD monitor and was compared with digital templating. Five separate observers participated in this study templating on 52 total hip arthroplasties. For the acetate templating, the digital images were magnified to the scaled reference on the templates provided by the manufacturer (ratio 1.2:1) before templating using a 25-mm marker as a reference. Both the acetate and digital templating results were then compared with the actual implanted components to determine accuracy. Interobserver and intraobserver variability was determined by an intraclass correlation coefficient. Observers recorded time to complete templating from the time of complete upload of patients' imaging onto the system to completion of templating. Conclusions Acetate onlay templating on digitally calibrated images can be a reliable substitute for digital templating using specialized software. It is quicker to

Background: The optimal treatment of complex proximal humeral fractures in adults remains controversial. We evaluated the risk of complications and the long-term outcomes in patients with a severely displaced fracture or a fracture-dislocation of the proximal part of the humerus treated with open reduction and plate fixation (ORIF). Methods: Between 1995 and 2012, 5,897 consecutive patients with a proximal humeral fracture were referred to a specialist shoulder clinic for surgical assessment. Indications for surgery included anterior or posterior fracture-dislocation, substantial tuberosity involvement with >1 cm of displacement in a Neer 3 or 4-part fracture configuration, disengagement of the head from the shaft, or severe varus or valgus deformity of the head. All patients who met the surgical criteria and had been followed for 2 years were included, and standardized clinical and radiographic assessments of outcomes were performed. At a median of 10.8 years (range, 5 to 22 years) after ORIF, all surviving cognitively intact patients completed a patient-reported questionnaire assessing functional outcomes and satisfaction. Results: Three hundred and sixty-eight patients (6.2%) met the inclusion criteria and had the appropriate follow-up. The study population had a high rate of complex fracture configurations; 77.2% had tuberosity involvement, 54.1% had complete head-shaft disengagement, and 44.0% had a dislocated head. Eighty-seven patients (23.6%) had postoperative stiffness, 25 (6.8%) had fixation failure/nonunion, and 16 (4.3%) had late osteonecrosis/posttraumatic osteoarthritis; these complications were the reason for the majority of the reoperations in the cohort. The survivorship until any reoperation was 74% at 10 years, but when reoperations for stiffness were excluded, the survivorship was 90% during the same time period. The patients’ mean levels of pain, function, and satisfaction with treatment were good to excellent. Conclusions: Our results support the use of primary ORIF in medically fit patients with a severely displaced fracture or a fracture-dislocation of the proximal part of the humerus in centers where the expertise to carry out such treatment exists. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Highlights Patients, when asked if they would complete another telemedicine encounter again, 92.9% (278/299) of patients reported they would. Physicians reported high satisfaction, and that 78.4% of the time a telemedicine encounter was successful in replacing an in-person visit. During our study period, over 600 telemedicine encounters were performed with extremely favourable ratings from patients and physicians.

No abstract