Abstracts Posters SICOT-SOF meeting Gothenburg 2010 _2_
Abstracts Posters SICOT-SOF meeting Gothenburg 2010 _2_ Abstracts Posters SICOT-SOF meeting Gothenburg 2010 _2_
Poster Topic: Trauma - Systemic Abstract number: 26119 THE PROPOSAL OF NEW CLASSIFICATION AND TREATMENT PROTOCOL FOR SEGMENTAL DESTRUCTIVE LIMB INJURIES WITH INTACT DISTAL PART Cedomir VUCETIC, Goran TULIC, Borislav DULIC, Cedo VUCKOVIC, Aleksandar TODOROVIC Institute for orthopaedic surgery and traumatology, Belgrade (SERBIA) A segmental destructive limb injury with intact distal part represents quite a challenge for a surgeon if a limb salvage procedure is intended. We have encountered two major types and two subtypes of these injuries. Type A injuries are transversal destructions whilst type B are longitudinal segmental destructions. We divided these major two types in two additional subtypes each: A1-transverse segmental soft tissue destruction without any bone involvement; A2 transverse segmental destruction involving bone; B1 longitudinal segmental soft tissue destruction without bone involvement, and B2 longitudinal segmental destruction with bones involved. The rational concept for treatment protocol for type A injuries would be to debride soft tissues and shorten the bone as needed in order to achieve contact between preserved parts of the limb. Type B injuries require extensive debridement and reconstruction of soft tissue defect with composite flap while preserving the bone length if possible. If not, the bone may be shortened initially, with elongation procedures performed when the soft tissues sufficiently recover. This approach shorten now, elongate later should be reserved as salvage procedure only for the most severe injuries. In our experience shortening of up to 5 cm on forearm and upper arm does not significantly impair limb function and appearance, which makes a subsequent elongation optional. Treatment based on this classification and its rational enables improved limb survival, wound and fracture healing, better infection control and earlier rehabilitation. We feel that the functional and esthetic outcome in patients with these injuries completely justifies described approach. 600
Poster Topic: Trauma - Systemic Abstract number: 26269 THE EFFICACY OF INITIAL FRACTURE MANAGEMENT IN A LARGE ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA UNIT Saqib JAVED, George MCLAUCHLAN Royal Preston Hospital, Preston (UNITED KINGDOM) Introduction: Outpatient fracture care is dealt with by Accident and Emergency (A&E) and orthopaedics utilising A&E and fracture clinics. Current working time directive legislation has led to the use of more nurse practitioners instead of junior doctors in the initial assessment and management of these cases in A&E. We analysed the efficacy of this process.Methods: A retrospective patient note analysis was conducted for referrals to the fracture clinic of a large trauma hospital over a four week period. Information collected included A&E diagnosis and initial treatment, orthopaedic diagnosis, time from injury to appointment and appropriateness of fracture clinic referral. All referrals were evaluated by an orthopaedic consultant.Results: 400 referrals were identified (216 male, 184 female) over a four week period. The average age was 33 years (range 4 - 93). For only 12% of referrals was an orthopaedic opinion sought prior to referral. The majority (75%) of patients referred to fracture clinic were seen either by nurse practitioners or junior doctors. Fracture clinic referrals were skewed by region with 50% of referrals being made for hand and wrist injuries. Fifty per cent of fracture clinic referrals could have been managed between A&E and primary care. Conclusion: The management of musculoskeletal trauma remains suboptimal with inefficient use of orthopaedic services. The patient load could potentially be halved with further training of frontline A&E staff and timely orthopaedic input with targeted training of common hand, wrist, foot and ankle injuries taking precedence. 601
- Page 549 and 550: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hand/Wrist A
- Page 551 and 552: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hand/Wrist A
- Page 553 and 554: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 555 and 556: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 557 and 558: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 559 and 560: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 561 and 562: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 563 and 564: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 565 and 566: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 567 and 568: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 569 and 570: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 571 and 572: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 573 and 574: Poster Topic: Trauma - Hip Abstract
- Page 575 and 576: Poster Topic: Trauma - Knee Abstrac
- Page 577 and 578: Poster Topic: Trauma - Knee Abstrac
- Page 579 and 580: Poster Topic: Trauma - Knee Abstrac
- Page 581 and 582: Poster Topic: Trauma - Shoulder Abs
- Page 583 and 584: Poster Topic: Trauma - Shoulder Abs
- Page 585 and 586: Poster Topic: Trauma - Shoulder Abs
- Page 587 and 588: Poster Topic: Trauma - Shoulder Abs
- Page 589 and 590: Poster Topic: Trauma - Spine Abstra
- Page 591 and 592: Poster Topic: Trauma - Spine Abstra
- Page 593 and 594: Poster Topic: Trauma - Systemic Abs
- Page 595 and 596: Poster Topic: Trauma - Systemic Abs
- Page 597 and 598: Poster Topic: Trauma - Systemic Abs
- Page 599: Poster Topic: Trauma - Systemic Abs
- Page 603 and 604: Poster Topic: Trauma - Systemic Abs
- Page 605 and 606: Poster Topic: Trauma - Tibia/Fibula
- Page 607 and 608: Poster Topic: Trauma - Tibia/Fibula
- Page 609 and 610: Poster Topic: Trauma - Tibia/Fibula
- Page 611 and 612: Poster Topic: Trauma - Tibia/Fibula
- Page 613 and 614: Poster Topic: Trauma - Tibia/Fibula
- Page 615 and 616: Poster Topic: Trauma - Tibia/Fibula
- Page 617 and 618: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 619 and 620: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 621 and 622: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 623 and 624: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 625 and 626: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 627 and 628: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 629 and 630: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 631 and 632: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 633 and 634: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 635 and 636: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 637 and 638: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 639 and 640: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 641 and 642: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 643 and 644: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 645 and 646: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 647 and 648: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
- Page 649 and 650: Poster Topic: Tumours Abstract numb
Poster<br />
Topic: Trauma - Systemic<br />
Abstract number: 26119<br />
THE PROPOSAL OF NEW CLASSIFICATION AND TREATMENT PROTOCOL<br />
FOR SEGMENTAL DESTRUCTIVE LIMB INJURIES WITH INTACT DISTAL PART<br />
Cedomir VUCETIC, Goran TULIC, Borislav DULIC, Cedo VUCKOVIC, Aleksandar<br />
TODOROVIC<br />
Institute for orthopaedic surgery and traumatology, Belgrade (SERBIA)<br />
A segmental destructive limb injury with intact distal part represents quite a challenge<br />
for a surgeon if a limb salvage procedure is intended. We have encountered two<br />
major types and two subtypes of these injuries. Type A injuries are transversal<br />
destructions whilst type B are longitudinal segmental destructions. We divided these<br />
major two types in two additional subtypes each: A1-transverse segmental soft tissue<br />
destruction without any bone involvement; A2 transverse segmental destruction<br />
involving bone; B1 longitudinal segmental soft tissue destruction without bone<br />
involvement, and B2 longitudinal segmental destruction with bones involved. The<br />
rational concept for treatment protocol for type A injuries would be to debride soft<br />
tissues and shorten the bone as needed in order to achieve contact between<br />
preserved parts of the limb. Type B injuries require extensive debridement and<br />
reconstruction of soft tissue defect with composite flap while preserving the bone<br />
length if possible. If not, the bone may be shortened initially, with elongation<br />
procedures performed when the soft tissues sufficiently recover. This approach<br />
shorten now, elongate later should be reserved as salvage procedure only for the<br />
most severe injuries. In our experience shortening of up to 5 cm on forearm and<br />
upper arm does not significantly impair limb function and appearance, which makes a<br />
subsequent elongation optional. Treatment based on this classification and its<br />
rational enables improved limb survival, wound and fracture healing, better infection<br />
control and earlier rehabilitation. We feel that the functional and esthetic outcome in<br />
patients with these injuries completely justifies described approach.<br />
600