Peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) predicts humeral diaphysis torsional mechanical properties with good short-term precision.

Peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) is a popular tool for non-invasively estimating bone mechanical properties. Previous studies have demonstrated pQCT provides precise estimates that are good predictors of actual bone mechanical properties at popular distal imaging sites (tibia and radius). The predictive ability and precision of pQCT at more proximal sites remains unknown. The aim of the current study was to explore the predictive ability and short-term precision of pQCT estimates of mechanical properties of the midshaft humerus, a site gaining popularity for exploring the skeletal benefits of exercise. Predictive ability was determined ex vivo by assessing the ability of pQCT-derived estimates of torsional mechanical properties in cadaver humeri (density-weighted polar moment of inertia [IP] and polar Strength Strain Index [SSIP]) to predict actual torsional properties. Short-term precision was assessed in vivo by performing six repeat pQCT scans at the level of the midshaft humerus in 30 young, healthy individuals (degrees of freedom = 150), with repeat scans performed by the same and different testers and on the same and different days to explore the influences of different testers and time between repeat scans on precision errors. IP and SSIP both independently predicted at least 90% of the variance in ex vivo midshaft humerus mechanical properties in cadaveric bones. Overall values for relative precision error (root mean squared coefficients of variation) for in vivo measures of IP and SSIP at the midshaft humerus were less than 1.5% and were not influenced by pQCT assessments being performed by different testers or on different days. These data indicate that pQCT provides very good prediction of midshaft humerus mechanical properties with good short-term precision, with measures being robust against the influences of different testers and time between repeat scans

Fluid lavage in patients with open fracture wounds (FLOW): an international survey of 984 surgeons

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although surgeons acknowledge the importance of irrigating open fracture wounds, the choice of irrigating fluid and delivery pressure remains controversial. Our objective was to clarify current opinion with regard to the irrigation of open fracture wounds.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used a cross-sectional survey and a sample-to-redundancy strategy to examine surgeons' preferences in the initial management of open fracture wounds. We mailed this survey to members of the Canadian Orthopaedic Association and delivered it to attendees of an international fracture course (AO, Davos, Switzerland).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 1,764 surgeons who received the questionnaire, 984 (55.8%) responded. In the management of open wounds, the majority of surgeons surveyed, 676 (70.5%), favoured normal saline alone. Bacitracin solution was used routinely by only 161 surgeons (16.8%). The majority of surgeons, 695 (71%) used low pressures when delivering the irrigating solution to the wound. There was, however considerable variation in what pressures constituted high versus low pressure lavage. The overwhelming majority of surgeons, 889 (94.2%), reported they would change their practice if a large randomized controlled trial showed a clear benefit of an irrigating solution – especially if it was different from the solution they used.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The majority of surgeons favour both normal saline and low pressure lavage for the initial management of open fracture wounds. However, opinions varied as regards the comparative efficacy of different solutions, the use of additives and high versus low pressure. Surgeons have expressed considerable support for a trial evaluating both irrigating solutions and pressures.</p

The effect of residency training on arthroscopic knot tying and knot stability: which knot is best tied by Orthopaedic surgery residents?

Abstract Background The aim of this study is to evaluate which of three arthroscopic knots are most reliably taught to and executed by residents at varying levels of training. Methods Three arthroscopic knots, the Samsung Medical Center (SMC), the Weston, and the surgeon’s knot, were taught to 16 orthopaedic surgery residents. Each knot was tied in triplicate at two sessions 1 week apart. The knots were then biomechanically tested for strength. Corresponding knots tied by a sports medicine fellow served as the respective controls. Results Comparing all knots regardless of year of training, the SMC knot failed at significantly higher loads (237.2 ± 66.6 N) than the surgeon’s knot (203.7 ± 45.3 N, p = 0.049) and the Weston knot (193.5 ± 56.1 N, p = 0.013). No significant differences in knot strength were found when comparing knots tied by residents at different levels of training and when comparing residents to the sports medicine fellow. There was no difference in conditioning elongation between surgeon’s (p = 0.343), Weston (p = 0.486), or SMC knots (p = 0.200) tied by post-graduate year one and five residents. Conclusions We report the first study that evaluates the loop strength of an arthroscopically tied knot performed by orthopaedic surgery residents in various levels of training. In our cohort, the SMC knot required a higher load to failure, when compared to the Surgeon’s and Weston knot, after a simple arthroscopic knot tying curriculum. Based on these findings, he SMC knot should be considered as a part of future orthopaedic surgery resident arthroscopic training programs