ObjectiveTo compare the short-term effectiveness of femoral prosthesis with different neck-shaft angles for the reconstruction of proximal femoral anatomy after total hip arthroplasty (THA). MethodsBetween January 2012 and December 2013, 101 patients undergoing unilateral THA who accorded with selection criteria were selected for a retrospective study. The patients were divided into 2 groups:during THA, femoral prosthesis with 135° neck-shaft angle was used in 52 patients (group A) and femoral prosthesis with 127° neck-shaft angle was used in 49 patients (group B). There was no significant difference in gender, age, weight, body masss index, pathogeny, disease duration, preoperative neck-shaft angle, leg discrepancy, and preoperative Harris score between 2 groups (P>0.05). The postoperative Harris score was recorded to evaluate the effectiveness. And the femoral offset of the operated and contralateral sides, the change value of the femoral offset (xFO), the ratio of xFO to the offset of contralateral side (sdFO), the number of patients whose sdFO was more than 15% or less than -15% (outlier), the global offset, the height of femoral head rotation center, and leg discrepancy were measured at postoperation. ResultsOperative incision healed by first intension in 2 groups; no complication of infection, dislocation, or revision was found. All patients were followed up 12-32 months (mean, 23 months). The Harris score at last follow-up were significantly improved when compared with preoperative score in 2 groups (P＜0.05), but there was no signficant difference between 2 groups (t=1.267, P=0.832). The xFO and sdFO of group B were significantly larger than those of group A (P＜0.05); the number of outlier was 20 in group A and was 33 in group B, showing significant difference (P=0.005). The height of femoral head rotating center and global offset at 3 months after operation showed no signficant difference between 2 groups (P>0.05). And significant improvement in leg discrepancy was found at 3 months in 2 groups (P＜0.05), but there was no significant difference between 2 groups (t=0.403, P=0.689). ConclusionBoth of the two femoral prosthesis with different neck-shaft angles can restore the proximal femoral anatomy well and gain similar early effectiveness after THA. However, the Stryker Trident femoral prosthesis with 127° neck-shaft angle may have the tendency to enlarge the femoral offset.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect and safety of subgluteal approach continous sciatic nerve block with 0.2% ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia in calcaneal fracture patients. MethodsForty calcaneal fracture patients treated from May 2012 to January 2013 were randomly assigned to two groups:20 patients in continuous sciatic nerve block group (group CSB) and 20 patients in self-controlled intravenous analgesia group (group PCIA).Patients in group CSB were given subgluteal approach continuous sciatic nerve block,and PCA pump was connected to give 0.2% ropivacaine via continuous nerve block catheter continuously for analgesia.Patients in group PCIA were given PCA pump directly for self-controlled intravenous analgesia.The movement/rest VAS scores and Ramsay scores at 2,8,24,48 hours after surgery,the dose of other analgesia drugs after surgery,the satisfaction of patients and surgeons,and side effects were recorded. ResultsThe movement and rest visual analogue scale (VSA) scores and the dose of analgesia drugs in group CSB were significantly lower than group PCIA at all time points (P<0.05).The satisfaction of patients and surgeons in group CSB was higher than group PCIA (P<0.05). ConclusionCompared with self-controlled intravenous analgesia,subgluteal approach continuous sciatic nerve block with 0.2% ropivacaine can provide better and safer postoperative analgesia for calcaneal fracture patients.
ObjectiveTo compare the effect of pretreatment with butorphanol or tramadol for prevention of propofol-induced injection pain by intravenous injection or drip, in order to explore a safe and effective method. MethodsWe chose 150 patients of ASAⅠ-Ⅱundergoing elective surgery between October 2012 and March 2013 in Sichuan Orthopedic Hospital as the study subjects. They were randomly divided into five groups with 30 patients in each group:butorphanol injection and drip group (group BI and group BD), tramadol injection and drip group (group TI and group TD), control group (group C). Five minutes before anesthesia induction, patients in group BI, TI and C were respectively injected with butorphanol 2 mg, tramadol 100 mg, and saline; patients in group BD and TD were respectively injected with butorphanol 2 mg and tramadol 100 mg before receiving propofol (2.5 mg/kg) for 2 minutes. Assessment of pain during injection was done by using a four-point scale. ResultsThe pre-injection pain incidence in group BI and TI was significantly higher than that in group BD, TD and C(P < 0.05), and it was significantly higher in group BI than group TI (P < 0.05). The incidence of propofol injection pain in group BI, BD, TI and TD were significantly lower than that in group C (P < 0.05), and it was the lowest in group BD (P < 0.05) followed by group BI (P < 0.05). The total rate of pain in group BD was only 6.67%, significantly lower than other groups (P < 0.05). ConclusionsThe pretreatment with butorphanol and tramadol by intravenous injection or drip can reduce the incidence of propofol injection pain. Pretreatment with butorphanol at 2 mg by intravenous drip is more effective, but should be closely observed to avoid adverse events.