Aim: To assess the epidemiological aspects of fractures sustained during bike accidents. Study design: Retrospective study Place and duration of study: Department of Orthopaedic, M Islam Medical & Dental College Gujranwala from 1st June 2020 to 31st December 2021. Methodology: Five hundred patients of bike accidents were assessed through severity scoring system. Various bike types, fractures sustained, rate of mortality, helmet usage was assessed. Results: There were 54.6% males and 45.4% females. The mean age of the patients was 33.5±5.75 years. Ninety percent of patients wear no helmet. The presentation of the injuries showed that majority of the cases as 28.2% had facial injuries. Spinal and thoracic injury was common in multi trauma injuries. Conclusion: Bike accidents cause severe life threatening injuries which can be reduced through wearing helmets. Keywords: Bike accidents, fractures, multi trauma

Objective: To compare the mean induction dose of Propofol to induce general anesthesia by conventional method versus mean induction dose after applying priming principle. Study Design and Setting: Randomized controlled trial at Operation theatre complex, Shalamar Hospital, Lahore from November 2016 to May 2017. Methods: A total of 100 patients aged 18-55 years were equally divided into control and study groups. After standard anesthetic monitoring, intravenous propofol was used for induction of general anesthesia by conventional method in Control (C) group and by applying Priming principle in Study (S) group. Total dose requirement of propofol was noted. Data was analyzed in SPSS version 20 and paired sample t-test was applied. P-value of < 0.05 was considered as significant. Results: The mean induction dose of propofol was 70.90 ± 16.77 mg in study group (S) as compared to 94.60 ± 20.22 mg in the control group (C). The difference of mean induction dose in both groups was 23.7± 3.45 mg and thus p-value of 0.000. Conclusion: There was significant reduction of dose of propofol required to induce general anesthesia in elective surgical patient by applying priming principle

Objective: To find the frequency of destructive hip disease in post intra-articular corticosteroid hip Injection. Study Design: Retrospective study Place and Duration of Study: Department of Orthopaedic, Sahara Medical College Narowal from 1st January 2021 to 31st December 2021. Methodology: One hundred and twenty cases of corticosteroid injection in intra-articular region were analyzed. The radiological imaging within 6-12 months was used for finding frequency of rapidly destructive arthrosis. Narrowing of joint space greater than fifty percent with a loss of cartilage up to 2mm within a year was used for rapidly destructive arthrosis diagnosis. Kallgren and Lawrence scoring system ranged between 0-4 was used. Results: There were 73.3% and 26.7% males and mean was 53.1±3.3 years. The steroidal injection was placed as 40mg triamcinolone-acetonide with 4 mL 1% lidocaine in 77.5% of cases. 20.8% rapidly destructive arthrosis in all the patients who were injected with corticosteroid. The progression of total hip arthroplasty was noticeable in 22.5%. Conclusion: A high frequency of destructive hip disease is observed in intra-articular corticosteroid hip injections. Keywords: Frequency, Destructive hip disease, Intra-articular corticosteroid hip injection

Background: Procedural sedation is required for multiple short duration procedures outside of the operating rooms especially in radiology and endoscopy suites. Intravenous anesthetic agent with rapid recovery profile is desirable in such circumstances. This study aims to compare two regimens of intravenous anesthetic agents. Aim: To compare the mean recovery time of propofol and midazolam with propofol alone for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Settings: Department of Anesthesia, Shalamar Hospital, Lahore. Study Duration: June 2017 to December 2017. Methods: A total of 70 adult patients aged 20-60 years undergoing ERCP under sedation were included. Patients were given a combination of propofol and midazolam in group A while propofol alone was given in group B. After procedure, pts were transferred to recovery room and were followed for assessment of recovery time. Data were analyzed in SPSS vr 21, Independent t-test was applied & p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Significant difference was found in mean recovery time amongst both the groups. Mean recovery time in Group A (propofol and midazolam) was 19.29±4.50 minutes while in Group B (propofol alone) was 26.66±3.70 minutes showing statistically significant result with p-value = 0.0001. Conclusion: We conclude that mean recovery time with propofol plus midazolam is shorter as compared to propofol alone for sedation in ERCP. Keywords: Propofol, midazolam, sedation outside operation theatre.