Time from injury to operative intervention in traumatic intracranial hematoma: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes in traumatic intracranial hematoma (TICH) have not improved significantly despite advances in trauma care. A modifiable factor in TICH management is time to operation room (TOR). TOR has become a key marker in Traumatic brain injury care despite a lack of contemporary evidence. This study aimed to determine the timing of TICH evacuation and its association with mortality and neurological outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, OVID MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Included studies reported data on adult patients with acute TICH who underwent surgical evacuation. The primary outcome was TOR and its association with mortality or functional neurological recovery. RESULTS: From 1838 articles screened, 17 were included. Eight studies reported TOR as a continuous variable, ranging between 3 and 7.1 h. Three studies found better outcomes with shorter TOR, five found no difference, and one found worse outcomes with shorter TOR. Five articles were included in meta-analysis of mortality in patients undergoing operative decompression less than or greater than 4 h from injury which found lower mortality in the >4-h group, OR = 1.53. Longitudinal regression analysis showed no difference in TOR over the 33-year span of articles included. CONCLUSION: There is limited data available on TOR in TICH, with equivocal results on the effect of timing on outcomes. TOR has not decreased over the last 4 decades. The unvalidated 4-h cut-off seems to be associated with better survival. Contemporary assessment of this potentially important performance indicator is required.

Modifiability of surgical timing in postinjury multiple organ failure patients.

BACKGROUND: Postinjury multiple organ failure (MOF) is the leading cause of late trauma deaths, with primarily non-modifiable risk factors. Timing of surgery as a potentially modifiable risk factor is frequently proposed, but has not been quantified. We aimed to compare mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and ICU LOS between MOF patients who had surgery that preceded MOF with modifiable timings versus those with non-modifiable timings. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of an ongoing 17-year prospective cohort study of ICU polytrauma patients at-risk of MOF. Among MOF patients (Denver score>3), we identified patients who had surgery that preceded MOF, determined whether the timing of these operation(s) were modifiable(M) or non-modifiable (non-M), and evaluated the change in physiological parameters as a result of surgery. RESULTS: Of 716 polytrauma patients at-risk of MOF, 205/716 (29%) developed MOF, and 161/205 (79%) had surgery during their ICU admission. Of the surgical MOF patients, 147/161 (91%) had one or more operation(s) that preceded MOF, and 65/161 (40%) of them had operation(s) with modifiable timings. There were no differences in age (mean (SD) 52 (19) vs 53 (21)years), injury severity score (median (IQR) 34 (26-41)vs34 (25-44)), admission physiological and resuscitation parameters, between M and non-M-patients. M patients had longer ICU LOS (median (IQR) 18 (12-28)versus 11 (8-16)days, p < 0.0001) than non-M-patients, without difference in mortality (14%vs16%, p = 0.7347), or hospital LOS (median (IQR) 32 (18-52)vs27 (17-47)days, p = 0.3418). M-patients had less fluids and transfusions intraoperatively. Surgery did not compromise patient physiology. CONCLUSION: Operations preceding MOF are common in polytrauma and seem to be safe in maintaining physiology. The margin for improvement from optimizing surgical timing is modest, contrary to historical assumptions.

Hemiarthroplasty vs Total Hip Arthroplasty for the Management of Displaced Neck of Femur Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Displaced femoral neck fractures (DFNF) are common and can be treated with osteosynthesis, hemiarthroplasty (HA), or total hip arthroplasty (THA). There is no consensus as to which intervention is superior in managing DFNF. METHODS: Studies were identified through a systematic search of the MEDLINE database, EMBASE database, and Cochrane Controlled Trials. Included studies were randomized or controlled trials (1966 to August 2018) comparing THA with HA for the management of DFNF. (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42018110057). RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included totaling 1364 patients (660 THA and 704 HA). THA was found to be superior to HA in terms of risk of reoperation, Harris Hip Score and Quality of Life (Short Form 36). Overall, the risk of dislocation was greater in THA group than HA in the first 4 years, after which there was no difference. There was no difference between THA and HA in terms of mortality or infection. CONCLUSION: Overall, THA appears to be superior to HA. THA should be the recommended intervention for DFNF in patients with a life expectancy >4 years and in patients younger than 80 years. However, both HA and THA are reasonable interventions in patients older than 80 years and with shorter life expectancy.

Supplementary medial plating in revision surgery for distal femoral fractures: A surgical technique with clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Distal femur fractures (DFF) are common, especially in the elderly and high energy trauma patients. Lateral locked osteosynthesis constructs have been widely used, however non-union and implant failures are not uncommon. Recent literature advocates for the liberal use of supplemental medial plating to augment lateral locked constructs. However, there is a lack of proprietary medial plate options, with some authors supporting the use of repurposing expensive anatomic pre-contoured plates. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of an effective, readily available medial implant option. METHODS: A retrospective analysis from January 2014 to August 2023 was performed on DFF requiring revision open reduction internal fixation (rORIF) with supplemental medial plating with a Large Fragment Locking Compression Plate (LCP) T-Plate via a medial sub-vastus approach. The T-plate was contoured and placed superior to the medial condyle. A combination of 4.5 mm cortical, 5 mm locking and/or 6.5 mm cancellous screws were used, with oblique screw trajectories towards the distal lateral cortex of the lateral condyle. The primary outcome was union rate. RESULTS: This technique was utilised on fifteen patients. The mean age was 55±15 (range 23-81); 73 % of cases were male and the median follow-up was 61 weeks (IQR 49-87). The two most common fracture patterns were AO/OTA 33-C3 (n = 5) and 33-A3 (n = 4), and three patients had open fractures. The union rate was 93 % (14/15), with a median time to union of 29 weeks (IQR 18-49). There were two complications: a deep infection requiring two debridements and locally eluding antibiotic insertion, and a prominent screw requiring removal; both patients achieved union. The median range of motion was 0° (IQR 0-5) of extension and 100° (IQR 90-120) of flexion. CONCLUSION: Supplemental medial plating of DFF with a Large Fragment LCP T-Plate is a feasible, safe, and economical option for rORIF. Further validation on a larger scale is warranted, along with considerations to developing a specific implant in line with these principles.

Managing periprosthetic tibia fractures: International perspectives.

Knee arthroplasty, both total knee and unicompartmental, has had a significant impact on millions of patients globally. Although satisfaction is usually high, complications such as periprosthetic fracture are increasingly common. Distal femur periprosthetic fractures are relatively well researched and understood in comparison with periprosthetic proximal tibia fractures (PTFs). The management of PTFs is essentially an evidence-free area. This review explores the literature (or lack thereof) and integrates cases from Australia and Japan. As it stands, there is scant literature relating to all facets of PTFs, including, most concerningly, the management of them. Larger studies are required to help further investigate this important interface between arthroplasty and orthopaedic trauma. As a guide, those with loose prostheses will likely benefit most from revision total knee arthroplasty, while those with well-fixed prostheses can be managad according to the fracture with homage paid to the presence of the prosthesis. The use of periarticular locked plates is likely a better option over conventional large or small fragment plates. Nonoperative management is a viable option for selected individuals and can be associated with favorable outcomes.

The Diagnostic, Therapeutic and Prognostic Relevance of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps in Polytrauma.

Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) represent a recently discovered polymorphonuclear leukocyte-associated ancient defence mechanism, and they have also been identified as part of polytrauma patients' sterile inflammatory response. This systematic review aimed to determine the clinical significance of NETs in polytrauma, focusing on potential prognostic, diagnostic and therapeutic relevance. The methodology covered all major databases and all study types, but was restricted to polytraumatised humans. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 1967 patients. Ten samples were taken from plasma and four from whole blood. There was no standardisation of methodology of NET detection among plasma studies; however, of all the papers that included a healthy control NET, proxies were increased. Polytrauma patients were consistently reported to have higher concentrations of NET markers in peripheral blood than those in healthy controls, but their diagnostic, therapeutic and prognostic utility is equivocal due to the diverse study population and methodology. After 20 years since the discovery of NETs, their natural history and potential clinical utility in polytrauma is undetermined, requiring further standardisation and research.

Incidence of multiple organ failure in adult polytrauma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postinjury multiple organ failure (MOF) is the leading cause of late death in trauma patients. Although MOF was first described 50 years ago, its definition, epidemiology, and change in incidence over time are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the incidence of MOF in the context of different MOF definitions, study inclusion criteria, and its change over time. METHODS: Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched for articles published between 1977 and 2022 in English and German. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed when applicable. RESULTS: The search returned 11,440 results, of which 842 full-text articles were screened. Multiple organ failure incidence was reported in 284 studies that used 11 unique inclusion criteria and 40 MOF definitions. One hundred six studies published from 1992 to 2022 were included. Weighted MOF incidence by publication year fluctuated from 11% to 56% without significant decrease over time. Multiple organ failure was defined using four scoring systems (Denver, Goris, Marshall, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA]) and 10 different cutoff values. Overall, 351,942 trauma patients were included, of whom 82,971 (24%) developed MOF. The weighted incidences of MOF from meta-analysis of 30 eligible studies were as follows: 14.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.1-17.2%) in Denver score >3, 12.7% (95% CI, 9.3-16.1%) in Denver score >3 with blunt injuries only, 28.6% (95% CI, 12-45.1%) in Denver score >8, 25.6% (95% CI, 10.4-40.7%) in Goris score >4, 29.9% (95% CI, 14.9-45%) in Marshall score >5, 20.3% (95% CI, 9.4-31.2%) in Marshall score >5 with blunt injuries only, 38.6% (95% CI, 33-44.3%) in SOFA score >3, 55.1% (95% CI, 49.7-60.5%) in SOFA score >3 with blunt injuries only, and 34.8% (95% CI, 28.7-40.8%) in SOFA score >5. CONCLUSION: The incidence of postinjury MOF varies largely because of lack of a consensus definition and study population. Until an international consensus is reached, further research will be hindered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis; Level III.

Management of Vancouver B2 Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures, Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and analyze the current evidence for the use of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) constructs compared with conventional revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) for the management of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs). DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search of the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases was conducted. Prospective and retrospective studies were eligible. No limitation was placed on publication date, with only articles printed in English eligible. STUDY SELECTION: Included studies were retrospective studies comparing ORIF and rTHA for the management of Vancouver B2 PFFs. DATA EXTRACTION: The primary outcome was the overall complication rate. Other outcomes included as rate of dislocation, revision operation, refracture, infection, nonunion, and subsidence/loosening. Twenty-four studies were included totaling 1621 patients, of which 331 were treated with ORIF and 1280 with rTHA. CONCLUSION: The 1621 patients included comprised a mixture of different fracture patterns, prostheses, and patient comorbidities. The overall complication rate for ORIF was 24% versus 18% for rTHA (P = 0.13). The results demonstrate that rTHA has a similar revision rate to ORIF in PFFs with a loose femoral component and adequate bone stock. ORIF was superior to rTHA in prevention of postoperative dislocation; however, there was no difference between other complications. This review suggests a potential role of both ORIF and rTHA in the management of Vancouver B2 PFFs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Preperitoneal packing versus angioembolization for the initial management of hemodynamically unstable pelvic fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamically unstable pelvic fracture patients are challenging to manage. Preperitoneal packing (PPP) and angioembolization (AE) are two interventions commonly used to help gain hemorrhage control. Recently, there has been a tendency to support PPP in hemodynamically unstable pelvic fracture seemingly in direct comparison with AE. However, it seems that key differences between published cohorts exist that limits a comparison between these two modalities. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases was conducted. Prospective and retrospective studies were eligible. No limitation was placed on publication date, with only manuscripts printed in English eligible (PROSPERO CRD42021236219). Included studies were retrospective and prospective cohort studies and a quasirandomized control trial. Studies reported demographic and outcome data on hemodynamically unstable patients with pelvis fractures that had either PPP or AE as their initial hemorrhage control intervention. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality rate. Eighteen studies were included totaling 579 patients, of which 402 were treated with PPP and 177 with AE. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between AE and PPP in regard to age, presence of arterial hemorrhage, Injury Severity Score, and time to intervention. The crude mortality rate for PPP was 23%, and for AE, it was 32% (p = 0.001). Analysis of dual-arm studies showed no significant difference in mortality. Interestingly, 27% of patients treated with PPP did not get adequate hemorrhage control and required subsequent AE. CONCLUSION: Because of bias, heterogeneity, and inadequate reporting of physiological data, a conclusive comparison between modalities is impossible. In addition, in more than a quarter of the cases treated with PPP, the patients did not achieve hemorrhage control until subsequent AE was performed. This systematic review highlights the need for standardized reporting in this high-risk group of trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.