A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

What is the appropriate revascularisation approach in traumatic popliteal artery injury? | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • Popliteal artery injury (PAI) can occur alongside other injuries like proximal tibial fractures or knee dislocations, highlighting the need for tailored revascularization strategies.
  • A study from 2013 to 2023 analyzed 21 cases of PAI, examining surgical methods and their impact on long-term knee stability.
  • The findings suggest that the choice of revascularization technique should vary based on associated injuries to avoid complications during definitive surgery.

Article Abstract

Background: Popliteal artery injury (PAI) is sometimes accompanied by proximal tibial fracture or knee dislocation. We hypothesized that revascularisation approach should be selected depending on the associated injury. The purpose of this study is to propose revascularisation approach that does not interfere with definitive surgery.

Methods: Patients with PAI who were treated between 2013 and 2023 were included. Associated injuries, revascularisation approach, and skin incision for the definitive surgery were investigated. We investigated whether varus-valgus instability remained as an outcome.

Results: 21 limbs with PAI were included. There were 6 cases with proximal tibial fracture. Medial incision was used in 2 cases and crank shaped incision in 4 cases. In 4 cases of crank shaped incision, osteosynthesis was performed through a crank shaped incision. There were 8 cases with knee dislocation. Medial incision was used in 1 case, S shaped incision in 4 cases, and crank shaped incision in 3 cases. In cases of S shaped incision, extra-articular ligament was repaired through independent incisions. In three cases of crank shaped incision, it was not possible to repair extra-articular ligament because of interfere with the initial incision. As a result, knee joint instability remained. There were 7 cases without proximal tibial fracture or knee dislocation. Medial incision was used in 1 case, S shaped incision in 3 cases, and crank shaped incision in 3 cases. There was no interference between the incisions for revascularisation and for definitive surgery.

Conclusion: For PAI, revascularisation approaches should be selected depending on the associated injury.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2024.11.001DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

shaped incision
36
incision cases
28
crank shaped
24
cases crank
20
revascularisation approach
16
incision
14
proximal tibial
12
tibial fracture
12
knee dislocation
12
cases
12

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!