Abstract

Abstract

Introduction

Optimal orthopaedic implant placement is a major contributing factor to the long term success of all common joint arthroplasty procedures. Devices such as 3D printed bespoke guides and orthopaedic robots are extensively described in the literature and have been shown to enhance prosthesis placement accuracy. These technologies have significant drawbacks such as logistical and temporal inefficiency, high cost, cumbersome nature and difficult theatre integration. A radically new disruptive technology for the rapid intraoperative production of patient specific instrumentation that obviates all disadvantages of current technologies is presented.

Regional nerve block for upper limb surgery is an established procedure. Our study was undertaken to look at the patient experience of this. We prospectively studied 59 consecutive patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopic surgery under regional anaesthesia in our department. They completed a questionnaire which they brought back at their first follow up appointment. The questionnaire gathered information of their experience of anaesthesia and surgery, adequate postoperative information. We reviewed if intra-operative pain occurred and if the patients would undergo such a procedure again. All surgeons were upper limb specialists.3 out of 59 patients required conversion to general anaesthetic (5%) due to failure of the block. The introduction of the block was mainly painless;with patients giving a mean scoring of 0.59 on the visual analog pain score (VAS, range 0–5). 26 patients (44%) expressed interest and watched their operation. Of those, 7 patients felt anxious after having the proceedings explained.1 patient discontinued to watch due to this. 10 patients experienced intraoperative pain, 2 requiring local anaesthetic, 8 receiving sedation, giving a mean score of 3.2 on the VAS. 81.4% of patients would have surgery with regional anaesthetic again, 85% would recommend to others. 83% of patients received adequate information. Overall satisfaction of the experience was rated out of 10, with a mean score of 8.7 (median 9). Regional blocks are an established technique. Since patients are awake and can watch their surgery, it is important to consider the patients perception of this experience. The majority of viewing patients were reassured by explanations of their pathology. Most patients would undergo another procedure with regional anaesthesia and would recommend it, suggesting that this is an effective and popular choice. The overall experience is positive. This supports our intention of offering regional blocks for all upper limb surgery, facilitating increasing use of day case facilities, reducing inpatient stays

The aim of the study was to assess the validity of the new device [BREVIO] [AEND] [Level 2 evidence] in diagnosing carpal tunnel syndrome in the outpatient setting when used by personnel not trained previously in neurophysiologic methods. We prospectively compared the results from a portable handheld automated electroneurodiagnostic devices (AEND) the BREVIO with those from conventional nerve conduction studies. We calculated specificity and sensitivity. We also studied the limits of agreement and correlation between measured latencies. Patient satisfaction with new device was recorded.

Twenty-seven participants (42 hands) were tested. The average age was 56.43 years (38-79). There were 16 females and 11 males. The sensitivity and specificity of the BREVIO as compared to conventional methods were 80% and 75% using distal motor latencies; using distal sensory latencies the sensitivity and specificity were 90% and 60% respectively. The limits of agreement between the sensory and motor latencies using Bland Altman plots were good. Similarly there was good correlation between values measured with the Pearson's correlation coefficient. The position of the baseline cursor was questionable in 19 hands. Repositioning the cursor reduced the number of false positive results which would increase the specificity of the device. The average pain score, VAS on a scale of 1-10, with the BREVIO was 1.69 (1-4) and 3.11(1-5) with conventional testing. The average satisfaction rating on a scale of 1-5 was 1.39 with the BREVIO and 2.73 with the conventional nerve conduction testing.

The BREVIO is an interesting device. We recommend its use by untrained persons only under the supervision of someone trained in neurophysiology who is aware of potential pitfalls.

Neer type 2 fractures of the distal third of the clavicle have a non union rate of 22-35% after conservative treatment. Open reduction and internal fixation has been recommended by most authors but there is no consensus about the best method of internal fixation. We retrospectively assessed the union and shoulder function following Hook plate fixation in 18 patients with Neer type 2 fractures of lateral end clavicle with more then a six month follow up after surgery.

There were 14 males with a mean follow-up of 25.89 months (6-48 months) and the average age was 40.33 years (22-62 range). Fifteen had acute fractures and the rest were non unions. Complications included two non unions, one following a deep infection. There were no iatrogenic fractures. Acromial osteolysis was seen in five patients who had their plates in situ. The average pain score at rest was 1 (0-4) and the average pain score on abduction was 2.2 (0-5). The average Constant score was 88.5 (63-100). Patients were asked to rate their shoulder function; three said their shoulder was normal, eleven said it was nearly normal and one rated it as not normal.

Hook plate fixation appears to be a valuable method of stabilising Neer type 2 fractures of the clavicle resulting in high union rates and good shoulder function. These plates need to be removed after union to prevent acromial osteolysis.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether the mode of anaesthesia chosen for patients undergoing lumbar microdiscectomy surgery has any significant influence on the immediate outcome in terms of safety, efficacy or patient satisfaction.

This prospective randomised study compared safety, efficacy and satisfaction levels in patients having spinal versus general anaesthesia for single level lumbar microdiscectomy.

Fifty consecutive healthy and cooperative patients were recruited and prospectively randomised into two equal groups; half the patients received a spinal anaesthetic (SA), the remainder a general anaesthetic (GA). Each specific mode of anaesthesia was standardised.

Comprehensive post-operative evaluation concentrated on documenting any complications specific to the particular mode of anaesthesia, recording the pace at which the various milestones of physiological and functional recovery were reached, and the level of patient satisfaction with the type of anaesthesia used.

The results showed no serious complication specific to their particular mode of anaesthesia in either group. Thirteen out of 25 SA patients required temporary urinary catheterisation (9 males, 4 females) while among the GA group 4 patients required urinary catheterisation (4 males and 1 female). Post-operative pain perception was significantly lower in the SA group. The SA patients achieved the milestones of physiological and functional recovery more rapidly. While both groups were satisfied with their procedure, the level of satisfaction was significantly higher in the SA group.

In conclusion, lumbar spinal microdiscectomy can be carried out with equal safety, employing either spinal or general anaesthesia. While they require more temporary urinary catheterisation associated with the previous use of intrathecal morphine, patients undergoing SA suffer less pain in association with their procedure and recover more rapidly. Blinded to an extent by not having experienced the alternative, both groups appeared satisfied with their anaesthetic. However, the level of satisfaction was significantly higher in the SA group.