Antegrade anterior column acetabulum fracture fixation with cannulated compression headless screws-A biomechanical study on standardized osteoporotic artificial bone.

PURPOSE: Due to the increase in life expectancy and high-energy traumas, anterior column acetabular fractures (ACFs) are also increasing. While open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is still the standard surgical procedure, minimally invasive, percutaneous fixation of osteoporotic acetabulum fractures (AF) are growing in popularity. The aim of this biomechanical study was to evaluate the biomechanical competence following antegrade fixation with a standard screw versus a cannulated compression headless screw. METHODS: Eight anatomical osteoporotic composite pelvises were given an anterior column fracture. Two groups of eight specimens each (n = 8) for fixation with either a 6.5 mm cannulated compression headless screw in group Anterior Acetabulum Canulated Compression Headless Screw (AACCH), or with a 6.5 mm partially threaded cannulated screw in group Anterior Acetabulum Standard Screw (AASS) where compared. Each specimen was biomechanically loaded cyclically at a rate of 2 Hz with monotonically increasing compressive load until failure. Motions were assessed by means of optical motion tracking. RESULTS: Initial construct stiffness trended higher in group AACCH at 152.4 ± 23.1 N/mm compared to group AASS at 118.5 ± 34.3 N/mm, p = 0.051. Numbers of cycles and corresponding peak load at failure, were significantly higher in group AACCH at 6734 ± 1669 cycles and 873.4 ± 166.9 N versus group AASS at 4440 ± 2063 cycles and 644.0 ± 206.3 N, p = 0.041. Failure modes were breakout of the screws around the proximal entry point. CONCLUSION: From a biomechanical perspective, group AACCH was associated with superior biomechanical competence compared to standard partially threaded cannulated screws and could therefore be considered as valid alternative for fixation of anterior acetabulum fractures.

Optimizing Subtalar Arthrodesis: A Human Cadaveric Evaluation of a Novel Partially-Threaded Screw Combination in the Delta Configuration.

Background and Objectives: Despite the established role of subtalar joint arthrodesis (SJA) for treatment of subtalar osteoarthritis, achieving bone union remains challenging, with up to 46% non-union rates. Adequate compression and stable fixation are crucial for successful outcomes, with internal screw fixation being the gold standard for SJA. The delta configuration, featuring highly divergent screws, offers stability, however, it can result in hardware irritation in 20-30% of patients. Solutions to solve this complication include cannulated compression screw (CCS) countersinking or cannulated compression headless screw (CCHS) application. The aim of this biomechanical study was to investigate the stability of a delta configuration for SJA utilizing either a combination of a posterior CCHS and an anterior CCS or a standard two-CCS combination. Materials and Methods: Twelve paired human cadaveric lower legs were assigned pairwise to two groups for SJA using either two CCSs (Group 1) or one posterior CCHS and one anterior CCS (Group 2). All specimens were tested under progressively increasing cyclic loading to failure, with monitoring of the talocalcaneal movements via motion tracking. Results: Initial stiffness did not differ significantly between the groups, p = 0.949. Talocalcaneal movements in terms of varus-valgus deformation and internal-external rotation were significantly bigger in Group 1 versus Group 2, p ≤ 0.026. Number of cycles until reaching 5° varus-valgus deformation was significantly higher in Group 2 versus Group 1, p = 0.029. Conclusions: A delta-configuration SJA utilizing a posterior CCHS and an anterior CCS is biomechanically superior versus a standard configuration with two CCSs. Clinically, the use of a posterior CCHS could prevent protrusion of the hardware in the heel, while an anterior CCS could facilitate less surgical time and thus less complication rates.

The value of pre-hospital trauma life support courses for medical personnel-a questionnaire study.

Background: The aim of the study was to determine the impact that PHTLS® course participation had on self-confidence of emergency personnel, regarding the pre-hospital treatment of patients who had suffered severe trauma. Furthermore, the goal was to determine the impact of specific medical profession, work experience and prior course participation had on the benefits of PHTLS® training. Methods: A structured questionnaire study was performed. Healthcare providers from local emergency services involved in pre-hospital care in the metropolitan area of Zurich (Switzerland, Europe) who completed a PHTLS® course were included. Altered self-confidence, communication, and routines in the treatment of severe trauma patients were examined. The impact of prior course participation, work experience and profession on course benefits were evaluated. Results: The response rate was 76%. A total of 6 transport paramedics (TPs), 66 emergency paramedics (EPs) and 15 emergency doctors (EDs) were included. Emergency paramedics had significantly more work experience compared with EDs (respectively 7.1 ± 5.7 yrs. vs. 4.5 ± 2.1 yrs., p = 0.004). 86% of the participants reported increased self-confidence in the pre-hospital management of severe trauma upon PHTLS® training completion. Moreover, according to 84% of respondents, extramural treatment of trauma changed upon course completion. PHTLS® course participants had improved communication in 93% of cases. This was significantly more frequent in EPs than TPs (p = 0.03). Multivariable analysis revealed emergency paramedics benefit the most from PHTLS® course participation. Conclusion: The current study shows that PHTLS® training is associated with improved self-confidence and enhanced communication, with regards to treatment of severe trauma patients in a pre-hospital setting, among medical emergency personnel. Additionally, emergency paramedics who took the PHTLS® course improved in overall self-confidence. These findings imply that all medical personal involved in the pre-hospital care of trauma patients, in a metropolitan area in Europe, do benefit from PHTLS® training. This was independent of the profession, previous working experience or prior alternative course participation.

Does the injury pattern drive the surgical treatment strategy in multiply injured patients with major fractures?

BACKGROUND: The timing of definitive surgery in multiple injured patients remains a topic of debate, and multiple concepts have been described. Although these included injury severity as a criterion to decide on the indications for surgery, none of them considered the influence of injury distributions. We analyzed whether injury distribution is associated with certain surgical strategies and related outcomes in a cohort of patients treated according to principles of early and safe fixation strategies. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, multiple injured patients were included if they were primarily admitted to a Level I trauma center, had an Injury Severity Score of ≥16 points, and required surgical intervention for major injuries and fractures. The primary outcome measure was treatment strategy. The treatment strategy was classified according to the timing of definitive surgery after injury: early total care (ETC, <24 hours), safe definitive surgery (SDS, <48 hours), and damage control (DC, >48 hours). Statistics included univariate and multivariate analyses of mortality and the association of injury distributions and surgical tactics. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2022, 1,471 patients were included (mean ± SD age, 55.6 ± 20.4 years; mean Injury Severity Score, 23.1 ± 11.4). The group distribution was as follows: ETC, n = 85 (5.8%); SDS, n = 665 (45.2%); and DC, n = 721 (49.0%); mortality was 22.4% in ETC, 16.1% in SDS, and 39.7% in DC. Severe nonlethal abdominal injuries (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.5) and spinal injuries (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.2) were associated with ETC, while multiple extremity injuries were associated with SDS (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.4-2.2). Severe traumatic brain injury was associated with DC (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4). When a correction for the severity of head, abdominal, spinal, and extremity injuries, as well as differences in the values of admission pathophysiologic parameters were undertaken, the mortality was 30% lower in the SDS group when compared with the DC group (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.2-0.4). CONCLUSION: Major spinal injuries and certain abdominal injuries, if identified as nonlethal, trigger definitive surgeries in the initial setting. In contrast, severe TBI was associated with delayed fracture care. Patients with major fractures and other injuries were treated by SDS (definitive care, <48 hours) when the pathophysiological response was adequate. The choice of a favorable surgical treatment appears to depend on injury patterns and physiological patient responses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Clinical validation of the "Straight-Leg-Evaluation-Trauma-Test" (SILENT) as a rapid assessment tool for injuries of the lower extremity in trauma bay patients.

PURPOSE: Clinical assessment of the major trauma patient follows international validated guidelines without standardized trauma-specific assessment of the lower extremities for injuries. This study aimed to validate a novel clinical test for lower extremity evaluation during trauma resuscitation phase. METHODS: This diagnostic, prognostic observational cohort study was performed on trauma patient treated at one level I trauma center between Mar 2022 and Mar 2023. The Straight-Leg-Evaluation-Trauma (SILENT) test follows three steps during the primary survey: inspection for obvious fractures (e.g., open fracture), active elevation of the leg, and cautious elevation of the lower extremity from the heel. SILENT was considered positive when obvious fracture was present and painful or pathological mobility was observed. The SILENT test was compared with standardized radiographs (CT scan or X-ray) as the reference test for fractures. Statistical analysis included sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic testing. RESULTS: 403 trauma bay patients were included, mean age 51.6 (SD 21.2) years with 83 fractures of the lower extremity and 27 pelvic/acetabular fractures. Overall sensitivity was 75% (95%CI 64 to 84%), and overall specificity was 99% (95%CI 97 to 100%). Highest sensitivity was for detection of tibia fractures (93%, 95%CI 77 to 99%). Sensitivity of SILENT was higher in the unconscious patient (96%, 95%CI 78 to 100%) with a near 100% specificity. AUC was highest for tibia fractures (0.96, 95%CI 0.92 to 1.0) followed by femur fractures (0.92, 95%CI 0.84 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: The SILENT test is a clinical applicable and feasible rule-out test for relevant injuries of the lower extremity. A negative SILENT test of the femur or the tibia might reduce the requirement of additional radiological imaging. Further large-scale prospective studies might be required to corroborate the beneficial effects of the SILENT test.