Fibula fixation in the treatment of tibial pilon fractures – Is it really necessary?

BackgroundThere is a lack of consensus about the role of fibula fixation in these complex fractures, with only two clinical studies in the literature. We hypothesize that the fibula fracture need not be fixed in the tibial pilon fractures if primary stability can be achieved with tibial fixation alone.MethodsWe reviewed 79 patients with operatively treated tibial pilon with associated fibula fractures from 2007 to 2017 and divided them into two groups; patients with fibula fracture fixation and those without fixation. The primary outcome measure was any mechanical complications. Secondary outcomes were wound complications and other morbidities.ResultsThere were 54 (68.4%) patients with fibula fixation and 25 (31.6%) patients without fixation. There were no statistically significant differences in mechanical complications between the two groups. However, patients without fibula fixation were noted to have more wound complications (44% vs 25.9%, p = 0.108) although this was not statistically significant. In terms of removal of implant (ROI), there were no differences noted in patients with or without fibula fixation (33.3% vs 28%, p = 0.796). There were also no significant differences in ROI for those fixed with plate and screws when compared to those fixed with Rush rod and K wire within the group with fibula fixation.ConclusionFibula fixation in the treatment of tibial pilon fractures is not routinely necessary and does not result in decreased mechanical complications such as malunion, delayed union, nonunion and implant failure. Fibula fracture fixation should be reserved for cases where it may aid reduction or provide additional stability.     

Is external fixation needed for the treatment of tibial fractures with acute compartment syndrome?

Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) after tibial fracture carries a risk of various complications, including infection, delayed union, nonunion, nerve damage, and poor prognosis. For the treatment of fractures with ACS, fasciotomy is conducted, and the method to stabilise the fracture has to be considered. Thirty-five patients who underwent surgery for ACS with tibial shaft fractures were evaluated, and the results of initial internal fixation (Group I, 20 patients) and initial external fixation (Group II, 15 patients) were analysed. The mean age was 41 years. Five patients needed additional surgery for bone union. Complications occurred in 4 cases, but no deep infection was reported. The time to bone union, the need for additional surgery, and the incidence of complications in Group I and Group II were not statistically different. For the treatment of ACS with tibial fracture, immediate internal fixation and changing from external fixation to internal fixation did not affect the clinical course.     

Is it possible to save one lumbar segment in the treatment of thoracolumbar fractures?

Surgical treatment of unstable thoracolumbar fractures is controversial. Most authors reported that short segment fixation led to a high incidence of implant failure and correction loss. On the other hand, long segment fixation has the disadvantage of fusing more segments. We aimed to compare the outcomes of long-segment fixation versus two or three levels above and one level below fixation for acute thoracolumbar fractures. Twenty six consecutive patients were assigned to two groups. Group 1 included 14 patients treated with long fixation, whereas group 2 included 12 patients treated with two or three levels above and one level below fixation. Fractures were classified according to the Mc Cormack, Magerl and Denis classifications. Clinical (Oswestry questionnaire, Visual analog score) and radiological (Sagittal index, percentage of anterior body height compression, local kyphosis and Cobb angle) outcomes were analysed. The average follow-up for the long and hybrid fixation groups were 28 and 20 months respectively. Clinical scores of both groups at the last follow-up were not significantly different. The preoperative, postoperative and follow-up sagittal index, anterior body height compression, local kyphosis angle and Cobb angle were not significantly different. Correction loss of 3.36 degrees was seen in the long segment fixation group, versus 2.75 degrees in the other group at the last follow-up. There was no significant difference between the results achieved in the patients who had transpedicular fixation two or three levels above and one level below the fractured vertebra and those who had long segment fixation for thoracolumbar burst fractures.     

Does obesity influence the outcome after the operative treatment of ankle fractures?

Many orthopaedic surgeons believe that obese patients have a higher rate of peri-operative complications and a worse functional outcome than non-obese patients. There is, however, inconsistency in the literature supporting this notion. This study was performed to evaluate the effect of body mass index (BMI) on injury characteristics, the incidence of complications, and the functional outcome after the operative management of unstable ankle fractures. We retrospectively reviewed 279 patients (99 obese (BMI > or = 30) and 180 non-obese (BMI < 30) patients who underwent surgical fixation of an unstable fracture of the ankle. We found that obese patients had a higher number of medical co-morbidities, and more Orthopaedic Trauma Association type B and C fracture types than non-obese patients. At two years from the time of injury, however, the presence of obesity did not affect the incidence of complications, the time to fracture union or the level of function. These findings suggest that obese patients should be treated in line with standard procedures, keeping in mind any known associated medical co-morbidities.     

Posterior fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures: Is it possible to protect one segment in the lumbar region?

Background

The treatment for thoracolumbar burst fractures is controversial. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare intermediate-segment (IS) and long-segment (LS) instrumentation in the treatment for these fractures.

Methods

IS instrumentation was considered as pedicle fixation two levels above and one level below the fractured vertebra (infra-laminar hooks attached to lower vertebra with pedicle screws). LS instrumentation was done two levels above and two levels below the fractured vertebra. Among a total of 25 consecutive patients, Group 1 included ten patients treated by IS pedicle fixation, whereas Group 2 included fifteen patients treated by LS instrumentation.

Results

The measurements of local kyphosis (p = 0.955), sagittal index (p = 0.128), anterior vertebral height compression (p = 0.230) and canal diameter expansion (p = 0.839) demonstrated similar improvement at the final follow-up between the two groups. However, there was a significant difference (p < 0.05) between Group 1 and Group 2 regarding clinical outcome [Hannover scoring system, Oswestry disability questionnaire and the range of motion of the lumbar region compared to neutral (0°)].

Conclusions

The radiographic parameters were the same between the two groups. However, the clinical parameters demonstrated that IS instrumentation is a more effective management of thoracolumbar burst fractures.     

Does hospital structure influence the outcome of operative treatment of femoral neck fractures?

Data on 32 007 patients suffering from a medial fracture of the femoral neck have been collected between 1993 and 1999 in a database for external quality assurance organized by the chamber of physicians in Westfalia-Lippe. A statistical analysis (ANOVA, chi-square-test) has been performed to find out whether factors like specialization, annual volume or level of the hospital (primary, secondary or tertiary hospital) influence the outcome. RESULTS: Patients with higher preoperative risk-factors are treated more often in primary hospitals. These clinics perform conservative treatment significantly more often than tertiary hospitals (6.5 % vs. 3.8 %). Osteosyntheses are performed more often in departments specialized in traumatology (13 %) or tertiary hospitals (16.8 %). Preoperative length of stay was 0.5-0.7 days shorter in these hospitals. There is no significant difference in postoperative complications all together (23.2-25.6 %), but a significantly lower rate in postoperative complications after osteosynthesis performed by departments specialized in traumatology (11.3 % vs. 18.8 %). A volume load of more than 50 cases per year correlates with a significant decline in postoperative complications (22.5 % vs. 28.2 %). Risk adjusted mortality does not show significant differences among the different levels of hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: There are distinct differences regarding the way of treatment and procedural quality, but not concerning the short-term outcome between hospitals of different levels.     

Is the proximity of external fixator pins to eventual definitive fixation implants related to the risk of deep infection in the staged management of tibial pilon fractures?

IntroductionIn the staged management of tibial pilon fractures, overlap between definitive internal fixation and external fixation pin sites has been investigated as a risk factor for infection with equivocal conclusions. Our aim was to determine if overlap or proximity of definitive internal fixation to external fixation pin sites influences the risk of deep infection.Patients and methodsWe reviewed 280 AO/OTA 43B or 43C type distal tibia fractures in 277 patients at two level-one trauma centers. Patients underwent staged management using early temporizing external fixation followed by definitive open reduction and plate fixation. Primary outcome was the association between pin site overlap and the development of deep infection. Secondary outcome was the relationship between development of deep infection and the distance from pin site to definitive fixation.ResultsThe average duration between external fixation and definitive internal fixation was 14 days. 24% of fractures developed deep infection requiring surgical intervention. There was no association between pin site overlap and the development of deep infection (p = 0.18). There was no relationship between infection and the distance between proximal plate extent and pin site (p = 0.13).DiscussionWe identified no association between pin site overlap and the development of deep infection. We suggest that temporizing external fixation pins should be placed so as to obtain optimal stability of the construct with lesser emphasis on aiming to be absolutely outside the zone of future fixation.Level of evidenceLevel III Therapeutic Retrospective Comparative study.     

Complex fractures of the proximal humerus in the elderly—outcome and complications after locking plate fixation

Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with locking plates or primary arthroplasty remains a controversial issue in the management of complex proximal humerus fractures. Aim of this study was to evaluate the surgeon- and patient-based outcome of patients older than 65 years who underwent ORIF using locking plate fixation of a 3- or 4-part fracture of the proximal humerus. Twenty-seven patients older than 65 years were treated with locking plate fixation (PHILOS, Fa. Synthes, Umkirch, Germany). At an average follow-up of 44 months, the clinical and the subjective outcome were evaluated, and complications were analyzed. The mean age- and gender-related Constant score was 70% (30–100%) compared with 92% (47–108%) of the contralateral non-injured shoulder. The mean DASH score was 29 points (0–71). Five patients (18.5%) showed clinical signs of an impingement, which was related to malpositioning of the plate in 3 cases. Screw cutout was seen in 22.2% (6 patients). Avascular necrosis of the head or the tubercula was found in 8 patients (29.6%). The revision rate was 29.6%. However, the patients considered the functional status of their shoulder as “good” or “satisfactory.” The functional and patient-orientated results of the locking plate fixation of complex displaced proximal humerus fractures in the elderly are comparable to those of primary arthroplasty and minimally invasive treatment. Proper surgical technique (screw length, plate position) is mandatory for reducing the revision rate.     

The treatment of distal third humeral diaphyseal fractures: Is there still a place for the external fixation?

Introduction

The treatment for humeral diaphyseal fractures is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of treating humeral distal third diaphyseal fractures by using external fixation technique.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively review 65 cases of diaphyseal humeral fractures (31 type A, 23 type B and 11 type C of the AO/OTA classification) treated with external fixation (Orthofix FAD small) between 2008 and 2013. The mean follow-up was 48 months (24–72 months). There were 12 open fractures; however, no cases of concomitant vascular injury were described. The transolecranic traction was always applied to promote partial reduction through ligamentotaxis. In case of interposition of soft tissues impeding reduction, a small incision was performed allowing mobilization of bone ends.

Results

All fractures resulted healed at a mean of 11 weeks (range 9–13 weeks); the average time of removal of the external fixator was 88 days (range 65–95 days). At the last follow-up, the mean elbow flexion was 132.6° (Min 126°–Max 137°) and the mean elbow extension was 6.4° (Max 0°–Min 13°). The Cassebaum’s index rated as excellent in 47.8 % (31 patients), good in 37 % (24 patients), fair in 9.2 % (6 patients) and poor in 6 % (4 patients). The mean DASH score at the final follow-up was 14.7 (range 0–33); 15 patients had a range score between 10 and 20, 43 had less than 10, and seven had more than 20. We observed three cases of superficial infections and two cases of acute radial nerve palsy recovered within 3 months.

Conclusion

According to the excellent clinical results and full rate of consolidation, we state external fixation as a valid option in the treatment of distal third humeral diaphyseal fractures.

     

Biomechanical comparison of four different fixation methods in the management of Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures: Is there a clear winner?

BackgroundCannulated screws augmented with the medial buttress plate could confer greater biomechanical stability and higher union rates than the screw fixation alone for treating young patients with Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures (FNFs). No study has evaluated the effects of distal bicortical screw fixation and biomechanical properties of buttress plate augmentation under simultaneous vertical and rotational forces, physiologically acting on the hip joint. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical properties of four methods of three cannulated screw fixation under the combined axial and torsional loading in a synthetic femur model of type III FNF.MethodsTwenty-four third-generation composite femora were divided into four groups (6 femora in each group) based on the screw fixation configuration: inverted triangle configuration (Group A),  Pauwels' configuration (Group B), inverted triangle configuration combined with medial buttress plate using distal unicortical (Group C), and distal bicortical screw placement (Group D). A Pauwels type III FNF was simulated on the sawbones. Each model was subjected to the combined axial and torsional cyclic loading and subsequently tested to failure.ResultSignificant differences were determined in axial stiffness (AS) among the four groups (p = 0.024), whereas there was no significant difference in torsional stiffness (p = 0.147). The mean AS was higher in group D (639.5 ± 86.2 N/mm) than in group A (430.6 ± 94.8 N/mm), group B (426.2 ± 41.9 N/mm), and group C (451.2 ± 156.7 N/mm). Failure forces (FFs) were significantly different among four groups (p = 0.007), while there was no considerable difference in failure moment values (p = 0.555). The mean FF was significantly higher in group D (1307.1 ± 96.4 N) than in group A  (1076.9 ± 371.2 N) and group B (1075.5 ± 348.3 N) (p = 0.014 and p = 0.018, respectively). There was no significant difference in the mean FF between groups D and C.ConclusionRegardless of the medial plate use, multiple cannulated systems could provide similar biomechanical results regarding torsional stiffness and failure moments. Bicortical placement of the most distal screw in medial buttress plate application could improve axial stability but not significantly affect the rotational stability of the inverted triangle screw fixation system in managing type III FNFs.     

External dynamic fixation in fractures of the humerus: can it still be considered treatment of second choice?

The authors report 40 patients affected with diaphyseal fracture of the humerus treated by dynamic axial fixator (FAD Orthofix). Minimum follow-up was 2 years. A clinical and radiographic retrospective study was conducted with the purpose of verifying the validity of external fixation as treatment of choice in diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. The results were evaluated considering healing time, extent and type of complications, long-term clinical, radiographic and functional findings. Results were: excellent: 35; good: 2; fair: 2; poor: 1. Complications were: nonunione: 1; reimplantation of FAD screws: 1; 4 infections of the screw holes, 3 realignments due to secondary displacement, 1 re-fracture after removal of the implant. There were no iatrogenic lesions of the radial nerve, or infections of the fracture site. The authors conclude that this semi-invasive, versatile and well-tolerated method, may be considered a valid alternative to conservative treatment, or to internal fixation even in cases of single trauma, despite limits related to the degree of collaboration of the patient, particularly with regard to debridement of the screw holes and periodical clinical and radiographic monitoring.     

Results of operative treatment of acetabular fractures from the Third World—how local factors affect the outcome

The objective of this study was to assess the outcome of operations on acetabular fractures from a developing country in the presence of locally available facilities. Sixty-three acetabular fractures were assessed at an average follow up of 52.94 months after operation. Twenty-six patients operated upon in the first three years and 37 operated thereafter were separately studied to discover the effect of the learning curve. Regarding the fractures, 47 of 63 (74.6%) had excellent/good results (Harris Hip Score>80). The complications included broken drill bit in eight patients (12.69%), deep infection and heterotopic ossification in five patients (7.93%), avascular necrosis and sciatic nerve palsy in two patients (3.17%) and implant failure in one patient (1.58%). The results collected during the learning curve were inferior in the complex fractures (p value<0.001). Complications were common in patients opting for local implants and in those operated after over 2 weeks delay.