Background Double ipsilateral femoral fractures account for 1-9% of femoral fractures. There is no clear advantage between single or double implant osteosynthesis. We present a series of patients with double ipsilateral femoral fractures, to address the challenges in treatment, namely the implants for osteosynthesis and complications of treatment. Materials and methods We retrospectively studied 16 patients (7 men, 9 women; mean age, 51 years) treated from January 2015 to December 2018. Motor vehicle accidents were the leading cause of injury. Types of fractures were pertrochanteric and shaft (6), pertrochanteric and distal (2), double shaft (3), neck and shaft (2), neck and distal (1), shaft and distal (1), and triple fracture including a pertrochanteric, shaft and distal (1). In five patients, two different implants were used (plate and screws, cannulated hip screws, femoral nail), whereas in 11 patients a long femoral nail was used. Results Fourteen patients experienced union at a mean of 3 months (2-6 months). Two patients experienced nonunion: both had plate and screws osteosynthesis. One patient died 15 days after admission from polytrauma and another patient experienced central venous catheter thrombosis and pneumonia. Surgical complications (2 patients) included a thigh skin necrosis, and external fixator pin tract infection/infected non-union. Weight-bearing was delayed in all patients; full weight-bearing was allowed in 11 patients at 4 months postoperatively, and in four patients at 5 months. Conclusion Due to the rarity and the difficulty of standardization of double ipsilateral femoral fractures, there is variable information on the optimal osteosynthesis of the fractures and the outcome of the patients. It seems that closed reduction and long hip nailing is the treatment of choice, with few complications.
Purpose Running, jumping/landing and cutting/change of direction (CoD) are critical components of return to sport (RTS) following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), however the electromyographic (EMG) activity patterns of the operated leg during the execution of these tasks are not clear. Methods A systematic review was conducted to retrieve EMG studies during running, jumping/landing and cutting/(CoD) in ACLR patients. MEDLINE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science databases were searched from 2000 to May, 2022 using a combination of keywords and their variations: “anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction” OR “ACLR”, “electromyography” OR “EMG”, “running”, “jumping” OR “landing”, “cutting” OR “change-of-direction” OR “CoD”. The search identified studies comparing EMG data during running, landing and cutting/(CoD) between the involved limb and contralateral or control limbs. Risk of bias was assessed and quantitative analyses using effect sizes were performed. Results Thirty two studies met the inclusion criteria. Seventy five percent (24/32) of the studies reported altered EMG activity pattern of the ACLR leg during running, jumping/landing and cutting/(CoD) when compared with either the healthy control leg or the contra-lateral leg. Twelve studies showed decreased, delayed or earlier onset and delayed peak in quadriceps EMG activity with small to large effect sizes and 9 studies showed increased, delayed or earlier onset and delayed peak in hamstrings EMG activity with small to large effect sizes. Four studies showed a “hamstrings-dominant” strategy i.e. decreased quadriceps coupled with increased hamstrings EMG activity in both running and jumping/landing irrespective of graft type. One study reported that on the grounds of decreased quadriceps activity, lower hamstrings EMG activity was predictive of ipsilateral re-injury in ACLR patients. Conclusion This systematic review of Level III evidence showed that the ACLR leg displays decreased quadriceps or increased hamstrings EMG activity or both despite RTS. Simultaneous decreased quadriceps and increased hamstrings EMG activity was shown for both running and jumping/landing. From a clinical perspective this “hamstrings dominant” strategy can serve as a protective mechanism against graft re-injury. Level of evidence III.
The aim of this paper is to provide a brief overview of the history of microsurgery in Greece and how it evolved throughout the years. It is based on published literature as well as anecdotal evidence. It is by no means an exhaustive list of available resources and contributions. Microsurgery in Greece begins with Prof Soucacos who acquired his microsurgical skills in the USA (1970–1974), where he worked as a clinical and research fellow. After gaining invaluable experience, he returned to his home country, Greece, to establish a microsurgery replantation team in 1975. His team gained national recognition soon thereafter thanks to the many successes and innovations they achieved. The tradition is continued with contemporary microsurgical courses in Greece from expert faculty and a busy microsurgical practice in several centers across the country. The experimental educational program in microsurgery includes a blend of synthetic and live animal models, such as rats and rabbits. They include a complete exposure to basic and advanced practical exercises through several days. The simulation training models slowly but surely steadily advance to meet the training standards.
Objectives: Hip fractures in the elderly are common injuries that need timely surgical management. Since the beginning of the pandemic, patients with a proximal femoral fracture (PFF) experienced a delay in time to surgery. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate a possible variation in mortality in patients with PFF when comparing COVID-19 negative versus positive. Methods: This is a multicentric and retrospective study including 3232 patients with PFF who underwent surgical management. The variables taken into account were age, gender, the time elapsed between arrival at the emergency room and intervention, pre-operative American Society of Anesthesiology score, pre-operative cardiovascular and respiratory disease, and 10-day/1-month/6-month mortality. For 2020, we had an additional column, “COVID-19 swab positivity.” Results: COVID-19 infection represents an independent mortality risk factor in patients with PFFs. Despite the delay in time-to-surgery occurring in 2020, no statistically significant variation in terms of mortality was detected. Within our sample, a statistically significant difference was not detected in terms of mortality at 6 months, in patients operated within and beyond 48 h, as well as no difference between those operated within or after 12/24/72 h. The mortality rate among subjects with PFF who tested positive for COVID-19 was statistically significantly higher than in patients with PFF who tested. COVID-19 positivity resulted in an independent factor for mortality after PFF. Conclusion: Despite the most recent literature recommending operating PFF patients as soon as possible, no significant difference in mortality was found among patients operated before or after 48 h from diagnosis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.