Are extra locking bolts or fibular plating more important in extreme nailing of distal tibia fractures? A cadaveric biomechanical analysis.

OBJECTIVES: In far-distal extra-articular tibia fracture "extreme" nailing, debate surrounds the relative biomechanical performance of plating the fibula compared with extra distal interlocks. This study aimed to evaluate several constructs for extreme nailing including one interlock (one medial-lateral interlock), one interlock + plate (one medial-lateral interlock with lateral fibula compression plating), and two interlocks (one medial-lateral interlock and one anterior-posterior interlock). METHODS: Fifteen pairs of fresh cadaver legs were instrumented with a tibial nail to the physeal scar. A 1 cm segment of bone was resected from the distal tibia 3.5 cm from the joint and an oblique osteotomy was made in the distal fibula. We loaded specimens with three different distal fixation constructs (one interlock, one interlock + plate, and two interlocks) through 10,000 cycles form 100N-700 N of axial loading. Load to failure (Newtons), angulation and displacement were also measured. RESULTS: Mean load to failure was 2092 N (one interlock), 1917 N (one interlock + plate), and 2545 N (two interlocks). Linear mixed effects modeling demonstrated that two interlocks had a load to failure 578 N higher than one interlock alone (95 % CI, 74N-1082 N; P = 0.02), but demonstrated no significant difference between one interlock and one interlock + plate. No statistically significant difference in rates or timing of displacement >2 mm or angulation >10° were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: When nailing far-distal extra-articular tibia and fibula fractures, adding a second interlock provides more stability than adding a fibular plate. Distal fibula plating may have minimal biomechanical effect in extreme nailing.

Does the OTA Open Fracture Classification Align With the Gustilo-Anderson Classification? A Study of 2215 Open Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Open Fracture Classification (OTA-OFC) and Gustilo-Anderson classification of open extremity fractures and determine if there is meaningful alignment between these grading systems. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Level I academic trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients with at least 1 operatively treated open extremity fracture and surgeon-assigned OTA-OFC and Gustilo-Anderson classification. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Frequency, distribution, and association measures of OTA-OFC category scores and Gustilo-Anderson classification types. RESULTS: Two thousand twenty-seven patients (mean age, 43.1 ± 17.5 years) with 2215 fractures were included. Gustilo-Anderson type I or II fractures (n = 961; 43%) most frequently had the least severe scores for all OTA-OFC categories. Type IIIA fractures (n = 978; 44%) were most often assigned intermediate scores for OTA-OFC Bone Loss (n = 564; 58%). Type IIIB fractures (n = 204, 9%) were most often assigned intermediate OTA-OFC Skin scores (n = 120; 59%). Type IIIC fractures (n = 72; 3%) were most often assigned the most severe OTA-OFC Arterial score (n = 60; 83%). In the multivariable model, OTA-OFC Contamination scores showed little association (ß = 0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.09) with Gustilo-Anderson classification severity. Conversely, higher OTA-OFC Arterial (ß = 0.50; 95% CI 0.44-0.56) and Skin (ß = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.40-0.51) scores were strongly associated with more severe Gustilo-Anderson classifications. CONCLUSIONS: OTA-OFC Contamination scores were weakly associated with Gustilo-Anderson classification severity for open fractures. The study findings suggest that the current Gustilo-Anderson classification does not adequately account for injury contamination, a known predictor of infection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.