Microbiological and functional outcomes after open extremity fractures sustained overseas: The experience of a UK level I trauma centre

Background Open extremity fractures carry a high risk of limb loss and poor functional outcomes. Transfer of extremity trauma patients from developing countries and areas of conflict adds further layers of complexity due to challenges in the delivery of adequate care. The combination of extensive injuries, transfer delays and complex microbiology presents unique challenges. Methods A retrospective review was conducted to analyse the surgical and microbiological themes of patients with open extremity fractures transferred from overseas to our institution (Imperial College NHS Trust) between January 2011 and January 2016. Results Twenty civilian patients with 21 open extremity fractures were referred to our unit from 11 different countries. All patients had poly-microbial wound contamination on initial surveillance cultures. Five patients (25%) underwent amputation depending on the extent of osseous injury; positive surveillance cultures did not preclude limb reconstruction, with seven patients undergoing complex reconstruction and eight undergoing simple reconstruction to achievewound coverage. Hundred percent of patients demonstrated infection-free fracture union on discharge. Conclusion Patients with open extremity fractures transferred from overseas present the unique challenge of poly-microbial infection in addition to extensive traumatic wounds. Favourable outcomes can be achieved despite positive microbiological findings on tissue culture with adequate antimicrobial therapy. The decision to salvage the limb and the complexity of reconstruction used should be based on the chance of achieving meaningful functional recovery, mainly determined by the extent of bony injury. The complexity of reconstruction was based on the predicted long-term functionality of the salvaged limb

Open tibial/fibular fractures in the elderly: A retrospective cohort study

The incidence of open tibia/fibula fractures in the elderly is increasing but current national guidelines focus on the aggressive treatment of high-energy injuries in younger patients. There is conflicting evidence regarding whether older age affects treatment provision and outcomes in open fractures. The aim of this study was to determine if elderly patients are sustaining a different injury to younger patients, and how their treatment and outcomes differ. This may have implications for future guidelines and verify their application in the elderly. In this retrospective single-centre cohort study (December 2015 - July 2018), we compared the injury characteristics, operative and outcomes of elderly (>65 years) and younger (18-65 years) patients with open tibia/fibula fractures. An extended cohort examined free flap reconstruction. In total, 157 patients were included. High-energy injuries were commoner in younger patients (88% vs 37%; p<0.001). Most were Gustilo-Anderson 3b in both groups. Elderly patients waited longer until debridement (21:19 vs 19:00 hours) and had longer inpatient stays (23 vs 15 days). There was no difference in time to antibiotics, operative approach or post-operative complications. Despite the low-energy nature of elderly patients’ injuries, the severity of soft tissue insult was equivalent to younger patients with high-energy injuries. Our data suggest that age and co-morbidities should not prohibit lower limb reconstruction. The current application of generic guidelines appears suitable in the elderly, particularly in the acute management. We suggest current management pathways and targets be reviewed to reflect the greater need for peri-operative optimisation and rehabilitation in elderly patients

The metabolic basis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: 2011 report of the “metabolic” workgroup of the Fondation Yves Cotrel

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to elucidate the metabolic processes involved in the pathogenesis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) in light of research by the present authors as well as current literature. METHODS: Pathogenetic mechanism