RESUMEN
A 59-year-old woman with a painful right knee that became locked in extension after a trivial trauma was seen at the emergency room. This was caused by unloaded hyperextension in bed. She was diagnosed with a superior dislocation of the patella. A closed reduction was performed, but a recurrent episode was seen within a week. An arthroscopy was performed, in which the causative osteophytes were removed. In the 12-month follow-up after treatment, no recurrence was seen. A superior dislocation of the patella is caused by patellofemoral osteophytes that interlock. This can cause a degenerative knee to become locked in extension. Beside interlocking osteophytes of the patella and the distal femur, the superior part of the patella is tilted away from the femur. This is caused by the pull of the patella tendon and the simultaneous relaxation of the quadriceps tendon. This is a pathognomonic finding on radiographs that, to the best of our knowledge, has been identified but not been appreciated as such in previous reports. As illustrated in this report, a superior dislocation of the patella can easily be recognized on physical examination and radiographic imaging alone when familiar with the specific abnormalities. This will reduce unnecessary diagnostic imaging studies and delay in treatment. This case report illustrates a recurrent case of superior dislocation of the patella. We summarize and evaluate previous reports, discuss trauma mechanisms, physical examination, classification, and treatment including recurrent cases. After reading this case report the reader will be able to diagnose a superior dislocation of the patella with near certainty on physical examination and radiographic imaging of the knee alone.
Asunto(s)
Osteofito/complicaciones , Luxación de la Rótula/diagnóstico por imagen , Luxación de la Rótula/etiología , Artroscopía , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Luxación de la Rótula/cirugíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Annually approximately 18,044 patients are admitted to Dutch hospitals with hip fractures. This is an increasing demand for medical care due to the increasing amount of elderly people. Although previous studies showed that routine check of X-rays following hip fracture surgery is unnecessary, it remains routine in most clinics in the Netherlands. In addition to the radiation exposure to the patient, it is painful and leads to unnecessary costs. This study aims to establish if routine check X-rays 1 day after internal fixation for hip fracture with adequate image intensifier guidance influence postoperative management. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed for all patients undergoing internal fixation of hip fractures with image intensifier guidance in the period from January 2006 until December 2007 in our hospital. RESULTS: In that period 294 patients underwent internal fixation of hip fractures, 254 underwent a check X-ray and were included in this study. In only two patients the check X-ray did change patient management. CONCLUSION: A check X-ray following internal fixation of hip fractures after adequate peroperative image intensifier guidance is not useful. Dismissing this unuseful medical investigation, leads to less radiation exposure, less pain and less costs.
RESUMEN
In this multicenter study, the efficacy of and tolerability for meropenem were compared with those for the combination of cefuroxime-gentamicin (+/- metronidazole) for the treatment of serious bacterial infections in patients > or = 65 years of age. A total of 79 patients were randomized; thirty-nine received meropenem (1 g/8 h), and 40 received cefuroxime (1.5 g/8 h) plus gentamicin (4 mg/kg of body weight daily) for 5 to 10 days. Metronidazole (500 mg/6 h) could be added to the cefuroxime-gentamicin regimen for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections (n = 10). Seventy patients were evaluable for clinical efficacy; the primary diagnoses were as follows: pneumonia in 41 patients (20 treated with meropenem, 21 treated with cefuroxime-gentamicin), intra-abdominal infection in 10 patients (7 meropenem, 3 cefuroxime-gentamicin-metronidazole), urinary tract infection (UTI) in 11 patients (6 meropenem, 5 cefuroxime-gentamicin), sepsis syndrome in 7 patients (4 meropenem, 3 cefuroxime-gentamicin), and "other" in 1 patient (cefuroxime-gentamicin). The pathogens isolated from 18 patients with bacteremia were as follows: Staphylococcus spp. (n = 2), Streptococcus spp. (n = 2), members of the family Enterobacteriaceae (n = 11), and Bacteroides spp. (n = 3). A satisfactory clinical response at the end of therapy was achieved in 26 of 37 (70%) and 24 of 33 (73%) evaluable patients treated with meropenem and combination therapy, respectively. Clinical success was achieved in 23 of 31 (74%) and 21 of 28 (75%) evaluable patients with infections other than UTIs, respectively. A satisfactory microbiological response occurred in 15 of 22 (68%) patients in the meropenem group compared with 12 of 19 (63%) treated with combination therapy. Renal failure occurred during therapy in 2 of 39 (5%) meropenem recipients compared with 5 of 40 (13%) of those treated with combination therapy. The findings in this small study indicate that meropenem is as efficacious for and as well tolerated by elderly patients as the combination of cefuroxime-gentamicin (+/- metronidazole).