Epidemiology of Limb Amputations and Prosthetic Use During COVID-19 Pandemic in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the trends in the incidence of major limb amputations and the prevalence of Dutch prosthetic users at the national level in The Netherlands between 2012 and 2021 (during the COVID-19 pandemic). Local hospitals in The Netherlands reported a doubling of major lower limb amputations during COVID-19, information about a change in the incidence of major upper limb amputations was not reported. We could not confirm this remarkable increase in major lower limb amputations in our institution, nor did we observe a change in the incidence of major upper limb amputations. We hypothesize that the COVID-19 pandemic had no effect on the number of major limb amputations. DESIGN: Observational retrospective study analyzing national open-access databases of health insurance claims. SETTING: The Dutch national opensource database www.opendisdata.nl was used to retrieve the incidence of limb amputations in the period 2012-2021, stratified by the level of amputation and the cause of amputation. The results were verified using the www.gipdatabank.nl databank. This period included 4 intervals of nationwide COVID-19 lockdowns. PARTICIPANTS: 60,848 patients who underwent limb amputations at the upper or lower extremity in the Netherlands from 2012 to 2021 (N=60,848) were included in this study. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Upper- and lower-limb amputation and prosthetic use. RESULTS: Data were retrieved for a total of 60,848 patients in the Netherlands, who underwent 68,180 amputations of the upper and lower extremities at any level from 2012 to 2021, including 22,095 major amputations of the lower extremities. The ongoing trend of stable numbers of major lower-limb amputations from 2012 to 2019 continued in 2020 and 2021. The verification of these data at the level of prosthetic users confirmed that the annual trends were unchanged. CONCLUSION: The reported increased numbers of major lower-limb amputations during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands could not be confirmed using nationwide epidemiologic data.

Have Surgery and Implant Modifications Been Associated With Reduction in Soft Tissue Complications in Transfemoral Bone-anchored Prostheses?

BACKGROUND: The most frequently occurring adverse events in individuals with a transfemoral amputation treated with a bone-anchored prosthesis are soft tissue infections and stoma-related complications. These soft tissue complications are believed to be influenced by surgical technique and implant design, but little is known about the effect of changes to treatment on these events. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the result of surgical technique and implant modifications on the incidence of soft tissue infections and stoma-related complications in transfemoral bone-anchored prosthesis users, depending on whether they had a conventional stoma and a cobalt-chrome-molybdenum (CoCrMo) osseointegration implant (treatment period 2009 to 2013) or a shallower stoma and titanium osseointegration implant (2015 to 2018)? (2) What is the incidence of serious complications, such as bone or implant infection, aseptic loosening, intramedullary stem breakage, and periprosthetic fracture? METHODS: Between 2009 and 2013, we performed osseointegration implant surgery using a conventional surgical technique and a CoCrMo implant in 42 individuals who had a lower extremity amputation experiencing socket-related problems that resulted in limited prosthesis use. We considered all individuals treated with two-stage surgery with a standard press-fit transfemoral osseointegration implant as potentially eligible for inclusion. Based on this, 100% (42) were eligible, and 5% (two of 42) were excluded because they did not provide informed consent, leaving 95% (40 of 42) for analysis. Between 2015 and 2018, we treated 79 individuals with similar indications with osseointegration implant surgery, now also treating individuals with dysvascular amputations. We used an adapted surgical technique resulting in a shallower stoma combined with a titanium implant. Using the same eligibility criteria as for the first group, 51% (40 of 79) were eligible; 49% (39 of 79) were excluded because they were treated with transtibial amputation, a patient-specific implant, or single-stage surgery and 1% (one of 79) were lost before the 2-year follow-up interval, leaving 49% (39 of 79) for analysis. The period of 2013 to 2015 was a transitional period and was excluded from analysis in this study to keep groups reasonably comparable and to compare a historical approach with the present approach. Hence, we presented a comparative study of two study groups (defined by surgical technique and implant design) with standardized 2-year follow-up. The risk factors for adverse events were similar between groups, although individuals treated with the shallow stoma surgical technique and titanium implant potentially possessed an increased risk because of the inclusion of individuals with dysvascular amputation and the discontinuation of prolonged postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Outcomes studied were soft tissue infections and stoma-related complications (hypergranulation or keloid formation as well as stoma redundant tissue) and bone or implant infection, aseptic loosening, implant stem breakage, periprosthetic fracture, and death. RESULTS: Patients treated with the shallow stoma surgical technique and titanium implant experienced fewer soft tissue infections (13 versus 76 events, absolute risk 0.17 [95% CI 0.09 to 0.30] versus 0.93 [95% CI 0.60 to 1.45]; p < 0.01), which were treated with less invasive measures, and fewer stoma redundant tissue events (0 versus five events, absolute risk 0 versus 0.06 [95% CI 0.03 to 0.14]) than patients treated with the conventional stoma surgical technique and CoCrMo implant. This was contrasted by an increased incidence of surgical site infections occurring between surgical stages 1 and 2, when no stoma was yet created, after the implementation of treatment changes (conventional surgery and CoCrMo implant versus shallow stoma surgery and titanium implant: one versus 11 events, absolute risk 0.01 [95% CI 0.00 to 0.08] versus 0.14 [95% CI 0.08 to 0.25]; p = 0.02). Patients treated with the shallow stoma surgical technique and titanium implant did not experience serious complications, although bone infections occurred (six events in 8% [three of 40] of patients) in the conventional surgery and CoCrMo implant group, all of which were successfully treated with implant retention. CONCLUSION: Adaptations to surgical technique and newer implant designs, as well as learning curve and experience, have resulted in a reduced incidence and severity of soft tissue infections and stoma redundant tissue, contrasted by an increase in surgical site infections before stoma creation. Serious complications such as deep implant infection were infrequent in this 2-year follow-up period. We believe the benefits of these treatment modifications outweigh the disadvantages and currently advise surgeons to create a shallower stoma with a stable soft tissue envelope, combined with a titanium implant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

What Are the Risk Factors for Mechanical Failure and Loosening of a Transfemoral Osseointegrated Implant System in Patients with a Lower-limb Amputation?

BACKGROUND: Septic loosening and stem breakage due to metal fatigue is a rare but well-known cause of orthopaedic implant failure. This may also affect the components of the osseointegrated implant system for individuals with transfemoral amputation who subsequently undergo revision. Identifying risk factors is important to minimize the frequency of revision surgery after implant breakage. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What proportion of patients who received an osseointegrated implant after transfemoral amputation underwent revision surgery, and what were the causes of those revisions? (2) What factors were associated with revision surgery when stratified by the location of the mechanical failure and (septic) loosening (intramedullary stem versus dual cone adapter)? METHODS: Between May 2009 and July 2015, we treated 72 patients with an osseointegrated implant. Inclusion criteria were a minimum follow-up of 5-years and a standard press-fit cobalt-chromium-molybdenum (CoCrMb) transfemoral osseointegrated implant. Based on that, 83% (60 of 72) of patients were eligible; a further 3% (2 of 60) were excluded because of no received informed consent (n = 1) and loss to follow-up (n = 1). Eventually, we included 81% (58 of 72) of patients for analysis in this retrospective, comparative study. We compared patient characteristics (gender, age, and BMI), implant details (diameter of the intramedullary stem, length of the dual cone, and implant survival time), and event characteristics (infectious complications and distal bone resorption). The data were retrieved from our electronic patient file and from our cloud-based database and analyzed by individuals not involved in patient care. Failures were categorized as: (1) mechanical failures, defined as breakage of the intramedullary stem or dual-cone adapter, or (2) (septic) loosening of the osseointegrated implant. RESULTS: Thirty-four percent (20 of 58) of patients had revision surgery. In 12% (7 of 58) of patients, the reason for revision was due to intramedullary stem failures (six breakages, one septic loosening), and in 22% (13 of 58) of patients it was due to dual-cone adaptor failure (10 weak-point breakages and four distal taper breakages; one patient broke both the weak-point and the dual-cone adapter). Smaller median stem diameter (failure: 15 mm [interquartile range 1.3], nonfailure: 17 mm [IQR 2.0], difference of medians 2 mm; p < 0.01) and higher median number of infectious events (failure: 6 [IQR 11], nonfailure: 1 [IQR 3.0], difference of medians -5; p < 0.01) were associated with revision intramedullary stem surgery. No risk factors could be identified for broken dual-cone adapters. CONCLUSION: Possible risk factors for system failure of this osteointegration implant include small stem diameter and high number of infectious events. We did not find factors associated with dual-cone adapter weak-point failure and distal taper failure, most likely because of the small sample size. When treating a person with a lower-limb amputation with a CoCrMb osseointegrated implant, we recommend avoiding a small stem diameter. Further research with longer follow-up is needed to study the success of revised patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Functional performance and safety of bone-anchored prostheses in persons with a transfemoral or transtibial amputation: a prospective one-year follow-up cohort study.

OBJECTIVES:: (1) To compare level of function, activity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and satisfaction in persons with a lower extremity amputation before surgery and 6- and 12-months after implantation of an osseointegration implant and (2) to report adverse events. DESIGN:: Prospective cohort study. SETTING:: University medical centre. SUBJECTS:: A total of 40 consecutive persons (median age: 56 years) who received a transfemoral (31) or transtibial (9) osseointegration implant, between April 2014 and March 2016. INTERVENTION:: Osseointegration implant surgery followed by a predefined rehabilitation programme. MAIN MEASURES:: Hip abductor strength, prosthetic use, back pain frequency, postoperative pain, mobility level (Timed-Up and Go (TUG) and wheelchair-boundedness), walking ability (6 minute walking test (6MWT) and walking distance in daily life), HRQoL, satisfaction regarding the prosthesis, and adverse events. RESULTS:: Strength, prosthetic use, walking distance, HRQoL, and satisfaction level increased significantly at 6- and 12-month follow-up compared to baseline ( P ⩽ 0.002). The TUG showed no change at 6-month follow-up ( P = 0.420) but improved significantly at 12-month follow-up compared to baseline ( P = 0.005). Wheelchair-boundedness decreased from 12/40 participants at baseline to 0 at follow-ups. The 6MWT ( P ⩾ 0.038) and back pain ( P ⩾ 0.437) did not change over time. Stump pain was present in 28/39 and 22/40 of the participants at 6-and 12-month follow-up, respectively. The major adverse events were managed successfully and included three dual-cone breakages and four bone fractures. An uneventful course was completed by 19/31 transfemoral and 4/9 transtibial bone-anchored prostheses users. CONCLUSION:: Bone-anchored prostheses lead to improved performance and appear to be safe, so they might be considered for persons with socket-related problems.

Pain Exposure Physical Therapy versus conventional treatment in complex regional pain syndrome type 1-a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze cost-effectiveness of Pain Exposure Physical Therapy compared to conventional treatment alongside a randomized controlled trial (NCT00817128) in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1, where no clinical difference was shown between the two groups in an intention-to-treat analysis. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial with 9 months follow-up. SETTING: Patients were recruited from hospitals and general practitioners in the region around a university hospital. SUBJECTS: A total of 56 patients, 45 (80.4%) female, were randomized. About 4 patients in the intervention and 11 patients in the conventional group switched groups. The mean (SD) age was 44.3 (16.6) years, and in 37 (66.1%) patients, the upper extremity was affected. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received either Pain Exposure Physical Therapy (maximum of five sessions), or conventional treatment conforming with the Dutch multidisciplinary guideline. MAIN MEASURES: For the economic evaluation difference between the groups in health-related quality of life (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)), and the clinical outcomes Impairment level Sum Score-Restricted Version and Pain Disability was determined based on the intention-to-treat analysis as well as differences in both healthcare-related costs and travel expenses. Cost-effectiveness planes were constructed using bootstrapping to compare effects and costs. RESULTS: No significant effects were found for QALYs (mean difference = -0.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.10 to 0.04) and clinical outcomes. A cost minimization analysis showed a significant difference in costs between groups. The conventional treatment was 64% more expensive than the Pain Exposure Physical Therapy. CONCLUSION: This economic analysis shows that Pain Exposure Physical Therapy compared to conventional treatment is cost-effective.

Prevention of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type 1 after conservative reatment of a distal radius fracture with a home exercise program: A proof-of-concept study.

Prevention of CRPS-1, a post-traumatic pain syndrome, after a distal radius fracture is important as this syndrome might lead to chronic pain and serious disabilities. In several studies, it was shown that CRPS-1 can be cured with exercise and graded activities. In a prospective cohort study, a home exercise program with progressive loading exercises was applied immediately after cast removal in patients with a distal radius fracture. After three months, patients were interviewed by telephone using the subjective Budapest diagnostic criteria for CRPS-1. In our study, 56 patients were included and 9 patients (16%) scored positive on the subjective diagnostic criteria. None of the 9 patients was diagnosed with CRPS-1. This study indicates that a home exercise program after conservative treatment of distal radius fracture is a safe and effective option to prevent CRPS-1. A larger study is needed to prove the preventive power of this home exercise program.

Long-term outcomes following lower extremity press-fit bone-anchored prosthesis surgery: a 5-year longitudinal study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patients with lower extremity amputation frequently suffer from socket-related problems. This seriously limits prosthesis use, level of activity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). An additional problem in patients with lower extremity amputation are asymmetries in gait kinematics possibly accounting for back pain. Bone-anchored prostheses (BAPs) are a possible solution for socket-related problems. Knowledge concerning the level of function, activity and HRQoL after surgery is limited. The aims of this ongoing study are to: a) describe changes in the level of function, activity, HRQoL and satisfaction over time compared to baseline before surgery; b) examine potential predictors for changes in kinematics, prosthetic use, walking ability, HRQoL, prosthesis comfort over time and level of stump pain at follow-up; c) examine potential mechanisms for change of back pain over time by identifying determinants, moderators and mediators. METHODS/DESIGN: A prospective 5-year longitudinal study with multiple follow-ups. All adults, between May 2014 and May 2018, with lower extremity amputation receiving a press-fit BAP are enrolled consecutively. Patients with socket-related problems and trauma, tumour resection or stable vascular disease as cause of primary amputation will be included. Exclusion criteria are severe cognitive or psychiatric disorders. Follow-ups are planned at six-months, one-, two- and five-years after BAP surgery. The main study outcomes follow, in part, the ICF classification: a) level of function defined as kinematics in coronal plane, hip abductor strength, prosthetic use, back pain and stump pain; b) level of activity defined as mobility level and walking ability; c) HRQoL; d) satisfaction defined as prosthesis comfort and global perceived effect. Changes over time for the continuous outcomes and the dichotomized outcome (back pain) will be analysed using generalised estimating equations (GEE). Multivariate GEE will be used to identify potential predictors for change of coronal plane kinematics, prosthetic use, walking ability, HRQoL, prosthesis comfort and for the level of post-operative stump pain. Finally, potential mechanisms for change in back pain frequency will be explored using coronal plane kinematics as a potential determinant, stump pain as moderator and hip abductor strength as mediator. DISCUSSION: This study may identify predictors for clinically relevant outcome measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR5776 . Registered 11 March 2016, retrospectively registered.

Walking ability and quality of life in subjects with transfemoral amputation: a comparison of osseointegration with socket prostheses.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate walking ability and quality of life of osseointegrated leg prostheses compared with socket prostheses. DESIGN: Prospective case-control study. SETTING: University medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects (N=22) with transfemoral amputation (1 bilateral) referred to our center because of socket-related skin and residual limb problems resulting in limited prosthesis use. Their mean age was 46.5 years (range, 23-67y) and mean time since amputation was 16.4 years (range, 2-45y). Causes of amputation were trauma (n=20) and tumor (n=2). INTERVENTION: Implantation of an osseointegration prosthesis (OIP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Global score of the Questionnaire for Persons With a Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA), prosthesis use, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), Timed Up & Go (TUG) test, and oxygen consumption during treadmill walking. RESULTS: With the socket prosthesis, the mean ± SD Q-TFA global score, prosthesis use, 6MWT, TUG, and oxygen consumption were 39±4.7 points, 56±7.9h/wk, 321±28m, 15.1±2.1 seconds, and 1330±310mL/min, respectively, and significantly improved with OIP to 63±5.3 points, 101±2.4h/wk, 423±21m, 8.1±0.7 seconds, and 1093±361mL/min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Osseointegration is a suitable intervention for persons whose prosthesis use is reduced because of socket-related problems. Subjects with OIP significantly increased their walking ability and prosthesis-related quality of life.

The effectiveness and cost evaluation of pain exposure physical therapy and conventional therapy in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1. Rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain Exposure Physical Therapy is a new treatment option for patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type 1. It has been evaluated in retrospective as well as in prospective studies and proven to be safe and possibly effective. This indicates that Pain Exposure Physical Therapy is now ready for clinical evaluation. The results of an earlier performed pilot study with an n = 1 design, in which 20 patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type 1 were treated with Pain Exposure Physical Therapy, were used for the design and power calculation of the present study.After completion and evaluation of this phase III study, a multi-centre implementation study will be conducted.The aim of this study is to determine whether Pain Exposure Physical Therapy can improve functional outcomes in patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type 1. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is designed as a single-blinded, randomized clinical trial. 62 patients will be randomized with a follow-up of 9 months to demonstrate the expected treatment effect. Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type 1 is diagnosed in accordance with the Bruehl/International Association for the Study of Pain criteria. Conventional therapy in accordance with the Dutch guideline will be compared with Pain Exposure Physical Therapy. Primary outcome measure is the Impairment level SumScore, restricted version. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized controlled study with single blinding that has ever been planned in patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type 1 and does not focus on a single aspect of the pain syndrome but compares treatment strategies based on completely different pathophysiological and cognitive theories.

Decreasing incidence of complex regional pain syndrome in the Netherlands: a retrospective multicenter study.

Background: Complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS) is a symptom-based diagnosis of which the reported incidence varies widely. In daily practice, there appears to be a decrease in incidence of CRPS after a distal radius fracture and in general. Questions/purposes: The aim of this study was to assess the trend in the incidence of CRPS after a distal radius fracture and in general in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2018. Methods: The incidence of CRPS after a distal radius fracture was calculated by dividing the number of confirmed cases of CRPS after distal radius fracture by the total number of patients diagnosed with a distal radius fracture. Medical records of these patients were reviewed. Hospital-based data were used to establish a trend in incidence of CRPS in general. A Dutch national database was used to measure the trend in the incidence of CRPS in the Netherlands by calculating annual incidence rates: the number of new CRPS cases, collected from the national database, divided by the Dutch mid-year population. Results: The incidence of CRPS after distal radius fracture over the whole study period was 0.36%. Hospital data showed an absolute decrease in CRPS cases from 520 in 2014 to 223 in 2018. National data confirmed this with a decrease in annual incidence from 23.2 (95% CI: 22.5-23.9) per 100,000 person years in 2014 to 16.1 (95% CI: 15.5-16.7) per 100,000 person years in 2018. Conclusion: A decreasing trend of CRPS is shown in this study. We hypothesize this to be the result of the changing approach towards CRPS and fracture management, with more focus on prevention and the psychological aspects of disproportionate posttraumatic pain. Level of Evidence: level 3 (retrospective cohort study).

Displaced midshaft fractures of the clavicle: non-operative treatment versus plate fixation (Sleutel-TRIAL). A multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The traditional view that the vast majority of midshaft clavicular fractures heal with good functional outcomes following non-operative treatment may be no longer valid for all midshaft clavicular fractures. Recent studies have presented a relatively high incidence of non-union and identified speciic limitations of the shoulder function in subgroups of patients with these injuries. AIM: A prospective, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted in 21 hospitals in the Netherlands, comparing fracture consolidation and shoulder function after either non-operative treatment with a sling or a plate fixation. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 350 patients will be included, between 18 and 60 years of age, with a dislocated midshaft clavicular fracture. The primary outcome is the incidence of non-union, which will be determined with standardised X-rays (Antero-Posterior and 30 degrees caudocephalad view). Secondary outcome will be the functional outcome, measured using the Constant Score. Strength of the shoulder muscles will be measured with a handheld dynamometer (MicroFET2). Furthermore, the health-related Quality of Life score (ShortForm-36) and the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Outcome Measure will be monitored as subjective parameters. Data on complications, bone union, cosmetic aspects and use of painkillers will be collected with follow-up questionnaires. The follow-up time will be two years. All patients will be monitored at regular intervals over the subsequent twelve months (two and six weeks, three months and one year). After two years an interview by telephone and a written survey will be performed to evaluate the two-year functional and mechanical outcomes. All data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis, using univariate and multivariate analyses. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide level-1 evidence for the comparison of consolidation and functional outcome between two standardised treatment options for dislocated midshaft clavicular fractures. The gathered data may support the development of a clinical guideline for treatment of clavicular fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands National Trial Register NTR2399.

Is radiation superior to indomethacin to prevent heterotopic ossification in acetabular fractures?: a systematic review.

UNLABELLED: Heterotopic ossification is a well-known complication after fixation of an acetabular fracture. Indomethacin and radiation therapy are used as prophylaxis to prevent heterotopic ossification. It is unclear, however, whether either is superior, although this may relate to lack of power in individual studies. To compare the effectiveness of indomethacin with the effectiveness of radiation therapy, we conducted a systematic review in which all published prospective studies were evaluated. We performed a literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register. The retrieved studies were analyzed and categorized according to the quality and validity score of Jadad et al. We found five appropriate prospective studies, describing 384 patients. Although the quality of the available studies made a proper meta-analysis inappropriate, the incidence of heterotopic ossification was significantly lower in patients treated with radiation than in patients receiving indomethacin (five of 160 versus 20 of 224, respectively). Until further information is available, we believe the evidence supports radiation therapy as the preferred method for preventing heterotopic ossification after operative treatment of acetabular fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Magnetic-resonance-imaging-based three-dimensional muscle reconstruction of hip abductor muscle volume in a person with a transfemoral bone-anchored prosthesis: A feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Persons with transfemoral amputation typically have severe muscle atrophy of the residual limb. The effect of bone-anchored prosthesis use on existing muscle atrophy is unknown. A potentially feasible method to evaluate this is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based three-dimensional (3D) muscle reconstruction. We aimed to (1) examine the feasibility of MRI-based 3D muscle reconstruction technique in a person with a cobalt-chrome-molybdenum transfemoral bone-anchored prosthesis; and (2) describe the change of hip abductor muscle volume over time. METHODS: In this single case, 1-year follow-up study we reconstructed the 3D hip abductor muscle volumes semiautomatically from MRI scans at baseline, 6- and 12-month follow-up. The number of adverse events, difficulties in data analysis, time investment and participants' burden determined the level of feasibility. RESULTS: We included a man (70 years) with a transfemoral amputation who received a bone-anchored prosthesis after 52 years of socket prosthesis use. No adverse events occurred. The accuracy of the 3D reconstruction was potentially reduced by severe adipose tissue interposition. Data analysis was time-intensive (115 h). Participants' burden was limited to 3-h time investment. Compared to baseline, the total hip abductor volume of both the residual limb (6 month: 5.5%; 12 month: 7.4%) and sound limb (6 month: 7.8%; 12 month: 5.5%) increased. CONCLUSION: The presented technique appears feasible to follow muscle volume changes over time in a person with a cobalt-chrome-molybdenum transfemoral bone-anchored prosthesis in an experimental setting. Future research should focus on analysis of muscle tissue composition and the feasibility in bone-anchored prostheses of other alloys.

Rib fixation versus non-operative treatment for flail chest and multiple rib fractures after blunt thoracic trauma: a multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Over the years, a trend has evolved towards operative treatment of flail chest although evidence is limited. Furthermore, little is known about operative treatment for patients with multiple rib fractures without a flail chest. The aim of this study was to compare rib fixation based on a clinical treatment algorithm with nonoperative treatment for both patients with a flail chest or multiple rib fractures. METHODS: All patients with ≥ 3 rib fractures admitted to one of the two contributing hospitals between January 2014 and January 2017 were retrospectively included in this multicenter cohort study. One hospital treated all patients nonoperatively and the other hospital treated patients with rib fixation according to a clinical treatment algorithm. Primary outcome measures were intensive care length of stay and hospital length of stay for patients with a flail chest and patients with multiple rib fractures, respectively. To control for potential confounding, propensity score matching was applied. RESULTS: A total of 332 patients were treated according to protocol and available for analysis. The mean age was 56 (SD 17) years old and 257 (77%) patients were male. The overall mean Injury Severity Score was 23 (SD 11) and the average number of rib fractures was 8 (SD 4). There were 92 patients with a flail chest, 37 (40%) had rib fixation and 55 (60%) had non-operative treatment. There were 240 patients with multiple rib fractures, 28 (12%) had rib fixation and 212 (88%) had non-operative treatment. For both patient groups, after propensity score matching, rib fixation was not associated with intensive care unit length of stay (for flail chest patients) nor with hospital length of stay (for multiple rib fracture patients), nor with the secondary outcome measures. CONCLUSION: No advantage could be demonstrated for operative fixation of rib fractures. Future studies are needed before rib fixation is embedded or abandoned in clinical practice.

Complications of bone-anchored prostheses for individuals with an extremity amputation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to provide an overview of device-related complications occurring in individuals with an upper or lower extremity amputation treated with a screw, press-fit or other type of bone-anchored implant as well as interventions related to these complications. METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science databases. The included studies reported on device-related complications and interventions occurring in individuals with bone-anchored prostheses. The outcomes evaluated were death, infection, bone/device breakage, implant loosening, soft tissue complications, systemic events, antibiotic and surgical treatment. Subgroup analyses were performed for the following groups: a) implant type (screw, press-fit and other types of implants) and b) level of amputation (transfemoral, transtibial and upper extremity amputation). RESULTS: Of 309 studies, 12 cohort studies were eligible for inclusion, all of which had methodological shortcomings and 12 studies were excluded due to complete overlap of patient data. Implant infection were rare in certain transfemoral implants (screw: 2-11%, press-fit: 0-3%, Compress: 0%) but common in transtibial implants (29%). The same was observed for implant loosening, in transfemoral (screw: 6%, press-fit: 0-3%, Compress: 0%), transtibial implants (29%) as well as for upper extremity implants (13-23%). Intramedullary device breakage were rare in transfemoral implants (screw: 0%, press-fit: 1%, Compress: unknown) but frequent in individuals with transradial implants (27%) and absent in transtibial implants. Soft tissue infections and complications were common and underreported in most articles. CONCLUSIONS: Major complications (e.g. implant infection, implant loosening and intramedullary device breakage) are rare in transfemoral bone-anchored prosthesis and seem to occur less frequently in individuals with press-fit implants. Minor complications, such as soft tissue infections and complications, are common but are substantially influenced by the learning curve, implant design and surgical technique. Data for patients treated with a transtibial, upper extremity or Compress implant are underreported, precluding definitive conclusions. There is a need for either an international database to report on or a standard core set of complications as well as the need to follow classification systems that result in unequivocal data.

Timing of definitive fixation of major long bone fractures: Can fat embolism syndrome be prevented?

Fat embolism is common in patients with major fractures, but leads to devastating consequences, named fat embolism syndrome (FES) in some. Despite advances in treatment strategies regarding the timing of definitive fixation of major fractures, FES still occurs in patients. In this overview, current literature is reviewed and optimal treatment strategies for patients with multiple traumatic injuries, including major fractures, are discussed. Considering the multifactorial etiology of FES, including mechanical and biochemical pathways, FES cannot be prevented in all patients. However, screening for symptoms of FES should be standard in the pre-operative work-up of these patients, prior to definitive fixation of major fractures.

Osseointegrated Transtibial Implants in Patients with Peripheral Vascular Disease: A Multicenter Case Series of 5 Patients with 1-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Osseointegration is an alternative treatment for amputees who are unable to wear or have difficulty wearing a socket prosthesis. Although the majority of limb amputations are due to vascular disease, such amputations have been perceived as a contraindication to osseointegration surgery. We report the outcomes of osseointegrated reconstruction in a series of 5 patients with limb amputation due to peripheral vascular disease. METHODS: Five patients with transtibial amputation and a history of peripheral vascular disease who received an osseointegration implant from 2014 to 2015 were followed for 12 months. Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed, including pain, the amount of time the patient wore the prosthesis, mobility, walking ability, and quality of life. Adverse events, including infection, fracture, implant failure, revision surgery, additional amputation, and death, were monitored and recorded. RESULTS: Five transtibial amputees (56 to 84 years of age) followed for 1 year after osseointegration surgery were included in this case series. The mobility of all patients was improved at the time of follow-up. Three patients were wheelchair-bound prior to the surgery but all 5 were able to walk and perform daily activities at the time of follow-up. Four of the 5 patients were pain-free at 12 months postoperatively, and all 5 were using the osseointegrated prosthesis. Two patients had a single episode of superficial soft-tissue infection. CONCLUSIONS: An osseointegrated implant may be considered a feasible alternative to the conventional socket prosthesis for patients with peripheral vascular disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparison of bone-anchored prostheses and socket prostheses for patients with a lower extremity amputation: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to provide an overview of a) the used measurement instruments in studies evaluating effects on quality of life (QoL), function, activity and participation level in patients with a lower extremity amputation using bone-anchored prostheses compared to socket prostheses and b) the effects themselves. METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science. Included studies compared QoL, function, activity and/or participation level in patients with bone-anchored or socket prostheses. A best-evidence synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Out of 226 studies, five cohort and two cross-sectional studies were eligible for inclusion, all had methodological shortcomings. These studies used 10 different measurement instruments and two separate questions to assess outcome. Bone-anchored prostheses were associated with better condition-specific QoL and better outcomes on several of the physical QoL subscales, outcomes on the physical bodily pain subscale were inconclusive. Outcomes on function and activity level increased, no change was found at participation level. The level of evidence was limited. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for a standard set of instruments. There was limited evidence that bone-anchored prostheses resulted in higher QoL, function and activity levels than socket prostheses, in patients with socket-related problems. Implications for Rehabilitation Use of bone-anchored prostheses in combination with intensive outpatient rehabilitation may improve QoL, function and activity level compared with socket prosthesis use in patients with a transfemoral amputation and socket-related problems. All clinicians and researchers involved with bone-anchored prostheses should use and publish data on QoL, function, activity and participation level. There needs to be an agreement on a standard set of instruments so that interventions for patients with a lower extremity amputation are assessed consistently.

Plate Fixation Compared with Nonoperative Treatment for Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of operative treatment for clavicular fractures is increasing, despite varying results in previous studies. The aim of this study was to compare plate fixation and nonoperative treatment for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures with respect to nonunion, adverse events, and shoulder function. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial, patients between 18 and 60 years old with a displaced midshaft clavicular fracture were randomized between nonoperative treatment and open reduction with internal plate fixation. The primary outcome was evidence of nonunion at 1 year. Other outcomes were secondary operations, arm function as measured with the Constant shoulder score and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, pain, cosmetic results, and general health status. Outcomes were recorded at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year following trauma. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty patients were randomized. The rate of nonunion was significantly higher in the nonoperatively treated group than in the operatively treated group (23.1% compared with 2.4%; p < 0.0001), as was the rate of nonunion for which secondary plate fixation was performed (12.9% compared with 1.2%; p = 0.006). The rate of secondary operations was 27.4% in the operatively treated group (16.7% for elective plate removal) and 17.1% in the nonoperatively treated group (p = 0.18). Nineteen percent of the patients in the operatively treated group had persistent loss of sensation around the scar. No difference was found between the groups with respect to the Constant and DASH scores at all time points. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with a diaphyseal fracture of the clavicle displaced at least 1 shaft width, plate fixation improves the chances that the bone will heal; however, the rate of patients who need a second operation is considerable. In addition, the procedure does not improve shoulder function or general symptoms, and it does not decrease limitations compared with nonoperative treatment in a sling. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Effect of Implant Failure After Symphyseal Plating on Functional Outcome and General Health.

OBJECTIVES: To relate the incidence of implant failure after internal anterior fixation of the pelvic ring to functional outcome and the health-related quality of life in patients. DESIGN: Retrospective chart and radiographic review. SETTING: Level I Trauma center. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who were treated with symphyseal plating for traumatic symphyseal diastasis between January 2003 and December 2013. Patients were asked to complete 2 questionnaires, the SF-36 and the Majeed score. A retrospective chart and radiographic control review were performed on all patients. The following data were collected: demographic data and details regarding the pelvic surgery. Computed tomograms were used to determine fracture classification and quality of reduction. Conventional radiographic follow-up were used to detect implant failure. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients enrolled the study. Implant failure occurred in 11 (30%) patients resulting in the identification of 2 groups, "implant failure" (n = 11) and "intact implants" (n = 26). The baseline characteristics were equal in both groups. The analysis of the questionnaires revealed that the SF-36 score was not significantly different in any of the dimensions between the both groups. Patients in the implant failure group scored higher on all of the Majeed items, including the total Majeed score, but the difference did not reach statistical significance of P < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed comparable results regarding the general health measured by the SF-36 for both groups and higher Majeed scores for patients with implant failure compared with patients with intact implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.