Solitary coronal shear fractures of femoral condyle, such as Hoffa's fracture, are usually associated with supracondylar or intercondylar fractures of the femur. These fractures are rare and seen in the context of high energy mechanism leading to multiple injuries; therefore a thorough workup of the patient is required to rule out other significant injuries. Hoffa's fracture associated with femoral shaft and proximal tibial fractures is extremely rare and no such injury has been reported previously. We report two such cases which were managed with standard operative fixation techniques and demonstrated good to excellent functional outcome after a follow-up of one year. This report emphasizes that high index of suspicion is required for di- agnosis of these injuries and a thorough workup is mandatory to rule out other associated injuries. We also propose a possible mechanism of injury.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Femoral Fractures ; diagnosis ; surgery ; Fracture Fixation, Internal ; methods ; Humans ; Male ; Multiple Trauma ; diagnosis ; surgery ; Tibial Fractures ; diagnosis ; surgery

Background: The objective of this study is to summarize the evidence in Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews, the effects, and the benefits of monitoring intracranial pressure (ICP) in patients with head trauma with an indication of ICP monitoring Methods: The process of preparing this overview followed the guidelines established by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for umbrella reviews. Two independent reviewers evaluated the quality of reporting, bias risk, methodologies, and evidence using three different tools: the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) instrument, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). Results: A total of five papers met the criteria for inclusion in the study. These papers consisted of 49 primary research studies and 19 unique primary research studies. One of the SRs indicated that using intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring led to a reduction in mortality. Two of the SRs had mixed results with temporal variation, while two found no significant difference in mortality with ICP monitoring. It is important to note that the quality of the SRs varied, with some being of higher quality than others. Conclusion There was no conclusive evidence that ICP monitoring reduces mortality in TBI patients. There was high heterogeneity in included primary research studies. Future research should aim to address the limitations of these studies and provide more conclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness of ICP monitoring in reducing mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Background: The objective of this study is to summarize the evidence in Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews, the effects, and the benefits of monitoring intracranial pressure (ICP) in patients with head trauma with an indication of ICP monitoring Methods: The process of preparing this overview followed the guidelines established by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for umbrella reviews. Two independent reviewers evaluated the quality of reporting, bias risk, methodologies, and evidence using three different tools: the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) instrument, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). Results: A total of five papers met the criteria for inclusion in the study. These papers consisted of 49 primary research studies and 19 unique primary research studies. One of the SRs indicated that using intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring led to a reduction in mortality. Two of the SRs had mixed results with temporal variation, while two found no significant difference in mortality with ICP monitoring. It is important to note that the quality of the SRs varied, with some being of higher quality than others. Conclusion There was no conclusive evidence that ICP monitoring reduces mortality in TBI patients. There was high heterogeneity in included primary research studies. Future research should aim to address the limitations of these studies and provide more conclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness of ICP monitoring in reducing mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Background: The objective of this study is to summarize the evidence in Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews, the effects, and the benefits of monitoring intracranial pressure (ICP) in patients with head trauma with an indication of ICP monitoring Methods: The process of preparing this overview followed the guidelines established by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for umbrella reviews. Two independent reviewers evaluated the quality of reporting, bias risk, methodologies, and evidence using three different tools: the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) instrument, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). Results: A total of five papers met the criteria for inclusion in the study. These papers consisted of 49 primary research studies and 19 unique primary research studies. One of the SRs indicated that using intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring led to a reduction in mortality. Two of the SRs had mixed results with temporal variation, while two found no significant difference in mortality with ICP monitoring. It is important to note that the quality of the SRs varied, with some being of higher quality than others. Conclusion There was no conclusive evidence that ICP monitoring reduces mortality in TBI patients. There was high heterogeneity in included primary research studies. Future research should aim to address the limitations of these studies and provide more conclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness of ICP monitoring in reducing mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury.

Background: The objective of this study is to summarize the evidence in Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews, the effects, and the benefits of monitoring intracranial pressure (ICP) in patients with head trauma with an indication of ICP monitoring Methods: The process of preparing this overview followed the guidelines established by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) for umbrella reviews. Two independent reviewers evaluated the quality of reporting, bias risk, methodologies, and evidence using three different tools: the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) instrument, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2). Results: A total of five papers met the criteria for inclusion in the study. These papers consisted of 49 primary research studies and 19 unique primary research studies. One of the SRs indicated that using intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring led to a reduction in mortality. Two of the SRs had mixed results with temporal variation, while two found no significant difference in mortality with ICP monitoring. It is important to note that the quality of the SRs varied, with some being of higher quality than others. Conclusion There was no conclusive evidence that ICP monitoring reduces mortality in TBI patients. There was high heterogeneity in included primary research studies. Future research should aim to address the limitations of these studies and provide more conclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness of ICP monitoring in reducing mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury.