Angular deformities of the distal femur can be corrected by opening, closing and neutral wedge techniques. Opening wedge (OW) and closing wedge (CW) are popular and well described in the literature. CW and OW techniques lead to leg length difference whereas the advantage of neutral wedge (NW) technique has several unique advantages. NW technique maintains limb length, wedge taken from the closing side is utilised on the opening side and since the angular correction is only half of the measured wedge on either side, translation of distal fragment is minimum. Leg lengths are not altered with this technique hence a useful technique in large deformities. We found no reports of clinical outcomes using NW technique. We present a technique of performing external fixator assisted NW correction of large valgus and varus deformities of distal femur and dual plating and discuss the results. We have treated 20 (22 limbs – 2 patients requiring staged bilateral corrections) patients for distal femoral varus and valgus deformities with CWDFO between 2019 and 2022. Out of these 4 patients (5 limbs) requiring large corrections of distal femoral angular deformities were treated with Neutral Wedge (NW) technique. 3 patients (four limbs) had distal femoral valgus deformity and one distal femoral varus deformity. Indication for NW technique is an angular deformity (varus or valgus of distal femur) requiring > 12 mm opening/closing wedge correction. We approached the closing side first and marked out the half of the calculated wedge with K – wires in a uniplanar fashion. Then an external fixator with two Schanz screws is applied on the opposite side, inserting the distal screw parallel to the articular surface and the proximal screw 6–7 cm proximal to the first pin and at right angles to the femoral shaft mechanical axis. Then the measured wedge is removed and carefully saved. External fixator is now used to close the wedge and over correct, creating an appropriate opening wedge on the opposite side. A Tomofix (Depuoy Synthes) plate is applied on the closing side with two screws proximal to osteotomy and two distally (to be completed later). Next the osteotomy on the opposite side is exposed, the graft is inserted. mLDFA is measured under image intensifier to confirm satisfactory correction. Closing wedge side fixation is then completed followed by fixation of opposite side with a Tomofix or a locking plate.Introduction
Materials & Methods
Fracture related infections (FRI) following intramedullary nailing for tibial shaft fractures remain challenging to treat with associated high patient morbidity and healthcare costs. Recently, antibiotic-coated nails have been introduced as a strategy to reduce implant related infection rates in high-risk patients. We present the largest single-centre case series on ETN PROtect® outcomes reporting on fracture union, infection rates and treatment complications. 56 adult patients underwent surgery with ETN PROtect® between 01/09/17 and 31/12/20. Indications consisted of acute open fractures and complex revision cases (FRI, non-union surgery and re-fracture) with a mean of 3 prior surgical interventions. 51 patients had an open fracture as their index injury. We report on patient characteristics and outcomes including radiological/clinical union and deep infection. The one-year minimum follow-up rate was 87.5%.Introduction
Materials and Methods
Sagittal pelvic tilt (SPT) can change with spinal pathologies and fusion. Change in the SPT can result in impingement and hip instability. Our aim was to determine the magnitude of the SPT change for hip instability to test the hypothesis that the magnitude of SPT change for hip instability is less than 10° and it is not similar for different hip motions. Hip implant motions were simulated in standing, sitting, sit-to-stand, bending forward, squatting and pivoting in Matlab software. When prosthetic head and liner are parallel, femoral head dome (FHD) faces the center of the liner. FHD moves toward the edge of the liner with hip motions. The maximum distance between the FHD and the center in each motion was calculated and analyzed. To make the results more reliable and to consider the possibility of bony impingement, when the FHD approached 90% of the distance between the liner-center and liner-edge, we considered the hip “in danger for dislocation”. The implant orientations and SPT were modified by 1-degree increments and we used linear regression with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC) to determine the magnitude of SPT change that could cause instability.Introduction
Methods
We aim to assess the functional outcome, patient perceived satisfaction and implant survival at a mean follow up of 13[10–16] years following revision knee replacement. Between 1995 and 2001, 243 revision knee replacements were performed in 230 patients using Endolink [Link, Hamburg] or TC3 [Depuy, Leeds] prosthesis at Wrightington hospital, Wrightington, were consented to take part in this study. Data was collected prospectively which includes complications and functional assessment by Oxford knee score, WOMAC, HSS, UCLA, SF12 scores, and patient satisfaction questioner. The scores were obtained pre-operatively and post-operatively at 1 year, 5 years and at the latest follow-up. The mean age was 69 yrs, 51% were males, TC3 prosthesis as used in 175 and Endolink in 68, the revision was for Infection in 71[29%], 53 patients had intra-operative positive culture, 35 had 2 stage revision.Introduction
Patients and Methods
We aim to assess the functional outcome, patient satisfaction and implant survival at a mean follow up of 13[10–16] years following revision for infected total knee replacement. Between 1995 and 2001, 71 revision knee replacements were performed for infection, at Wrightington hospital, Wrightington. Data was collected prospectively which includes intra-operative cultures, complications and functional assessment by Oxford knee score, WOMAC, HSS, UCLA, SF12 scores, and patient satisfaction questioner. The scores were obtained pre-operatively and post-operatively at 1 year, 5 years and at the latest follow-up. Mean age was 69 yrs, 70% were Females, 31[44%] had 2 stage revisions and intra-operative culture was positive in 53 patients. Most common organism was staphylococcus aureus in 30% and staphylococcus epidermides in 18%.Introduction
Patients and Methods
Post-operative pain following forefoot surgery can be difficult to control with oral analgesia so regional analgesic methods have become more prominent in foot and ankle surgery. It was the aim of this study to evaluate the efficacy of a combination of popliteal and ankle blocks and decide if they provide significantly better post-operative analgesia than ankle block alone in forefoot surgery. This was a prospective, randomised, controlled and single blind study. The total number of patients was 63, with 37 in ankle block only group (control) and 26 in ankle and popliteal blocks group. All patients underwent forefoot surgery. Post-operative pain was evaluated in the form of a visual analogue scale and verbal response form. Evaluations took place four times for each patient: in the recovery room, 6 hours post-operatively, 24 hours post-operatively and on discharge. The pain assessor, who helped the patient complete the pain evaluation forms, was blinded to the number of blocks used. The amount of opiate analgesia required whilst as an inpatient was also recorded. On discharge the patient was asked to rate their satisfaction with the pain experienced during their hospital stay. Results were analysed using Mann-Whitney tests.Background
Methods
