Secondary Bony Defects after Soft Tissue Reconstruction in Limb-Threatening Lower Extremity Injuries: Does the Approach to Flap Elevation Matter?

BACKGROUND: Limb-threatening lower extremity injuries often require secondary bone grafting after soft tissue reconstruction. We hypothesized that there would be fewer wound complications when performing secondary bone grafting via a remote surgical approach rather than direct flap elevation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed at a single Level 1 trauma center comparing complications after secondary bone grafting in patients who had undergone previous soft tissue reconstruction after open tibia fractures between 2006 and 2020. Comparing bone grafting via a remote surgical incision versus direct flap elevation, we evaluated wound dehiscence requiring return to the operating room as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were deep infection and delayed amputation. RESULTS: We identified 129 patients (mean age: 40 years, 82% male) with 159 secondary bone grafting procedures. Secondary bone grafting was performed via a remote surgical approach in 54% (n = 86) and direct flap elevation in 46% (n = 73) of cases. Wound dehiscence requiring return to the operating room occurred in one patient in the flap elevation group (1%) and none of the patients in the remote surgical approach. The odds of deep wound infection (OR, 1.77; p = 0.31) or amputation (OR, 1.43; p = 0.73) did not significantly differ between surgical approaches. No significant differences were found in complications between the reconstructive surgeon elevating and re-insetting the flap and the orthopaedic trauma surgeon performing the flap elevation and re-inset. CONCLUSION: Direct flap elevation for secondary bone grafting after soft tissue reconstruction for open tibia fractures did not result in more complications than bone grafting via a remote surgical approach. These findings should reassure surgeons to allow other clinical factors to influence the surgical approach for bone grafting.

What Outcomes Are Most Important to Patients Following a Lower Extremity Limb-threatening Injury?

OBJECTIVE: To determine what outcomes are most important to patients after a limb-threatening injury, and if those preferences vary based on the patients' treatment (salvage vs amputation), health, demographics, or time since injury. BACKGROUND: The preferences that motivate the patients' choice of treatment following a limb-threatening injury are poorly understood. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are a robust survey methodology to quantify preferences. METHODS: Patients with a history of traumatic limb-threatening injury, January 2010 to December 2020, completed a survey with our DCE and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaire. The DCE attributes included recovery time, function, appearance, cost, and time in hospital. We used conditional logit modeling to estimate the relative importance of each attribute on a scale of 0% to 100%, determine willingness to pay for improvements in the included attributes, and assess variation in preferences based on patient characteristics, including PROMIS score. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients completed the survey (104 limb salvage, 46 amputation; mean age, 48±16 years; 79% male). Regaining preinjury function [relative importance=41%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 37%-45%] and minimizing costs (24%; 95% CI, 21%-28%) were of greatest importance. Changes in appearance were least important (7%; 95% CI, 5%-9%). The hierarchy of preferences did not vary between those who had limb salvage or amputation, but patient age, physical and mental health, and income were associated with preference variation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with limb-threatening injuries most valued gains in function and reduced out-of-pocket costs.

Are Pelvic Binders an Effective Prehospital Intervention?

OBJECTIVE: Widespread adoption of prehospital pelvic circumferential compression devices (PCCDs) by emergency medical services (EMS) systems has been slow and variable across the United States. We sought to determine the frequency of prehospital PCCD use by EMS providers. Secondarily, we hypothesized that prehospital PCCD use would improve early hemorrhagic shock outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of 162 unstable pelvic ring injuries transported directly to our center by EMS from 2011 to 2020. Included patients received a PCCD during their resuscitation (prehospital or emergency department). Prehospital treatment details were obtained from the EMS medical record. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received a PCCD by EMS before hospital arrival. Secondarily, we explored factors associated with receiving a prehospital PCCD, and its association with changes in vital signs, blood transfusion, and mortality. RESULTS: EMS providers documented suspicion of a pelvic ring fracture in 85 (52.8%) patients and 52 patients in the cohort (32.2%) received a prehospital PCCD. Wide variation in prehospital PCCD use was observed based on patient characteristics, geographic location, and EMS provider level. Helicopter flight paramedics applied a prehospital PCCD in 46% of the patients they transported (38/83); in contrast, the EMS organizations geographically closest to our hospital applied a PCCD in ≤5% of cases (2/47). Other predictors associated with receiving a prehospital PCCD included lower body mass index (p = 0.005), longer prehospital duration (p = 0.001) and lower Injury Severity Score (p < 0.05). We were unable to identify any improvements in clinical outcomes associated with prehospital PCCD, including early vital signs, number of blood transfusions within 24 hours, or mortality during admission (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate wide practice variation in the application of prehospital PCCDs. Although disparate PCCD application across the state is likely explained by differences across EMS organizations and provider levels, our study was unable to identify any clinical benefits to the prehospital use of PCCDs. It is possible that the benefits of a prehospital PCCD can only be observed in the most displaced fracture patterns with the greatest early hemodynamic instability.

Dual-Energy CT and Cinematic Rendering to Improve Assessment of Pelvic Fracture Instability.

Background Grading of pelvic fracture instability is challenging in patients with pelvic binders. Dual-energy CT (DECT) and cinematic rendering can provide ancillary information regarding osteoligamentous integrity, but the utility of these tools remains unknown. Purpose To assess the added diagnostic value of DECT and cinematic rendering, with respect to single-energy CT (SECT), for discriminating any instability and translational instability in patients with pelvic binders. Materials and Methods In this retrospective analysis, consecutive adult patients (age ≥18 years) were stabilized with pelvic binders and scanned in dual-energy mode using a 128-section CT scanner at one level I trauma center between August 2016 and January 2019. Young-Burgess grading by orthopedists served as the reference standard. Two radiologists performed blinded consensus grading with the Young-Burgess system in three reading sessions (session 1, SECT; session 2, SECT plus DECT; session 3, SECT plus DECT and cinematic rendering). Lateral compression (LC) type 1 (LC-1) and anteroposterior compression (APC) type 1 (APC-1) injuries were considered stable; LC type 2 and APC type 2, rotationally unstable; and LC type 3, APC type 3, and vertical shear, translationally unstable. Diagnostic performance for any instability and translational instability was compared between reading sessions using the McNemar and DeLong tests. Radiologist agreement with the orthopedic reference standard was calculated with the weighted κ statistic. Results Fifty-four patients (mean age, 41 years ± 16 [SD]; 41 men) were analyzed. Diagnostic performance was greater with SECT plus DECT and cinematic rendering compared with SECT alone for any instability, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.67 for SECT alone and 0.82 for SECT plus DECT and cinematic rendering (P = .04); for translational instability, the AUCs were 0.80 for SECT alone and 0.95 for SECT plus DECT and cinematic rendering (P = .01). For any instability, corresponding sensitivities were 61% (22 of 36 patients) for SECT alone and 86% (31 of 36 patients) for SECT plus DECT and cinematic rendering (P < .001). The corresponding specificities were 72% (13 of 18 patients) and 78% (14 of 18 patients), respectively (P > .99). Agreement (κ value) between radiologists and orthopedist reference standard improved from 0.44 to 0.76 for SECT versus the combination of SECT, DECT, and cinematic rendering. Conclusion Combined use of single-energy CT, dual-energy CT, and cinematic rendering improved instability assessment over that with single-energy CT alone. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Double-Bundle Internal Bracing: A Technique Guide.

There has been a recent increase in interest for double-bundle (db) anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions (ACLRs). Although this surgical technique has shown to improve rotational and translational stability, the literature has been inconsistent, finding its graft failure rates to be superior to that of the single-bundle (sb) ACLR. So far, no studies have reported the sb ACLR to be superior to db ACLR. It is possible that the db ACLR provides the most benefit in greatest-risk patients such as young athletes, female athletes, patients with generalized ligamentous laxity, and those undergoing revision ACLRs. The senior author's db ACLR technique incorporates a FiberTape internal brace, which is applied to both bundles. Despite inconsistencies in the literature, we suspect that autologous db ACLR with internal bracing could reduce graft failure rates and provide earlier return to preinjury activity level in high-risk patients compared with sb ACLR.

A deep surgical site infection risk score for patients with open tibial shaft fractures treated with intramedullary nail.

OBJECTIVES: To identify deep infection risk factors in patients with open tibial shaft fractures and to develop a scoring algorithm to predict the baseline deep infection risk in this patient population. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study conducted at a single academic trauma center identified patients with open tibial shaft fractures treated with intramedullary nail fixation from December 2006 to October 2020. The primary outcome was a deep surgical site infection requiring surgical debridement. The outcome was identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes and confirmed with a medical chart review documenting evidence of a tibial draining wound or sinus tract. RESULTS: Deep surgical site infection occurred in 13% of patients (97/769). Factors that predicted deep surgical site infection were identified. Gustilo-Anderson type IIIB or IIIC was the strongest predictor with a 12-fold increase in the odds of deep infection (OR 11.8, p < 0.001). Additional factors included age >40 years (OR 1.7, p = 0.03), American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥3 (OR 1.9, p < 0.01), Gustilo-Anderson type IIIA vs. type I or II (OR 2.8, p = 0.004), and gunshot wounds (OR 2.9, p = 0.02). The risk scoring model predicted patients who would develop an infection with an acceptable level of accuracy (AUC 0.79). The risk score categorized patients from a low probability of deep infection 2%-6% with <10 points to high risk (58%-69%) with >40 points. CONCLUSIONS: This risk score model predicts deep postoperative infection in patients with open tibial shaft fractures treated with intramedullary nails. The ability to accurately estimate deep infection risk at the time of presentation might aid patient expectation management and allow clinicians to focus infection prevention strategies on the high-risk subset of this population.

Telemedicine and Socioeconomics in Orthopaedic Trauma Patients: A Quasi-Experimental Study During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Socioeconomic factors may introduce barriers to telemedicine care access. This study examines changes in clinic absenteeism for orthopaedic trauma patients after the introduction of a telemedicine postoperative follow-up option during the COVID-19 pandemic with attention to patient socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS: Patients (n = 1,060) undergoing surgical treatment of pelvic and extremity trauma were retrospectively assigned to preintervention and postintervention cohorts using a quasi-experimental design. The intervention is the April 2020 introduction of a telemedicine follow-up option for postoperative trauma care. The primary outcome was the missed visit rate (MVR) for postoperative appointments. We used Poisson regression models to estimate the relative change in MVR adjusting for patient age and sex. SES-based subgroup analysis was based on the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) according to home address. RESULTS: The pre-telemedicine group included 635 patients; the post-telemedicine group included 425 patients. The median MVR in the pre-telemedicine group was 28% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10% to 45%) and 24% (95% CI, 6% to 43%) in the post-telemedicine group. Low SES was associated with a 40% relative increase in MVR (95% CI, 17% to 67%, P < 0.001) compared with patients with high SES. Relative MVR changes between pre-telemedicine and post-telemedicine groups did not reach statistical significance in any socioeconomic strata (low ADI, -6%; 95% CI, -25% to 17%; P = 0.56; medium ADI, -18%; 95% CI, -35% to 2%; P = 0.07; high ADI, -12%; 95% CI, -28% to 7%; P = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Low SES was associated with a higher MVR both before and after the introduction of a telemedicine option. However, no evidence in this cohort demonstrated a change in absenteeism based on SES after the introduction of the telemedicine option. Clinicians should be reassured that there is no evidence that telemedicine introduces additional socioeconomic bias in postoperative orthopaedic trauma care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Pelvic Ring Injury Mortality: Are We Getting Better?

OBJECTIVES: To determine if changes in pelvic trauma care and treatment protocols have affected overall mortality rates after pelvic ring injury. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Level I trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3314 patients with pelvic ring injuries who presented to a single referral center from 1999 to 2018 were included in the study. INTERVENTION: Pelvic ring management, years 1999-2006 versus years 2007-2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: In hospital mortality. Other examined variables included change in patient demographics, fracture characteristics, date of injury, associated injuries, length of hospital stay, Abbreviated Injury Severity Score. RESULTS: The composite mortality rate was 6.5% (214/3314). The earliest cohort presented a mortality rate of 9.1% [111/1224; 95% confidence interval (CI), 7.6%-10.8%] compared with the more recent cohort mortality rate of 4.9% (103/2090; 95% CI, 4.1%-5.9%). Overall mortality was significantly lower in the more recent period, a risk difference of 4.1% (95% CI, 2.3%-6.1%; P < 0.01). After adjusting for age and Abbreviated Injury Severity Score of the brain, chest, and abdomen, the mortality reduction was more pronounced with an adjusted risk difference of 6.4% (95% CI, 4.7%-8.1%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Significant improvement in the mortality rate of pelvic ring injuries has been demonstrated in recent years (4.9% vs. 9.1%) and the difference is even large when accounting for known confounders. Improvement appears to coincide chronologically with changes in trauma resuscitation and implementation of adjuvant treatments for managing patients with severe hemorrhagic shock. Although the exact benefit of each treatment awaits further research, these data might indicate improved care over time for these difficult patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patients value their own pain over braking safety when deciding when to return to driving: a discrete choice experiment on lower extremity injuries.

Objective: To quantify patient preferences towards time to return to driving relative to compromised reaction time and potential complication risks. Design: Cross-sectional discrete choice experiment. Setting: Academic trauma center. Patients: Ninety-six adult patients with an operative lower extremity fracture from December 2019 through December 2020. Intervention: None. Main Outcome Measurement: Patient completed a discrete choice experiment survey consisting of 12 hypothetical return to driving scenarios with varied attributes: time to return to driving (range: 1 to 6 months), risk of implant failure (range: 1% to 12%), pain upon driving return (range: none to severe), and driving safety measured by braking distance (range: 0 to 40 feet at 60 mph). The relative importance of each attribute is reported on a scale of 0% to 100%. Results: Patients most valued a reduced pain level when resuming driving (62%), followed by the risk of implant failure (17%), time to return to driving (13%), and braking safety (8%). Patients were indifferent to returning to driving at 1 month (median utility: 28, interquartile range [IQR] -31 to 80) or 2 months (median utility: 59, IQR: 41 to 91) postinjury. Conclusion: Patients with lower extremity injuries demonstrated a willingness to forego earlier return to driving if it might mean a decrease in their pain level. Patients are least concerned about their driving safety, instead placing higher value on their own pain level and chance of implant failure. The findings of this study are the first to rigorously quantify patient preferences toward a return to driving and heterogeneity in patient preferences. Level of Evidence: V.

Genome Sequences of Five Arenaviruses from Pygmy Mice (Mus minutoides) in Sierra Leone.

The genome sequences of five strains of a mammarenavirus were assembled from metagenomic data from pygmy mice (Mus minutoides) captured in Sierra Leone. The nearest fully sequenced relatives of this virus, which was named Seli virus, are lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus, Lunk virus, and Ryukyu virus.

Hypophosphatasia: Current Literature for Pathophysiology, Clinical Manifestations, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

Hypophosphatasia (HPP) is a rare inherited bone disorder identified by impaired bone mineralization. There are seven subtypes of HPP mainly characterized by their age of onset. These subtypes consist of perinatal (prenatal) benign, perinatal lethal, infantile, childhood, adult, odontohypophosphatasia, and pseudohypophosphatasia. Due to limited awareness of the condition, either misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis is common. Furthermore, the condition is frequently treated with contraindicated drugs. This literature illustrates the most recent findings on the etiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosing, and treatment for HPP and its subtypes. The etiology of the disease consists of loss-of-function mutations of the ALPL gene on chromosome one, which encodes for tissue nonspecific isoenzyme of alkaline phosphatase (TNAP). A decrease of TNAP reduces inorganic phosphate (Pi) for bone mineralization and allows for an increase in inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi) and phosphorylated osteopontin (p-OPN), which further reduces bone mineralization. The combination of these processes softens bone and mediates a clinical presentation similar to rickets/osteomalacia. HPP has an additional wide range of clinical features depending on its subtype. Although a concrete diagnostic guideline has not yet been established, many studies have supported a similar method of identifying HPP. Clinical features, radiological findings, and/or biomarker levels of the disorder should raise suspicion and encourage the inclusion of HPP as a differential diagnosis. Biomarkers, especially alkaline phosphatase (ALP), are major contributors to diagnosis. However, genetic testing is done for definitive diagnosis. The primary treatment for HPP is the reintroduction of TNAP as a recombinant enzyme called asfotase alfa. There are additional pharmaceutical treatments and in some cases, surgical intervention may be indicated. Pharmaceutical therapies such as bisphosphonates, denosumab, potent antiresorptive agents, and vitamin D are contraindicated in adults with HPP. We hope to raise awareness for HPP in order to prevent delayed diagnosis or misdiagnosis. We plan to encourage appropriate care and avoid treatments that may be contraindicating. We also encourage the development of a diagnostic guideline that will promote a consistently favorable patient prognosis.

Isolation of Angola-like Marburg virus from Egyptian rousette bats from West Africa.

Marburg virus (MARV) causes sporadic outbreaks of severe Marburg virus disease (MVD). Most MVD outbreaks originated in East Africa and field studies in East Africa, South Africa, Zambia, and Gabon identified the Egyptian rousette bat (ERB; Rousettus aegyptiacus) as a natural reservoir. However, the largest recorded MVD outbreak with the highest case-fatality ratio happened in 2005 in Angola, where direct spillover from bats was not  shown. Here, collaborative studies by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Njala University, University of California, Davis USAID-PREDICT, and the University of Makeni identify MARV circulating in ERBs in Sierra Leone. PCR, antibody and virus isolation data from 1755 bats of 42 species shows active MARV infection in approximately 2.5% of ERBs. Phylogenetic analysis identifies MARVs that are similar to the Angola strain. These results provide evidence of MARV circulation in West Africa and demonstrate the value of pathogen surveillance to identify previously undetected threats.