Skin Antisepsis before Surgical Fixation of Extremity Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating surgical-site infection have had conflicting results with respect to the use of alcohol solutions containing iodine povacrylex or chlorhexidine gluconate as skin antisepsis before surgery to repair a fractured limb (i.e., an extremity fracture). METHODS: In a cluster-randomized, crossover trial at 25 hospitals in the United States and Canada, we randomly assigned hospitals to use a solution of 0.7% iodine povacrylex in 74% isopropyl alcohol (iodine group) or 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol (chlorhexidine group) as preoperative antisepsis for surgical procedures to repair extremity fractures. Every 2 months, the hospitals alternated interventions. Separate populations of patients with either open or closed fractures were enrolled and included in the analysis. The primary outcome was surgical-site infection, which included superficial incisional infection within 30 days or deep incisional or organ-space infection within 90 days. The secondary outcome was unplanned reoperation for fracture-healing complications. RESULTS: A total of 6785 patients with a closed fracture and 1700 patients with an open fracture were included in the trial. In the closed-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 77 patients (2.4%) in the iodine group and in 108 patients (3.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 1.00; P = 0.049). In the open-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 54 patients (6.5%) in the iodine group and in 60 patients (7.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odd ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.27; P = 0.45). The frequencies of unplanned reoperation, 1-year outcomes, and serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with closed extremity fractures, skin antisepsis with iodine povacrylex in alcohol resulted in fewer surgical-site infections than antisepsis with chlorhexidine gluconate in alcohol. In patients with open fractures, the results were similar in the two groups. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03523962.).

Plating as a reduction aid prior to intramedullary nailing of tibia fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this meta-analysis is to analyse the literature on plate-assisted reduction during intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures and to compare the rates of infection and nonunion. METHODS: The databases Medline, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 2022 for literature comparing plate-assisted reduction during intramedullary nailing of extra-articular tibia fractures to standard, closed means of reduction. Data were extracted and pooled in a random effects meta-analysis for the primary outcomes of nonunion and infection risk. RESULTS: Five comparative studies were identified including 520 total patients, of which 151 underwent tibial nailing with the use of plate-assisted reduction with an average follow-up time of 17.9 months. Approximately two-thirds of patients retained the plate used to assist reduction during intramedullary nailing (102 of 151). Pooled analysis of the infection rates found no significant difference with plate-assisted intramedullary nailing (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.90, 95% CI 0.49-1.65, p = 0.72), and for nonunion rates, there was also no significant difference with plate-assisted intramedullary nailing (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.40-1.60, p = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Plate-assisted reduction during intramedullary nailing of tibia shaft fractures was not associated with an increased risk for nonunion or infection, and can be safely applied as an adjunct for reduction in challenging fracture patterns, without the need for later removal. However, evidence is quite limited and further investigation into the use of provisional plating as a technique is needed as its use in intramedullary nailing continues to expand.

Pronator quadratus preserving versus pronator quadratus dissecting approaches in volar plate fixation of distal radius fractures: a systematic review of comparative studies.

PURPOSE: To compare pronator quadratus preserving (PQ-P) approaches with PQ dissecting (PQ-D) approaches in volar plate fixation of distal radius fractures (DRFs). METHODS: Three databases were searched on March 10th, 2024. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. Data on demographics, fracture classifications, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion, radiographic parameters, and complications were extracted. RESULTS: Thirteen studies with a total of 1007 fractures were included. Two of three studies reported lower DASH scores in the PQ-P group between 6 weeks and 3 months postoperative, however no studies reported lower scores in the PQ-P group after 3 months. Three of three studies reported significantly lower VAS scores at 6 weeks postoperative, however no studies reported significant differences after 6 months. Only one of six studies reported significantly greater flexion, extension, and pronation in the PQ-P group. One of four studies reported greater radial deviation in the PQ-P group, while there were no differences in supination or ulnar deviation. One of ten and one of six studies reported greater volar tilt and ulnar variance or radial length, respectively, in the PQ-P group. CONCLUSION: There is not sufficient evidence supporting the utility of PQ-P approaches over conventional PQ-D approaches for volar plate fixation of DRFs, especially at long-term follow-ups (3+ months). There may be short term benefits with PQ-P approaches, specifically with regards to PROMs in the short-term (< 6 weeks), however there is limited high-quality evidence supporting these findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Is the Most Cost-effective Treatment Strategy for Proximal Humerus Fractures in Older Adults: A Cost-utility Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures are the second-most common fragility fracture in older adults. Although reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a promising treatment strategy for proximal humerus fractures with favorable clinical and quality of life outcomes, it is associated with much higher, and possibly prohibitive, upfront costs relative to nonoperative treatment and other surgical alternatives. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the cost-effectiveness of open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), hemiarthroplasty, and RTSA compared with the nonoperative treatment of complex proximal humerus fractures in adults older than 65 years from the perspective of a single-payer Canadian healthcare system? (2) Which factors, if any, affect the cost-effectiveness of ORIF, hemiarthroplasty, and RTSA compared with nonoperative treatment of proximal humerus fractures including quality of life outcomes, cost, and complication rates after each treatment? METHODS: This cost-utility analysis compared RTSA, hemiarthroplasty, and ORIF with the nonoperative management of complex proximal humerus fractures in adults older than 65 years over a lifetime time horizon from the perspective of a single-payer healthcare system. Short-term and intermediate-term complications in the 2-year postoperative period were modeled using a decision tree, with long-term outcomes estimated through a Markov model. The model was initiated with a cohort of 75-year-old patients who had a diagnosis of a comminuted (three- or four-part) proximal humerus fractures; 90% of the patients were women. The mean age and gender composition of the model's cohort was based on a systematic review conducted as part of this analysis. Patients were managed nonoperatively or surgically with either ORIF, hemiarthroplasty, or RTSA. The three initial surgical treatment options of ORIF, hemiarthroplasty, and RTSA resulted in uncomplicated healing or the development of a complication that would result in a subsequent surgical intervention. The model reflects the complications that result in repeat surgery and that are assumed to have the greatest impact on clinical outcomes and costs. Transition probabilities and health utilities were derived from published sources, with costs (2020 CAD) sourced from regional costing databases. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-utility ratio, which was calculated using expected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and costs. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of changing key model parameters. RESULTS: Based on both pairwise and sequential analysis, RTSA was found to be the most cost-effective strategy for managing complex proximal humerus fractures in adults older than 65 years. Compared with nonoperative management, the pairwise incremental cost-utility ratios of hemiarthroplasty and RTSA were CAD 25,759/QALY and CAD 7476/QALY, respectively. ORIF was dominated by nonoperative management, meaning that it was both more costly and less effective. Sequential analysis, wherein interventions are compared from least to most expensive in a pairwise manner, demonstrated ORIF to be dominated by hemiarthroplasty, and hemiarthroplasty to be extendedly dominated by RTSA. Further, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAD 50,000/QALY, RTSA had 66% probability of being the most cost-effective treatment option. The results were sensitive to changes in the parameters for the probability of revision RTSA after RTSA, the treatment cost of RTSA, and the health utilities associated with the well state for all treatment options except ORIF, although none of these changes were found to be clinically realistic based on the existing evidence. CONCLUSION: Based on this economic analysis, RTSA is the preferred treatment strategy for complex proximal humerus fractures in adults older than 65 years, despite high upfront costs. Based on the evidence to date, it is unlikely that the parameters this model was sensitive to would change to the degree necessary to alter the model's outcome. A major strength of this model is that it reflects the most recent randomized controlled trials evaluating the management of this condition. Therefore, clinicians should feel confident recommending RTSA for the management of proximal humerus fractures in adults older than 65 years, and they are encouraged to advocate for this intervention as being a cost-effective practice, especially in publicly funded healthcare systems wherein resource stewardship is a core principle. Future high-quality trials should continue to collect both clinical and quality of life outcomes using validated tools such as the EuroQOL-5D to reduce parameter uncertainty and support decision makers in understanding relevant interventions' value for money. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, economic and decision analysis.

What Is the Relative Effectiveness of the Various Surgical Treatment Options for Distal Radius Fractures? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Many acceptable treatment options exist for distal radius fractures (DRFs); however, a simultaneous comparison of all methods is difficult using conventional study designs. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on DRF treatment to answer the following questions: Compared with nonoperative treatment, (1) which intervention is associated with the best 1-year functional outcome? (2) Which intervention is associated with the lowest risk of overall complications? (3) Which intervention is associated with the lowest risk of complications requiring operation? METHODS: Ten databases were searched from inception to July 25, 2019. Search and analysis reporting adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Included studies were English-language RCTs that assessed at least one surgical treatment arm for adult patients with displaced DRFs, with less than 20% loss to follow-up. We excluded RCTs reporting on patients with open fractures, extensive bone loss, or ipsilateral upper extremity polytrauma. Seventy RCTs (n = 4789 patients) were included. Treatments compared were the volar locking plate, bridging external fixation, nonbridging external fixation, dynamic external fixation, percutaneous pinning, intramedullary fixation, dorsal plating, fragment-specific plating, and nonoperative treatment. Subgroup analyses were conducted for intraarticular fractures, extraarticular fractures, and patients with an average age greater than 60 years. Mean (range) patient age was 59 years (56 to 63) and was similar across all treatment groups except for dynamic external fixation (44 years) and fragment-specific plating (47 years). Distribution of intraarticular and extraarticular fractures was approximately equal among the treatment groups other than that for intramedullary fixation (73% extraarticular), fragment-specific plating (66% intraarticular) [13, 70], and dorsal plating (100% intraarticular). Outcomes were the DASH score at 1 year, total complications, and reoperation. The minimum clinically important different (MCID) for the DASH score was set at 10 points. The analysis was performed using Bayesian methodology with random-effects models. Rank orders were generated using surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. Evidence quality was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Most studies had a low risk of bias due to randomization and low rates of incomplete follow-up, unclear risk of bias due to selective reporting, and high risk of bias due to lack of patient and assessor blinding. Studies assessing bridging external fixation and/or nonoperative treatment arms had a higher overall risk of bias while studies with volar plating and/or percutaneous pinning treatment arms had a lower risk of bias. RESULTS: Across all patients, there were no clinically important differences in terms of the DASH score at 1 year; although differences were found, all were less than the MCID of 10 points. Volar plating was ranked the highest for DASH score at 1 year (mean difference -7.34 [95% credible interval -11 to -3.7) while intramedullary fixation, with low-quality evidence, also showed improvement in DASH score (mean difference -7.75 [95% CI -14.6 to -0.56]). The subgroup analysis revealed that only locked volar plating was favored over nonoperative treatment for patients older than 60 years of age (mean difference -6.4 [95% CI -11 to -2.1]) and for those with intraarticular fractures (mean difference -8.4 [95% CI -15 to -2.0]). However, its clinical importance was uncertain as the MCID was not met. Among all patients, intramedullary fixation (odds ratio 0.09 [95% CI 0.02 to 0.84]) and locked volar plating (OR 0.14 [95% CI 0.05 to 0.39]) were associated with a lower complication risk compared with nonoperative treatment. For intraarticular fractures, volar plating was the only treatment associated with a lower risk of complications than nonoperative treatment (OR 0.021 [95% CI < 0.01 to 0.50]). For extraarticular fractures, only nonbridging external fixation was associated with a lower risk of complications than nonoperative treatment (OR 0.011 [95% CI < 0.01 to 0.65]), although the quality of evidence was low. Among all patients, the risk of complications requiring operation was lower with intramedullary fixation (OR 0.06 [95% CI < 0.01 to 0.85) than with nonoperative treatment, but no treatment was favored over nonoperative treatment when analyzed by subgroups. CONCLUSION: We found no clinically important differences favoring any surgical treatment option with respect to 1-year functional outcome. However, relative to the other options, volar plating was associated with a lower complication risk, particularly in patients with intraarticular fractures, while nonbridging external fixation was associated with a lower complication risk in patients with extraarticular fractures. For patients older than 60 years of age, nonoperative treatment may still be the preferred option because there is no reliable evidence showing a consistent decrease in complications or complications requiring operation among the other treatment options. Particularly in this age group, the decision to expose patients to even a single surgery should be made with caution. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

The Role of Deltoid Ligament Repair in Ankle Fractures With Syndesmotic Instability: A Systematic Review.

Ankle fractures are the fourth most common fracture requiring surgical management. The deltoid ligament is a primary ankle stabilizer against valgus forces. It is frequently ruptured in ankle fractures; however, there is currently no consensus regarding repair. A systematic database search was conducted with Medline, PubMed, and Embase for relevant studies discussing patients with ankle fractures involving deltoid ligament rupture and repair. Screening, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed independently and in duplicate. Data extracted included pain, range of motion (ROM), function, medial clear space (MCS), syndesmotic malreduction, and complications. After screening, 9 eligible studies from 1990 to 2018 were included (N = 508). Compared to nonrepair groups, deltoid ligament repair patients had lower syndesmotic malreduction rates (0%-9% vs 20%-35%, p ≤ .05), fewer implant removals (5.8% vs 41% p ≤ .05), and longer operating time by 16-20 minutes (p ≤ .05). There was no significant difference for pain, function, ROM, MCS, and complication rate (p ≤ .05). In conclusion, deltoid ligament repair offers lower syndesmotic malreduction rates and reduced re-operation rates for hardware removal in comparison to trans-syndesmotic screws. Repair groups demonstrated equivalent or better outcomes for pain, function, ROM, MCS, and complication rates. Other newer syndesmotic fixation methods such as suture-button fixation require further evaluation when compared to the outcomes of deltoid ligament repair. A randomized control trial is required to further examine the outcomes of ankle fracture patients who undergo deltoid ligament repair versus trans-syndesmotic screw fixation.

How should we lengthen post-traumatic limb defects? a systematic review and comparison of motorized lengthening systems, combined internal and external fixation and external fixation alone.

PURPOSE: Various external fixation systems for lower extremity long bone deformities have been used to various degrees of success, while newer mechanical lengthening nail (MLN) systems offer the potential for improved patient outcomes. Proponents of MLNs argue that they reduce the number of operations, infectious complications, and improve quality of life; however, the evidence to support these claims is scant. This systematic review aims to evaluate the optimal lengthening system for treating post-traumatic long bone deformity. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for comparative studies of lengthening techniques among adult patients with axial deformities. Studies were screened and data extracted in duplicate. Treatment groups were pooled into external fixation (EF) alone, combined internal and external fixation (CIF), and mechanical lengthening nail (MLN). Outcomes were mean lengthening achieved, lengthening index, and reported complications. RESULTS: Thirteen studies with 725 patients (mean age: 29.6 years, 74% male) were included. Nearly all of the studies were either prospective or retrospective cohort studies (n = 12), with one randomized controlled trial of moderate study quality. The mean limb lengthening achieved, lengthening index, and rate of reoperation were similar among the MLN, EF, and CIF groups. CONCLUSION: The purported decreased the duration of lengthening and the risk of reoperation associated with MLNs was not demonstrated in this review. Patients with post-traumatic leg length deformities remain a challenging patient population to treat, with intervention being associated with high rates of infectious complications and need for revision operations.

What Is the Best Evidence for Management of Displaced Midshaft Clavicle Fractures? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of 22 Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Displaced mid-third clavicle fractures are common, and their management remains unclear. Although several meta-analyses have compared specific operative techniques with nonoperative management, it is not possible to compare different operative constructs with one another using a standard meta-analysis. Conversely, a network meta-analysis allows comparisons among more than two treatment arms, using both direct and indirect comparisons between interventions across many trials. To our knowledge, no network meta-analysis has been performed to compare the multiple treatment options for displaced clavicle fractures. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) to determine from among the approaches used to treat displaced midshaft clavicle fractures: (1) the intervention with the highest chance of union at 1 year, (2) the intervention with the lowest risk of revision surgery, and (3) the intervention with the highest functional outcome scores. Secondarily, we also (4) compared the surgical subtypes in the available RCTs on the same above endpoints. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were reviewed for relevant randomized controlled trials published up to July 25, 2018. Two hundred and eighty four papers were reviewed, with 22 meeting inclusion criteria of RCTs with appropriate randomization techniques, adult population, minimum of 1 year follow-up and including at least one operative treatment arm. In total, 1002 patients were treated with a plate construct, 378 with an intramedullary device, and 585 patients were managed nonoperatively. Treatment subtypes included locked intramedullary devices (56), unlocked intramedullary devices (322), anterior plating (89), anterosuperior plating (150), superior plating (449) or plating not otherwise specified (314). We performed a network meta-analysis to compare and rank the treatments for displaced clavicle fractures. We considered the following outcomes: union achievement, revision surgery risk and functional outcomes (DASH and Constant Scores). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was considered for both Constant and DASH scores to be at 8 points, representing the average of MCID scores reported for both DASH and Constant in the evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Union achievement was lower in patients treated nonoperatively (88.9%), and higher in patients treated operatively (96.7%, relative risk [RR] 1.128 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.17]; p < 0.001), Number needed to treat (NNT) = 10). Union achievement increased with any plate construct (97.8%, RR 1.13 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.7]; p < 0.0001, NNT = 9) and with anterior or anterosuperior plates (99.3%, RR 1.14 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.8]; p < 0.0001, NNT = 8). Risk of reoperation, when considering planned removal of hardware, was similar across all treatment arms. Lastly, operative treatment outperformed nonoperative treatment with minor improvements in DASH and Constant scores, though not approaching the MCID. At the subtype level, anterosuperior plating ranked highest in DASH and Constant functional scores with mean differences reaching 10-point improvement for Constant scores (95% CI 4.4 to 2.5) and 7.6 point improvement for DASH (95% CI 5.2 to 20). CONCLUSIONS: We found that surgical treatment led to a greater likelihood of union at 1 year of follow-up among adult patients with displaced mid-third clavicle fractures. In aggregate, surgical treatment did not increase functional scores by amounts that patients were likely to consider clinically important. Use of specific subtypes of plating (anterior, anterosuperior) resulted in improvements in the Constant score that were slightly above the MCID but did not reach the MCID for the DASH score, suggesting that any outcomes-score benefits favoring surgery were likely to be imperceptible or small. In light of these findings, we believe patients can be informed that surgery for this injury can increase the likelihood of union incrementally (about 10 patients would need to undergo surgery to avoid one nonunion), but they should not expect better function than they would achieve without surgery; most patients can avoid surgery altogether with little absolute risk of nonunion. Patients who opt for surgery must be told that the decision should be weighed against complications and the possibility of undergoing a second procedure for hardware removal. Patients opting not to have surgery for acute midshaft clavicle fractures can be told that nonunion occurs in slightly more than 10% of patients, and that these can be more difficult to manage than acute fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Return to work following a distal biceps repair: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Among an active aging population, distal biceps tendon ruptures are becoming increasingly common. Typically, they are the result of an acute heavy eccentric load being placed on an already contracted muscle, and surgery is the gold standard treatment for optimal clinical and functional outcomes. Although improved strength has been shown after operative repair, there is little evidence available regarding a timeframe for return to work-related activity. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to provide guidance for return to work after a distal biceps repair. METHODS: The authors searched online databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE) from inception until October 11, 2018, for literature pertaining to functional outcomes after distal biceps repair. Study inclusion and exclusion criteria were established a priori and applied in duplicate independently by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: Of the 480 initial studies, 40 papers satisfied full text inclusion criteria (19 case control studies, 12 retrospective reviews, 9 prospective reviews). A total of 1270 patients with 1280 distal bicep ruptures were included in the study. The mean age of patients was 45.38 years, and 97% (n = 1067) of reported patients were male. The mean follow-up time was 30 months (range, 6-84 months). After distal biceps repair, 1128 (89%) of patients were able to fully return to work without any modification of duties. Time to return to work was reported in 17 of the included studies with a mean of 14.37 ± 0.52 weeks. DISCUSSION: The average time to return to work after distal biceps repair in the literature was just beyond 14 weeks. Patients and employers may be given a range between 3 and 4 months, with variation dependent on job demands. Further studies are needed to establish whether the surgical approach or repair technique has any impact on time to return to work.

Waste and recycling among orthopedic subspecialties.

Background: It is estimated that one-quarter to half of all hospital waste is produced in the operating room. Recycling of surgical waste in the perioperative setting is uncommon, even though there are many recyclable materials. The objective of this study was to determine the amount of waste produced in the preoperative and operative periods for several orthopedic subspecialties and to assess how much of this waste was recycled. Methods: Surgical cases at 1 adult and 1 pediatric tertiary care hospital in Calgary, Alberta, were prospectively chosen from 6 orthopedic subspecialties over a 1-month period. Waste was collected, weighed and divided into recyclable and nonrecyclable categories in the preoperative period and into recyclable, nonrecyclable, linen and biological categories in the intraoperative period. Waste bags were weighed using a portable hand-held scale. The primary outcome was the amount of recyclable waste produced per case. Secondary outcomes included the amount of nonrecyclable, biological and total waste produced. An analysis of variance was performed to test for statistically significant differences among subspecialties. Results: This study included 55 procedures. A total of 341.0 kg of waste was collected, with a mean mass of 6.2 kg per case. Arthroplasty produced a greater amount of recyclable waste per case in the preoperative (2017.1 g) and intraoperative (938.6 g) periods as well as total recyclable waste per case, resulting in a greater ratio of waste recycling per case then nearly all other subspecialties in the preoperative (86%) and intraoperative (14%) periods. Arthroplasty similarly produced a greater amount of nonrecyclable waste per case (5823.6 g) than the other subspecialties, most of which was produced during the intraoperative period (5512.9 g). Overall an average of 27% of waste was recycled per case. Conclusion: Among orthopedic subspecialties, arthroplasty is one of the largest waste producers and it has the highest potential for recycling of materials. Effective recycling programs in the operating room can reduce our ecological footprint by diverting waste from landfills, as our study revealed that nearly three-quarters of this waste is recyclable.

Contexte: On estime qu'un quart à la moitié de tous les déchets produits en hôpital proviennent des salles d'opération. Le recyclage des déchets produits en contexte opératoire est assez rare, bien que de nombreux matériaux soient recyclables. Cette étude visait à déterminer la quantité de déchets produits pendant les périodes préopératoire et peropératoire pour plusieurs surspécialités orthopédiques, et à évaluer la quantité de déchets recyclés. Méthodes: Pour y arriver, on a étudié de façon prospective pendant 1 mois les chirurgies effectuées dans 2 hôpitaux de soins tertiaires de Calgary (Alberta), 1 hôpital pédiatrique et 1 hôpital pour adulte, pour 6 surspécialités orthopédiques. Nous avons recueilli les déchets, les avons pesés et les avons répartis dans les catégories « recyclable ¼ et « non recyclable ¼ pour la période préopératoire, et « recyclable ¼, « non recyclable ¼, « textile ¼ et « biologique ¼ pour la période peropératoire. Les sacs de déchets ont été pesés à l'aide d'une balance portative. L'issue principale était la quantité de déchets produits par cas, et l'issue secondaire, la quantité de déchets non recyclables et biologiques et la quantité totale de déchets. On a ensuite procédé à une analyse de la variance pour déterminer la présence de différences statistiquement significatives entre les surspécialités. Résultats: Au total, 55 opérations ont été étudiées, et 341,0 kg de déchets ont été recueillis, pour une moyenne de 6,2 kg par cas. Les arthroplasties produisaient une plus grande quantité de déchets recyclables par cas dans les périodes préopératoire (2017,1 g) et peropératoire (938,6 g) ainsi qu'une plus grande quantité totale de déchets recyclables par cas, ce qui leur donne un meilleur ratio de recyclage par cas que pratiquement toutes les autres surspécialités dans les périodes préopératoire (86 %) et peropératoire (14 %). De même, les arthroplasties produisaient une plus grande quantité de déchets non recyclables par cas (5823,6 g) que les autres surspécialités, et la plupart de ces déchets étaient produits pendant la période peropératoire (5512,9 g). En moyenne, 27 % de l'ensemble des déchets étaient recyclés. Conclusion: Parmi les surspécialités orthopédiques, l'arthroplastie est l'une de celles qui produisent le plus de déchets et qui ont le plus grand potentiel de recyclage. Notre étude a révélé que près des trois quarts des déchets sont recyclables; ainsi, des programmes de recyclage efficaces en salle d'opération peuvent réduire notre empreinte écologique en empêchant l'enfouissement de certains déchets.

Maximizing virtual meetings and conferences: a review of best practices.

PURPOSE: In the current COVID-19 pandemic, it is more important than ever to maximize communication in the scientific and medical community. In the context of academic meetings and conferences, there is the growing need for a set of guidelines secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the growing environmental and economic challenges that large academic and medical conferences face. These Virtual Meetings Best Practices were established in response to the scant evidence and guidance on the topic. METHODS: These best practice guidelines were developed from a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature, grey literature and lay literature. MEDLINE and Embase databases were scoped for relevant, non-duplicate articles. For lay articles, Google searches were utilized. The recommendations that comprise this document are a compilation of nonexperimental descriptive studies (e.g. case studies) and expert committee reports, opinions and/or experience of respected authorities, and lay articles. RESULTS: We identified four phases of the meeting cycle: Pre-planning considerations, Planning, Accomplishing conference goals through execution, gauging Response and Engaging the target audience for future cycles (PrePARE). Akin to the Plan, Do, Study, Act Cycle of quality improvement interventions, this document is meant to drive meaningful initial and subsequent interventions in the meetings of the medical and academic community. This covers actions and preparation for registration, scheduling, speakers, attendees, event type, technology, monetization/marketing, dealing with disruptions, post-event deliverables, response and engagement strategies. Enhanced access to integrated, high-quality and efficient virtual meetings will establish a new norm as an effective alternative for innovative health research, education and information dissemination in orthopaedics and beyond. CONCLUSIONS: Given the uncertainty of whether large in-person gatherings will be permitted, advisable or responsible later into the summer of 2020 and beyond, these guidelines will aid events being converted and scheduled as virtual-only meetings. As we move forward in the era of increased utility and utilization of virtual conferencing, these guidelines will serve as a benchmark and standard for surgeons in the field.

A Case Report of Pneumococcal Septic Arthritis Following a Respiratory and Gastrointestinal Prodrome with Accompanying Literature Review.

We report an uncommon case of septic arthritis of the ankle from a Streptococcus pneumoniae infection and provide an update of the literature reported since 2002. A 58-year-old female presented to the hospital with right ankle pain and an inability to bear weight. She reported a history of productive cough, vomiting, diarrhea, and subjective fevers 4 days earlier. Streptococcus pneumonia was identified in her ankle aspirate, and she was treated urgently with operative incision and debridement, followed by postoperative intravenous antibiotics. At her 7-week follow-up, she demonstrated complete resolution of symptoms and near-complete recovery of range of motion. This case demonstrates the importance of early identification, as the majority of patients recover fully with prompt treatment. The literature review included 44 cases of pneumococcal septic arthritis and found that the knee was the most commonly affected joint, followed by the shoulder and ankle. Blood cultures were positive for S. pneumoniae in 27 of 38 adults (71%) and 4 of 6 children (67%). Comorbid conditions were present in 32 of 38 adults (84%) and 4 of 7 children (57%), the most frequent of which were alcoholism and osteoarthritis in adults and malignancy or immunosuppression in children. Additionally, roughly half of included adults had an extra-articular focus of pneumococcal disease, most frequently pneumonia. Operative treatment was undertaken in 32 of 38 adults (84%) and all 7 children. Of adults with data available, 24 of 33 (73%) recovered with complete joint function, compared with 5 of 7 children (71%).

A scoping review on the surgical management of metastatic bone disease of the extremities.

BACKGROUND: Management of metastatic bone disease of the extremities (MBD-E) is challenging, and surgical directions pose significant implications for overall patient morbidity and mortality. Recent literature reviews on the surgical management of MBD-E present a paucity of high-level evidence and global inconsistencies in study design. In order to steer productive research, a scoping review was performed to map and assess critical knowledge gaps. METHODS: The Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping studies was followed. A comprehensive literature search identified a large body of literature pertaining to the surgical management of MBD-E. Study data and meta-data was extracted and presented using descriptive analytics and a thematic framework. Literature gaps were identified and analyzed. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty five studies from 1969 to 2017 were included. Studies were categorized into 11 separate themes, with the majority (63%) falling into the "surgical fixation strategies" theme, followed by "complications" at 7% and "prognosis and survival" at 6.2%. Less than 3% of studies were categorized in "patient related outcomes" or "epidemiology" themes. 89% of studies were retrospective and only 6 studies were of level 1 or 2 evidence. We identified a temporal increase in publication by decade, and all studies published on interventional radiology techniques or economic analyses were published after 2007 or 2009, respectively. 64.9% of studies were published in Europe and 20.3% were published in North America. Average patient age was 62 (± 5.2 years), and breast was the most common primary tumour (28%), followed by lung (17%) and kidney (15%). In terms of surgical location, 75% of operations involved the femur, followed by the humerus at 22% and tibia at 3%. CONCLUSIONS: We present a descriptive overview of the current published literature on the surgical management of MBD-E. Critical knowledge gaps have been identified through the development of a thematic framework. Consolidation of literary gaps must involve bolstered efforts towards patient and family-engaged research initiatives and assessment of patient-related surgical outcomes. Multi-disciplinary engagement in developing prospective research will also help guide evidence-based personalized practice for these patients. By building on existing comprehensive patient databases and registries, knowledge on survival and prognostic parameters can be greatly improved.

Development of a simple multidisciplinary arthroplasty wound-assessment instrument: the SMArt Wound Tool

Background: There are currently no validated instruments in the orthopedic literature for assessing the healing of acute surgical wounds. The creation of a simple wound-assessment tool would provide a standardized method of reporting wound outcomes. The objective of this study was to systematically develop a wound-assessment tool that can be used to assess the early healing of arthroplasty incisions. Methods: The databases MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane reviews and CINAHL were searched. Articles that described objective assessment of acute incisional wounds were included. Items for the wound-assessment tool were then extracted from eligible studies based on the frequency of reporting. A multidisciplinary panel of wound experts compiled the items into an initial tool to assess key domains of wound healing. The items were reduced through several iterations of panel discussion. Results: Our search strategy yielded 3743 results, which were screened by title and abstract. Thirty-four studies were included in the systematic review for the development of the wound-assessment tool, and 10 domains were extracted based on frequency of reporting. After item reduction, the final version of the wound-assessment tool, the SMArt Wound Tool, contained 3 major domains: blistering, peri-incisional skin colour and exudate type. Conclusion: There is currently a need for a standardized tool to assess the healing of orthopedic surgical incisions. The SMArt Wound Tool provides a simple, objective method of assessing arthroplasty incisions for the presence of early complications.

Contexte: Il n'existe actuellement aucun instrument validé dans la littérature orthopédique pour évaluer la cicatrisation des plaies chirurgicales récentes. La création d'un outil d'évaluation simple des plaies offrirait une méthode standard pour suivre leur évolution. L'objectif de cette étude était de concevoir un outil d'évaluation systématique des plaies pouvant être utilisé pour vérifier la bonne cicatrisation des incisions d'arthroplastie. Méthodes: Les bases de données MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, le registre central Cochrane des essais contrôlés et la base de données Cochrane des revues systématiques ont été interrogés. Les articles qui décrivaient une évaluation objective des plaies d'incision récentes ont été inclus. Les paramètres d'évaluation des plaies ont ensuite été extraits à partir des études retenues en fonction de la fréquence à laquelle ils étaient rapportés. Un comité multidisciplinaire d'experts des plaies a compilé les paramètres pour créer un outil initial d'évaluation des domaines clés de la cicatrisation des plaies. Des discussions successives du comité ont ensuite permis de réduire le nombre de paramètres d'évaluation. Résultats: Notre stratégie d'interrogation a généré 3743 résultats qui ont été triés par titre et résumé. Trente-quatre études ont été retenues pour la revue systématique en vue de la création de l'outil d'évaluation des plaies et 10 domaines ont été extraits en fonction de la fréquence à laquelle ils étaient rapportés. Après la réduction du nombre de paramètres, la version finale de l'outil d'évaluation des plaies, appelé SMArt Wound Tool, comprenait 3 domaines principaux : formation de vésicules, couleur de la peau au pourtour de l'incision et type d'exsudat. Conclusion: On déplore actuellement l'absence d'outils standards pour évaluer la cicatrisation des plaies en chirurgie orthopédique. L'outil SMArt offre une méthode simple et objective d'évaluation des incisions d'arthroplastie pour déceler rapidement la moindre complication, le cas échéant.

A scoping review of the proximal humerus fracture literature.

BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus fractures are a common fragility fracture that significantly affects the independence of older adults. The outcomes of these fractures are frequently disappointing and previous systematic reviews are unable to guide clinical practice. Through an integrated knowledge user collaboration, we sought to map the breadth of literature available to guide the management of proximal humerus fractures. METHODS: We utilized a scoping review technique because of its novel ability to map research activity and identify knowledge gaps in fields with diverse treatments. Through multiple electronic database searches, we identified a comprehensive body of proximal humerus fracture literature that was classified into eight research themes. Meta-data from each study were abstracted and descriptive statistics were used to summarize the results. RESULTS: 1,051 studies met our inclusion criteria with the majority of research being performed in Europe (64%). The included literature consists primarily of surgical treatment studies (67%) and biomechanical fracture models (10%). Nearly half of all clinical studies are uncontrolled case series of a single treatment (48%). Non-randomized comparative studies represented 12% of the literature and only 3% of the studies were randomized controlled trials. Finally, studies with a primary outcome examining the effectiveness of non-operative treatment or using a prognostic study design were also uncommon (4% and 6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The current study provides a comprehensive summary of the existing proximal humerus fracture literature using a thematic framework developed by a multi-disciplinary collaboration. Several knowledge gaps have been identified and have generated a roadmap for future research priorities.

A scoping review of biomechanical testing for proximal humerus fracture implants.

BACKGROUND: Fixation failure is a relatively common sequela of surgical management of proximal humerus fractures (PHF). The purpose of this study is to understand the current state of the literature with regard to the biomechanical testing of proximal humerus fracture implants. METHODS: A scoping review of the proximal humerus fracture literature was performed, and studies testing the mechanical properties of a PHF treatment were included in this review. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the characteristics and methods of the included studies. RESULTS: 1,051 proximal humerus fracture studies were reviewed; 67 studies met our inclusion criteria. The most common specimen used was cadaver bone (87%), followed by sawbones (7%) and animal bones (4%). A two-part fracture pattern was tested most frequently (68%), followed by three-part (23%), and four-part (8%). Implants tested included locking plates (52%), intramedullary devices (25%), and non-locking plates (25%). Hemi-arthroplasty was tested in 5 studies (7%), with no studies using reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) implants. Torque was the most common mode of force applied (51%), followed by axial loading (45%), and cantilever bending (34%). Substantial testing diversity was observed across all studies. CONCLUSIONS: The biomechanical literature was found to be both diverse and heterogeneous. More complex fracture patterns and RTSA implants have not been adequately tested. These gaps in the current literature will need to be addressed to ensure that future biomechanical research is clinically relevant and capable of improving the outcomes of challenging proximal humerus fracture patterns.

Open fractures: evidence-based best practices.

Open fracture management is a common challenge to orthopaedic trauma surgeons and a burdensome condition to the patient, health care, and entire society. Fracture-related infection (FRI) is the leading morbid complication to avoid during open fracture management because it leads to sepsis, nonunion, limb loss, and overall very poor region-specific and general functional outcomes. This review, based on a symposium presented at the 2022 OTA International Trauma Care Forum, provides a practical and evidence-based summary on key strategies to prevent FRI in open fractures, which can be grouped as optimizing host factors, antimicrobial prophylaxis, surgical site management (skin preparation, debridement, and wound irrigation), provision of skeletal stability, and soft-tissue coverage. When it is applicable, strategies are differentiated between optimal resource and resource-limited settings.

Perceptions in orthopedic surgery on the use of cannabis in treating pain: a survey of patients with spine pain (POSIT Spine).

BACKGROUND: Back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Despite guidelines discouraging opioids as first-line treatment, opioids remain the most prescribed drugs for back pain. There is renewed interest in exploring the potential medical applications of cannabis, and with the recent changes in national legislation there is a unique opportunity to investigate the analgesic properties of cannabis. METHODS: This was a multi-center survey-based study examining patient perceptions regarding cannabis for spine pain. We included patients presenting with back or neck pain to one of three Orthopedic clinics in Ontario. Our primary outcome was perceived effect of cannabis on back pain, while secondary outcomes were perceptions regarding potential applications and barriers to cannabis use. RESULTS: 259 patients participated in this study, 35.3% (90/255) stating they used cannabis medically. Average pain severity was 6.5/10 ± 0.3 (95% CI 6.2-6.8). Nearly three-quarters were prescribed opioids (73.6%, 148/201), with oxycodone/oxycontin (45.9% 68/148) being the most common, and almost half of (49.3%, 73/148) had used an opioid in the last week. Patients estimated cannabis could treat 54.3% ± 4.0 (95% CI 50.3-58.3%) of their spine pain and replace 46.2% ± 6. 6 (95% CI 39.6-52.8%) of their current analgesics. Age (ß = - 0.3, CI - 0.6-0.0), higher pain severity (ß = 0.4, CI 0.1-0.6) and previous cannabis use (ß = 14.7, CI 5.1-24.4) were associated with a higher perceived effect of cannabis. Patients thought cannabis would be beneficial to treat pain (129/146, 88.4%), and reduce (116/146, 79.5%) or eliminate opioids (102/146, 69.9%). Not considering using cannabis for medical purposes (65/150, 43.3%) was the number one reported barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Patients estimated medical cannabis could treat more than half of their spine pain, with one in three patients already using medical cannabis. 79% of patients also believe cannabis could reduce opioid usage. This data will help support more research into cannabis for musculoskeletal pain.