Hardware removal: indications and expectations.

Matthew L Busam; Robert J Esther; William T Obremskey

doi:10.5435/00124635-200602000-00006

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16467186

Hardware removal: indications and expectations.

Matthew L Busam·Robert J Esther·William T Obremskey

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Although hardware removal is commonly done, it should not be considered a routine procedure. The decision to remove hardware has significant economic implications, including the costs of the procedure as well as possible work time lost for postoperative recovery. The clinical indications for implant removal are not well established. There are few definitive data to guide whether implant removal is appropriate. Implant removal may be challenging and lead to complications, such as neurovascular injury, refracture, or recurrence of deformity. When implants are removed for pain relief alone, the results are unpredictable and depend on both the implant type and its anatomic location. Current literature does not support the routine removal of implants to protect against allergy, carcinogenesis, or metal detection. Surgeons and patients should be aware of appropriate indications and have realistic expectations of the risks and benefits of implant removal.

Explore related subjects

Device Removal Fracture Fixation, Internal Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary Humans Hypersensitivity Metals Prostheses and Implants Tibial Fractures Journal Article Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Matthew L Busam, Robert J Esther, William T Obremskey. 2006. Hardware removal: indications and expectations.. https://doi.org/10.5435/00124635-200602000-00006

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Corporeal excavation: new technique for penile prosthesis implantation in men with severe corporeal fibrosis.

INTRODUCTION: Penile prosthesis implantation in men who have fibrotic corpora as the result of ischemic priapism or previous removal of an infected penile prosthesis poses a significant challenge to the implanting surgeon. We describe a new technique, corporeal excavation, to meet this challenge. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The operative approach is through an inverted T penoscrotal incision that affords exposure of nearly the entire corpus cavernosum on each side. Extended corporotomies are made on the ventral aspect of each corpus cavernosum, and a plane of dissection between the fibrotic corporeal tissue and the inner surface of the tunica albuginea is established, resulting in core removal of nearly all fibrotic intracorporeal tissue. Cylinders are laid into the empty corporeal bed, and the tunica albuginea is closed primarily. Nine patients were identified who had undergone this procedure. The operative notes and medical records were reviewed, and telephone interviews were done for follow-up when patients had not been recently seen in the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Successful outcomes were achieved in all 9 patients. Corporeal excavation permits penile prosthesis implantation in men with severe intracorporeal fibrosis usually resulting from priapism or previous removal of infected penile prostheses.

Device Removal↗

PubMed2006

Minimally invasive technique for explantation of right ventricular assist devices.

In an attempt to reduce some or all of the complications resulting from the use of biventricular assist devices after mechanical circulatory support, we have developed and applied a minimally invasive technique for explantation of right ventricular assist devices.

Device Removal↗

PubMed2006

Feasibility and outcomes of an early extubation policy after esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Although early extubation of esophagectomy patients has been found to be feasible, safe, and associated with low morbidity, there is no uniform standard of care among high volume centers. Our objective is to examine a contemporary series of esophagectomies and identify the feasibility and outcome of an early extubation policy. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of all patients who underwent esophagectomy between January 2003 and December 2004 at the Massachusetts General Hospital. One hundred and two patients were analyzed from 129 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy and subsequently divided in two groups: The early extubation group was extubated in the operating room and the late extubation group was extubated in the intensive care unit (ICU). RESULTS: Ninety percent were extubated early. Although most patients underwent a transthoracic or thoracoabdominal esophagectomy, the operative approach did not influence failure to extubate. Neoadjuvant therapy was not predictive of extubation failure. Most patients age 70 or greater (86%) were extubated early. There were three nonelective reintubations in the early extubation group secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome. The median length of stay was 11 days and median ICU stay was one day. The 30-day mortality was 1.9% and the median survival was 28 months. CONCLUSIONS: Attention to restricted intraoperative fluid balance, limited blood loss, anesthetic technique, and epidural use permit most patients undergoing esophageal resection to be safely extubated immediately postresection in the operating room.

Device Removal↗