Deep vein thrombosis following the treatment of lower limb pathologic bone fractures – a comparative study

Abstract Background Deep vein thrombosis is a well-known complication of fracture occurrence, lower limb surgery and periods of prolonged immobilisation. Its incidence can be increased even more in specific cases with metastatic bone disease and adjuvant treatment. There is a small amount of literature that addresses the incidence of DVT by comparing osteosynthesis and arthroplasty as surgical treatments. Current recommended anticoagulation protocols might be inadequate for specific groups of cancer patients undergoing osteosynthesis or arthroplasty. Methods The study was designed and performed in a retrospective manner and carried out on patients that presented at our Emergency Clinical County Hospital between 01.01.2008–31.12.2016. The patients’ evolution was followed for a standard of 2 months. All our deep vein thrombosis events were diagnosed via venous duplex imaging. The studied lot (n = 85) was paired with a control group (n = 170) with similar baseline characteristics. Results Our lot was comprised of 85 patients that underwent 85 surgeries, on both of our hospital’s Orthopaedic and Traumatology wards. When performing the student t-test and calculating OR (odds ratio) and RR (risk ratio) we encountered 11 cases of DVT in our studied group and 12 cases of DVT in our control group (p < 0.04). We found statistical significance when correlating DVT with type of implant (prosthesis), the presence of metastases over primary tumour and the choice of implant (prosthesis over intramedullary nail). There was no statistical significance found when correlating DVT events with the type of anticoagulation and the amount of blood transfusion units required. Conclusion Patients who undergo surgical treatment for lower limb pathological fracture due to malignancy are at increased risk of DVT or death due to PE under current general thromboprophylaxis regimens. The risk is higher for the immediate postoperative period (10 days). The risk is increased by metastasis, arthroplasty and adjuvant therapy (radiotherapy, chemotherapy), and we think that a more aggressive prophylactic protocol should be used

Avoiding the Removal of Syndesmotic Screws after Distal Tibiofibular Diastasis Repair: A Benefit or a Drawback?

There is still no general agreement about the most effective form of syndesmosis fixation with syndesmotic screws for patients affected by ankle fractures that are accompanied by syndesmotic injuries. In the same manner, no consensus has been reached yet on whether or not the tibiofibular syndesmotic screw is more beneficial if removed or not, as well as the exact timing of removal if this proves superiority. The purpose of this research was to verify whether or not removing syndesmotic screws reduces the risk of developing a diastasis and compare outcomes in patients whose syndesmotic screw was or was not removed at all. A retrospective observational study was carried out to cover a period of five years and a computed sample size of almost 300 cases. Patients were included in the current study if their history was positive for ankle fracture with distal tibiofibular diastasis repair with syndesmotic screws. Loss of reduction was more frequent after screw removal (8.5% vs. 2.1%), although the quality of reduction was generally excellent in both groups. The mean AOFAS score was significantly better in patients who had their tibiofibular screw removed (92.6 vs. 88.4), but the tibiofibular clear space and incisura fibularis depth widened more following the second intervention (3.8 mm vs. 3.6 mm, and, respectively, 4.3 vs. 4.1). Lastly, the same patients with tibiofibular screw removal had a significantly higher cost of total interventions and more days of medical leave (21 vs. 15 days on average). It seems that a strong conclusion in favor of removing or not removing syndesmotic screws after distal tibiofibular diastasis repair cannot be given. However, several radiographic findings lean toward the benefit of those patients whose tibiofibular screws were not removed, although mobility was notably better after the screw was removed. Furthermore, treatment expenses are greatly lowered if a subsequent operation for screw removal is avoided, as well as if individuals who have a single surgery take a shorter medical leave

Bedsores successfully treated with topical phenytoin

Phenytoin is normally used in epilepsy treatment. One of the side effect affecting a significative part of the treated patients is the gingival overgrowth. It could surely be a correlation between this stimulatory effect and the assessment of phenytoin in wound healing. In fact, some studies of the literature have shown that topical phenytoin promotes healing of traumatic wounds, burns and ulcers by decubitus or stasis (diabetic or venous) and we emphasize, in vitiligo, a particular attention into repigmentation. The related mechanism of action seems to be multifactorial. In the present paper topical phenytoin has been used as wound-healing agent in 19 documented cases of bedsores, divided in treated and placebo group. The used concentration of phenytoin was 5 mg/L dissolved in a water solution of 9 g NaCl /L (0.9% P/V of NaCl). Patches soaked with phenytoin solution were applied over the bedsores along 3 hours every 12 hours. Results showed that phenytoin treated patients healed their wounds significantly before (p&lt;0.001) with respect to controls. (www.actabiomedica.it