<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> The implants removal after fracture healing has always been an issue of controversy. After union, the implant ceases to be important and can be removed. Nevertheless, some patients require metallic implant removal due to various implant-related difficulties. Our study was aimed to identify the most common causes for removal of implant.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The patients admitted for implant removal in our department were consented and included in the study. Pre-operative radiological images collected and evaluated. Post-operatively, images were taken and followed for resolution of symptoms or appearance of new problems.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> A total of 60 patients were studied. Of these, 47 were males and 13 were females. Mean age was 33.7 years (range 4-70 years). Patient request (35% of patients) was the main indication for removal of implants. Reasons were found to be discomfort due to implant, infection, failure of implants and others.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Belief regarding hardware removal has been set and most of them are agreed that routine removal should not be performed unless obviously indicated. In our attempt to fill this gap, we trust that routine removal should not be performed in ‘asymptomatic’ patients. The procedure should not need a big procedure than the implant fixation surgery. Procedure should be sought also as a risk like refracture, bleeding, infection, neurovascular injury and prior to surgery, proper consent to be taken and patient should be well explained. Sometimes indicated results expected after surgery can’t be fulfilled, and instead, complication can results.</p>

BACKGROUND: Giant cell tumour of bone can occur at lower end of Radius and it is the third common site. The tumour has to be treated properly to prevent recurrence. Various methods of treatment are available and resection and reconstruction using ipsilateral upper end of fibula is one of the methods available. METHODS: The patients who had GCT lower end of Radius and attended the hospital for treatment were taken in this retrospective study. The tumour was evaluated clinically and with X-ray and MRI. The tumour was confirmed by FNAC or biopsy. The tumour was resected and reconstruction of the Radius was done using non-vascularised ipsilateral fibula. RESULTS: There were ten patients in this study, six males and four females with age varying from 25 to 41 years and follow up period varied from 36 to 60 months. The results were assessed by musculoskeletal tumour society score. Average grip strength was 65% of normal and over all functional range combined movements was 155 degrees which is comparable to published reports. The result was good in eight patients and in two cases there was mild subluxation of wrist joint which was graded as fair.. There was no recurrence of tumour. CONCLUSIONS: GCT of lower end of Radius treated with resection and reconstruction using nonvacularised ipsilateral fibula gives good result cosmetically and functionally.

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Frozen shoulder or adhesive capsulitis is a condition where the patient experience stiffness and pain in joint of the shoulder. It is an enigma as till now its etiology is unknown. It affects both the genders of the middle and elderly age. A retrospective, comparative study was to evaluate the effects of physical therapy versus intra-articular steroid injection in periarthritis of shoulder.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> 30 patients each with frozen shoulder who were treated either using physical therapy (Group 1) and intra-articular steroid injection (Group 2). The data was collected at baseline and at different follow-up periods and analyzed.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> There were 3 lost to follow-up in physiotherapy group and 4 in intra-articular injection group. Slight male preponderance (51.9% vs. 48.1%) was seen in physiotherapy group. Left side more affected in both the groups. Literacy (p=0.064), socioeconomic status (p=0.22), occupation (p=0.866), comorbidities (p=0.974), abnormal x-ray (p=0.34) were all comparable between the two groups. Mean duration of shoulder pain and restriction of shoulder motion were also comparable (p&gt;0.05). Side effects– 46.2% were higher in intra-articular injection group. Response to treatment, disability score and SPADI index showed significant reduction in both the groups, but significantly more reduction in intra-articular injection was seen in comparison to the physiotherapy group.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The overall treatment outcome in intra-articular injection group is much better in comparison to the physiotherapy group, but with higher side effects. Intra-articular injection of steroid will prove to be a boon after effective management of side effects.</p>