Search results for: S. Ayeko

Authors: S. Ayeko, J. Milton, C. Hughes, K. Anderson, R. G. Middleton

Abstract:

Background: Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) in association with hip hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty is a common and serious complication. In the Vancouver Classification system algorithm, B1 fractures should be treated with Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF) and preferentially revised in combination with ORIF if B2 or B3. This study aims to assess patient outcomes after plate osteosynthesis alone for Vancouver B1 and B2 fractures. The main outcome is the 1-year re-revision rate, and secondary outcomes are 30-day and 1-year mortality. Method: This is a retrospective single-centre case-series review from January 2016 to June 2021. Vancouver B1 and B2, non-malignancy fractures in adults over 18 years of age treated with polyaxial Non-Contact Bridging plate osteosynthesis, have been included. Outcomes were gathered from electronic notes and radiographs. Results: There were 50 B1 and 64 B2 fractures. 26 B2 fractures were managed with ORIF and revision, 39 ORIF alone. Of the revision group, one died within 30 days (3.8%), one at one year (3.8%), and two were revised within one year (7.7). Of the B2 ORIF group, three died within 30-day mortality (7.96%), eight at one year (21.1%), and 0 were revised in 1 year. Conclusion: This study has demonstrated that satisfactory outcomes can be achieved with ORIF, excluding revision in the management of B2 fractures.

Keywords: arthroplasty, bridging plate, periprosthetic fracture, revision surgery

Procedia PDF Downloads 71

Authors: J. Milton, C. Uzoigwe, O. Ayeko, B. Offorha, K. Anderson, R. G. Middleton

Abstract:

Background: We used the UK National Hip Fracture database to determine the effect of institution hip fracture case volume on hip fracture healthcare outcomes in 2019. Using logistic regression for each healthcare outcome, we compared the best performing 50 units with the poorest performing 50 units in order to determine if the unit volume was associated with performance for each particular outcome. Method: We analysed 175 institutions treating a total of 67,673 patients over the course of a year. Results: The number of hip fractures seen per unit ranged between 86 and 952. Larger units tendered to perform health assessments more consistently and mobilise patients more expeditiously post-operatively. Patients treated at large institutions had shorter lengths of stay. With regard to most other outcomes, there was no association between unit case volume and performance, notably compliance with the Best Practice Tariff, time to surgery, proportion of eligible patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty, length of stay, delirium risk, and pressure sore risk assessments. Conclusion: There is no relationship between unit volume and the majority of health care outcomes. It would seem that larger institutions tend to perform better at parameters that are dependent upon personnel numbers. However, where the outcome is contingent, even partially, on physical infrastructure capacity, there was no difference between larger and smaller units.

Keywords: institution volume, mortality, neck of femur fractures, osteoporosis

Procedia PDF Downloads 63