Multicentre collaborative cohort study of the use of Kirschner wires for the management of supracondylar fractures in children

Purpose Supracondylar fractures of the humerus cause significant morbidity in children. Nerve damage and loss of fracture reduction are common recognised complications in patients with this injury. Uncertainty surrounds the optimal Kirschner wire configuration and diameter for closed reduction and pinning of these fractures. This study describes current practice and examined the association between wire configuration or diameter and outcomes (clinical and radiological) in the operative management of paediatric supracondylar fractures. Methods Children presenting with Gartland II or III supracondylar fractures at five hospitals in south-west England were eligible for inclusion. Collaborators scrutinised paper and electronic case notes. Outcome measures were maintenance of reduction and iatrogenic nerve injury. Results Altogether 209 patients were eligible for inclusion: 15.7% had a documented neurological deficit at presentation; 3.9% who were neurologically intact at presentation sustained a new deficit caused by treatment and 13.4% experienced a clinically significant loss of reduction following fixation. Maintenance of reduction was significantly better in patients treated specifically with crossed ×3 Kirschner wire configuration compared to all other configurations. The incidence of iatrogenic nerve injury was not significantly different between groups treated with different wire configurations. Conclusion We present a large multicentre cohort study showing that crossed ×3 Kirschner wires are associated with better maintenance of reduction than crossed ×2 or lateral entry wires. Greater numbers would be required to properly investigate nerve injury relating to operative management of supracondylar fractures. We found significant variations in practice and compliance with the British Orthopaedic Association Standard for Trauma (BOAST) 11 guidelines.</p

Prognostic model to predict postoperative acute kidney injury in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery based on a national prospective observational cohort study.

Background: Acute illness, existing co-morbidities and surgical stress response can all contribute to postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery. The aim of this study was prospectively to develop a pragmatic prognostic model to stratify patients according to risk of developing AKI after major gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: This prospective multicentre cohort study included consecutive adults undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection, liver resection or stoma reversal in 2-week blocks over a continuous 3-month period. The primary outcome was the rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery. Bootstrap stability was used to select clinically plausible risk factors into the model. Internal model validation was carried out by bootstrap validation. Results: A total of 4544 patients were included across 173 centres in the UK and Ireland. The overall rate of AKI was 14·2 per cent (646 of 4544) and the 30-day mortality rate was 1·8 per cent (84 of 4544). Stage 1 AKI was significantly associated with 30-day mortality (unadjusted odds ratio 7·61, 95 per cent c.i. 4·49 to 12·90; P < 0·001), with increasing odds of death with each AKI stage. Six variables were selected for inclusion in the prognostic model: age, sex, ASA grade, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, planned open surgery and preoperative use of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker. Internal validation demonstrated good model discrimination (c-statistic 0·65). Discussion: Following major gastrointestinal surgery, AKI occurred in one in seven patients. This preoperative prognostic model identified patients at high risk of postoperative AKI. Validation in an independent data set is required to ensure generalizability

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries