|
|
Proximal femoral fracture. Results of treatment. Secondary prevention of new proximal femoral fracture after fracture of contralateral proximal femur.
Vaculík, Jan ; Džupa, Valér (advisor) ; Tuček, Milan (referee) ; Edelmann, Karel (referee)
In terms of loss of independence, mortality and their economic impact, proximal femoral fractures are the most serious of all low energy fractures. They heighten the risk of further low energy fractures including contralateral proximal femoral fracture. Fracture of the contralateral proximal femur is associated with higher mortality than fracture of the first proximal femur. Approximately half of proximal femoral fracture patients have already suffered a low energy fracture. In most cases, even these patients are not treated for osteoporosis and no course of action is undertaken to prevent further fractures. Patients suffering low energy fractures are often not aware of the causes of the fracture and do not know that by preventative measures it is possible to reduce risk of further fractures. Patients with low energy fractures frequently suffer from chronic diseases and a significant number of these patients suffer from cognitive impairment. In most cases, treatment by general practitioners to prevent fractures is not provided although there is considerable evidence showing the effectiveness of preventative measures. With a view to unifying approaches to prevention, guidelines for fracture prevention after proximal femoral fracture have been established, endorsed by professional organizations. Aim: The goal...
|
|
|
New Surgical Techniques to Prevent Serious Permanent Disability of Proximal Hume ral Fractures
Edelmann, Karel ; Čelko, Alexander (advisor) ; Janout, Vladimír (referee) ; Landor, Ivan (referee)
NEW SURGICAL TECHNIQUES TO PREVENT SERIOUS PERMANENT DISABILITY OF PROXIMAL HUMERAL FRACTURES AIM: Fractures of the proximal humerus are the third most common fracture in adults. In the treatment of displaced three-and four-part fractures in the last decade we have witnessed the advent of new angular stable implants, which have better biomechanical stability in osteoporotic bone in these patients very frequent. The purpose of this study was to determine whether these new implants are a better prevention of severe permanent disability, compared with the earlier technique of percutaneous pinning with K wires. METHOD: The detailed analysis for publishing rich area of research literature on treatment history, epidemiology and prevention of proximal humerus fractures was accomplished. Medium-term results were evaluated in a prospective randomized study of 55 patients treated with angular stable implants with an average age of 62.1 years (Targon PH nail 32 patients, Philos plate 23 patients). For comparison was used a group of 9 patients treated with percutaneous K wire fixation, combined monitored prospectively and retrospectively. With a minimal follow up of 12 months in all patients was determined the final individual relative Constant score and DASH score. For patients in the sample were obtained...
|
|
|
Proximal femoral fracture. Results of treatment. Secondary prevention of new proximal femoral fracture after fracture of contralateral proximal femur.
Vaculík, Jan ; Džupa, Valér (advisor) ; Tuček, Milan (referee) ; Edelmann, Karel (referee)
In terms of loss of independence, mortality and their economic impact, proximal femoral fractures are the most serious of all low energy fractures. They heighten the risk of further low energy fractures including contralateral proximal femoral fracture. Fracture of the contralateral proximal femur is associated with higher mortality than fracture of the first proximal femur. Approximately half of proximal femoral fracture patients have already suffered a low energy fracture. In most cases, even these patients are not treated for osteoporosis and no course of action is undertaken to prevent further fractures. Patients suffering low energy fractures are often not aware of the causes of the fracture and do not know that by preventative measures it is possible to reduce risk of further fractures. Patients with low energy fractures frequently suffer from chronic diseases and a significant number of these patients suffer from cognitive impairment. In most cases, treatment by general practitioners to prevent fractures is not provided although there is considerable evidence showing the effectiveness of preventative measures. With a view to unifying approaches to prevention, guidelines for fracture prevention after proximal femoral fracture have been established, endorsed by professional organizations. Aim: The goal...
|
|
|
New Surgical Techniques to Prevent Serious Permanent Disability of Proximal Hume ral Fractures
Edelmann, Karel ; Čelko, Alexander (advisor) ; Janout, Vladimír (referee) ; Landor, Ivan (referee)
NEW SURGICAL TECHNIQUES TO PREVENT SERIOUS PERMANENT DISABILITY OF PROXIMAL HUMERAL FRACTURES AIM: Fractures of the proximal humerus are the third most common fracture in adults. In the treatment of displaced three-and four-part fractures in the last decade we have witnessed the advent of new angular stable implants, which have better biomechanical stability in osteoporotic bone in these patients very frequent. The purpose of this study was to determine whether these new implants are a better prevention of severe permanent disability, compared with the earlier technique of percutaneous pinning with K wires. METHOD: The detailed analysis for publishing rich area of research literature on treatment history, epidemiology and prevention of proximal humerus fractures was accomplished. Medium-term results were evaluated in a prospective randomized study of 55 patients treated with angular stable implants with an average age of 62.1 years (Targon PH nail 32 patients, Philos plate 23 patients). For comparison was used a group of 9 patients treated with percutaneous K wire fixation, combined monitored prospectively and retrospectively. With a minimal follow up of 12 months in all patients was determined the final individual relative Constant score and DASH score. For patients in the sample were obtained...
|
guest ::
