Routine 6-weeks outpatient visit in patients treated surgically for upper extremity fractures: Is it truly necessary?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the usefulness of the routinely planned six-week outpatient visit and x-ray in patients treated surgically for the most common upper extremity fractures including clavicle, proximal humerus, humeral shaft, olecranon, radial shaft and distal radius. METHOD: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients treated surgically for the most common upper extremity fractures between 2019 and 2022 in a level 1 trauma center. The first outcome of interest was the incidence of abnormalities found on the x-ray made at the 6-week outpatient visit. Abnormalities were defined as all differences between the intra-operative (or direct postoperative) and 6-week x-ray. In case an abnormality was detected, the hospital records were screened to determine its clinical consequence. The clinical consequences were categorized into requiring either additional diagnostics, additional interventions, change of standard postoperative immobilization, weightbearing or allowed range of motion (ROM). The second outcome of interest was the incidence of deviations from the local standard post operative treatment and follow-up protocol based on the 6-week outpatient visit as a whole. Deviations were also categorized into either requiring additional diagnostics, additional interventions, change of standard postoperative immobilization, weightbearing or allowed range of motion. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were included. Abnormalities on x-ray at 6 weeks postoperatively were found in only 10 (3.7%) patients of which only 4 (1.5%) had clinical implications (in three patients extra imaging was required and in one patient it was necessary to deviate from standard weightbearing/ROM limitation regime). The clinical/radiological findings during the 6-week outpatient visit led to a deviation from standard in only 8 (3.0%) patients. Notably, the majority of these patients experienced symptoms suggestive for complications. CONCLUSION: The routine 6-week outpatient visit and x-ray, after surgery for common upper extremity fractures, rarely has clinical consequences. It should be questioned whether these routine visits are necessary and whether a more selective approach should be considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV; Case Series; Prognosis Study.

Cement augmentation for proximal humerus fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies.

INTRODUCTION: It is unclear if elderly patients treated with plate osteosynthesis for proximal humerus fractures benefit from cement augmentation. This meta-analysis aims to compare cement augmentation to no augmentation regarding healing, complications, and functional results. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized clinical trials and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. The primary outcome is overall complication rate. Stratified analyses were performed for types of complication (implant-related or systemic). Secondary outcomes include re-interventions, hospital stay, operation time, functional scores, and general quality of life. RESULTS: Five observational studies and one randomized controlled trial with a total of 541 patients were included. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the augmented group (15.6% versus 25.4%, OR 0.54 (95%CI 0.33-0.87)). This was caused by a reduction of implant-related complications (10.4% vs. 19.9%, OR 0.49 (95%CI 0.28, 0.88)). No difference in humeral head necrosis was found. Data on re-intervention, hospital stay, and operation time was limited but did not show significant differences. No impact on functional scores and general quality of life was detected. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows that cement augmentation may reduce overall complications, mainly by preventing implant-related complications. No difference was detected regarding need for re-intervention, functional scores, general quality of life, and hospital stay. This is the first meta-analysis on this topic. It remains to be seen whether conclusions will hold when more and better-quality data becomes available.

Does plate position influence the outcome in midshaft clavicular fractures? A multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE: To date, it remains unclear whether superior or anterior plating is the best option for treating midshaft clavicular fractures. The aim of this study was to compare both techniques with regard to the incidence of implant removal due to implant irritation, risk of complications, time to union, and function. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all midshaft clavicular fractures treated operatively between 2017 and 2020 in two hospitals in Switzerland were analyzed. The participating hospitals differed with regard to their standard practice; one offered superior plating only, while the other predominantly employed an anterior plate. The primary outcome was the incidence of implant removal for irritation. Secondary outcomes were time to union, complications, re-interventions, and range of motion during the follow-up period of at least 6 months. RESULTS: In total, 168 patients were included in the study of which 81 (48%) received anterior plating and 87 (52%) superior plating. The overall mean age was 45 years (SD 16). There was no significant difference between anterior and superior plating with regard to implant removal (58.5% versus 57.1%, p = 0.887), infection (5.7% versus 1.8%, p = 0.071), and time to union (median 48 weeks versus 52 weeks, p = 0.643). Data on range of motion were available in 71 patients. There was no significant difference in anteflexion (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) and abduction (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This retrospective cohort study did not find sufficient evidence to recommend one implant position over the other for midshaft clavicular fractures with regard to removal due to irritation. Time to union was similar and Infections were equally rare in both groups. Notably, a considerable number of patients in both groups had their implants removed due to irritation. Larger prospective studies are needed to determine how much plate position contributes to the occurrence of irritation and whether other patient or implant-related factors might play a role. Until this is clarified, implant position should be based on surgeons preference and experience.

[Distal radius fracture-tactic and approach]. / Distale Radiusfrakturen ­ Taktik und Zugangswahl.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of surgical treatment is fracture healing with restored alignment, rotation, and joint surface. Stable fixation allows for functional postoperative aftercare. INDICATIONS: Displaced intra- and extra-articular fractures which either could not be adequately reduced or in which a secondary displacement is to expected due to instability criteria. The following factors are considered instability criteria: age > 60 years, female, initial dorsal displacement > 20°, dorsal comminution, radial shortening > 5 mm, palmar displacement. CONTRAINDICATIONS: The only absolute contraindication is if the patient is deemed unfit for surgery due to concerns regarding anesthesia. Old age is a relative contraindication, as it is currently debated whether older patients benefit from the operation. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: The surgical technique is guided by the fracture pattern. Palmar plating is most commonly performed. If the joint surface needs to be visualized, a dorsal approach (in combination with another approach or alone) or arthroscopically assisted fixation should be chosen. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: In general, a functional postoperative regime can be carried out after plate fixation with mobilization without weightbearing. Short-term splinting can provide pain relief. Concomitant ligamentous injuries and fixations, which are not stable enough for functional aftercare (such as k­wires) require a longer period of immobilization. RESULTS: Provided the fracture is reduced correctly, osteosynthesis improves functional outcome. The complication rate ranges between 9 and 15% with the most common complication being tendon irritation/rupture and plate removal. Whether surgical treatment holds the same benefits for patients > 65 years as for younger patients is currently under debate.

Intraoperative imaging in hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative fluoroscopy (IFC) is gaining popularity in total hip arthroplasty (THA), with the aim to achieve better component positioning and therefore eventually reduced revision rates. This meta-analysis investigated the benefit of IFC by comparing it to intraoperative assessment alone. The primary outcome was component positioning and the secondary outcomes included complications and revision rates. METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Effect estimates for radiographic cup position, offset/leg length difference and outliers from a safe zone were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as a weighted odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: A total of 10 observational studies involving 1,394 patients were included. No randomized trials were found. IFC showed no significant reduction in acetabular cup position (inclination and anteversion), offset, leg-length discrepancies, revision (none reported) or overall complication rates. CONCLUSION: The current meta-analysis found no differences in cup positioning, offset, leg length discrepancy, the incidence of complications or revision surgery. It should be acknowledged that the included studies were generally performed by experienced surgeons. The benefit of intraoperative fluoroscopy might become more evident at an early phase of the learning curve for this procedure. Therefore, its role has yet to be defined.

Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for clavicle fractures.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment of comminuted clavicle shaft fractures with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO). INDICATIONS: Multifragmentary (≥ 2 intermediate fragments) clavicle shaft fractures with no need for anatomical reduction (AO 15.2B and 15.2C). Even simple fractures (AO 15.2A) with significant soft tissue injuries Tscherne grade I-III are suitable. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Medial or lateral clavicle fractures as well as simple fracture pattern where anatomical reduction is indispensable. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Short incision over the medial and lateral end of the main fracture fragments. Either medial or lateral epiperosteal plate insertion. Under image intensifier guidance, the plate is centered either superior or anteroinferior on the clavicle and fixed with a compression wire temporarily (alternatively by a cortical screw) in one of the most lateral holes. Fracture reduction (axis, length, and rotation) over the plate and preliminary fixation medially. After correct reduction has been achieved, further cortical screws and/or locking head screws can be inserted (lag before locking screws). Relative stability is achieved by applying a bridging technique. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: No immobilization is needed. Patients are encouraged to perform functional rehabilitation with active and passive physical therapy. Loading is increased according to radiological signs of bony consolidation. RESULTS: In a retrospective evaluation from 2001-2021, 1128 clavicle osteosyntheses were performed, of which 908 (80.5%) were treated with plate osteosynthesis and 220 (19.5%) with titanium elastic nail (TEN). Of the 908 plate osteosyntheses, 43 (4.7%) were performed with the MIPO approach. Finally, 42 patients (35 men and 7 women; mean age of 44 ± 15 years) with 43 clavicle shaft fractures were analyzed. The operation was accomplished in 63 ± 28 min, and average fluoroscopy time was 45 ± 42 s. A collective of 27 patients could be evaluated after a median follow-up of 14 months (range 1-51 months). In all, 26 fractures healed in a timely manner. In 1 patient a pseudarthrosis occurred which was treated with re-osteosynthesis and cancellous bone grafting in an open technique. Another patient revealed a wound complication with need of operative wound revision 6 weeks after the index surgery. Further postoperative course was uneventful in both patients. All were pain-free and able to return to work. After an average of 17 ± 8 months, 18 hardware removals (66.7%) were performed.

Biomechanical analysis of helical versus straight plating of proximal third humeral shaft fractures.

BACKGROUND: Proximal humeral shaft fractures are surgically challenging and plate osteosynthesis with a long straight plate is one operative treatment option in these patients although endangering the radial nerve distally. Helical plates potentially avoid the radial nerve by twisting around the humeral shaft. Aim of the study was to investigate in a human cadaveric model the biomechanical competence of helical plates versus straight lateral plates used for fixation of proximal third comminuted humeral shaft fractures. METHODS: Eight pairs of humeral cadaveric humeri were instrumented using either a long 90°-helical plate (Group1) or a straight long PHILOS plate (Group2). An unstable proximal humeral shaft fracture was simulated by means of a 5 cm osteotomy gap. All specimens were tested under quasi-static loading in axial compression, internal and external rotation, and bending in four directions. Subsequently, progressively increasing cyclic loading in internal rotation until failure was applied and interfragmentary movements were monitored by motion tracking. RESULTS: During static testing flexion/extension deformation in Group1 was significantly higher, however, varus/valgus deformation as well as shear and torsional displacement under torsional load remained statistically indifferent between both groups. During cyclic testing shear and torsional displacements were both significantly higher in Group1 compared to Group 2. However, cycles to catastrophic failure remained statistically indifferent between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: From a biomechanical perspective, although 90°-helical plating is associated with higher initial stability against varus/valgus collapse and comparable endurance under dynamic loading, it demonstrates lower resistance to flexion/extension and internal rotation with bigger shear interfragmentary displacements versus straight lateral plating and, therefore, cannot be considered as its real alternative. Alternative helical plate designs should be investigated in the future.

Outcomes after fixation of rib fractures sustained during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A retrospective single center analysis.

Background: Historically rib fractures have been typically treated non-operatively. Recent studies showed promising results after osteosynthesis of rib fractures in trauma patients with flail segments or multiple rib fractures. However, there is a paucity of data on rib fixation after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This study evaluated the outcomes of patients who received rib fixation after CPR. Methods: Adult patients who received surgical fixation of rib fractures sustained during CPR between 2010 and 2020 were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective study. Outcome measures included complications, quality of life (EQ 5D 5L) and level of dyspnea. Results: Nineteen patients were included with a mean age of 66.8 years. The mean number of fractured ribs was ten, seven patients additionally had a sternum fracture. Pneumonia occurred in 15 patients (74%), of which 13 were diagnosed preoperatively and 2 post-operatively. Six patients developed a postoperative pneumothorax, none of which required revision surgery. One patient showed persistent flail chest after rib fixation and required additional fixation of a concomitant sternum fracture. One infection of the surgical site of sternal plate occurred, while no further surgery related complications were reported. Mean EQ-5D-5L was 0.908 and the average EQ VAS was 80. One patient reported persisting dyspnea. Conclusion: To date, this is the largest reported cohort of patients who received rib fixation for fractures sustained during CPR. No complications associated with rib fixation were reported whereas one infection after sternal fixation did occur. Current follow-up demonstrated a good long-term quality of life after fixation, warranting further studies on this topic. Deeper knowledge on this subject would be beneficial for a wide spectrum of physicians.

Primary Closure or Secondary Wound Healing of Pin Sites After External Fixator Removal: A Single-Center Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this single-center randomized controlled trial was to compare primary wound closure using a suture with secondary wound healing of pin sites after removal of temporary external fixation. METHODS: This noninferiority trial included all patients who were treated with a temporary external fixator on an upper or lower extremity at 1 institution. The primary outcome was pin-site infection. Secondary outcomes were measured at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks and included all other complications, time to pin-site wound healing (in weeks), the most satisfactory pin site as rated by the patient, the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The most proximal pin site was randomly allocated (1:1) to either primary closure or secondary wound healing, and the other pin sites were treated alternately. RESULTS: Seventy patients, providing 241 pin sites, were included between January 1, 2019, and March 1, 2020. A total of 123 pin sites were treated with primary closure and 118, with secondary wound healing. The median age was 55 years (interquartile range, 46 to 67 years), 44% were male, and the median duration of the external fixation was 6 days (interquartile range, 4 to 8 days). There were no pin-site infections in either group. Wound healing was significantly faster in the primary closure group (median of 2 versus 6 weeks, p = 0.013). The VSS and patient satisfaction showed no differences between groups. There was 1 case of fracture-related infection not related to any pin site. CONCLUSIONS: Primary closure of temporary external fixator pin sites did not result in higher infection rates compared with secondary wound healing, and pin sites healed significantly faster after primary closure. Primary closure should therefore be considered in patients treated with a temporary external fixator. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Treatment and outcome in combined scapula and rib fractures: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: The primary aim was to describe the population characteristics of patients with combined scapula and rib fractures and outcomes associated with different treatment strategies. METHODS: All adult (≥ 18 years) patients with concurrent ipsilateral scapula and rib fractures admitted to the study hospital between 1st January 2010 and 31st June 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 223 patients were admitted with concurrent ipsilateral rib and scapula fractures. A total of 160 patients (72%) were treated conservatively, 63 patients (28%) operatively. Among operatively treated patients, 32 (51%) underwent rib fixation (RF) only, 24 (38%) underwent scapula fixation (SF) only, and seven patients (11%) underwent combined fixation of scapula and ribs (SRF). In general, more severely injured patients were treated with more extensive surgery. RF patients had a median hospital length of stay of 16 days, the SF patients 11 days and SRF patients 18 days. There were no significant differences in complications (pneumonia, recurrent pneumothorax and revision surgery) between groups. CONCLUSION: Injury severity resulted in different treatment modalities. As a result, different patient characteristics between treatment groups were observed, which makes direct comparison between treatment modalities impossible. All treatment modalities seem feasible; however, the additional value of both rib and scapula fixation has yet to be proven in large multicentre studies.

Anatomical analysis of different helical plate designs for proximal humeral shaft fracture fixation.

OBJECTIVES: Helical plates are preferably used for proximal humeral shaft fracture fixation and potentially avoid radial nerve irritation. AIMS: Safety of applying four different long plate designs (straight, 45°-, 90°-helical and ALPS) with MIPO technique as well as assessment and comparison of their distances to adjacent anatomical structures. METHODS: MIPO was performed in 16 human cadaveric humeri using either a straight (group 1), a 45°-helical (group 2), a 90°-helical (group 3) plate, or an ALPS (group 4). Applying CT angiography, distances between brachial arteries and plates were evaluated. All specimens were dissected and distances to the axillary, radial and musculocutaneous nerve were evaluated. RESULTS: No specimens demonstrated injuries of the anatomical structures at risk after MIPO with all investigated plate designs. Closest overall distance (mean (range); mm) between each plate and the radial nerve was 1 (1-3) in group 1, 7 (2-11) in group 2, 14 (7-25) in group 3 and 6 (3-8) in group 4. It was significantly bigger in group 3 and significantly smaller in group 1 compared to all other groups, p < 0.001. Closest overall distance between each plate and the musculocutaneous nerve was 16 (8-28) in group 1, 11 (7-18) in group 2, 3 (2-4) in group 3 and 6 (3-8) in group 4. It was significantly bigger in group 1 and significantly smaller in group 3 compared to all other groups, p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: MIPO with 45°- and 90°-helical plates as well as with ALPS is safely feasible and demonstrates significantly bigger distances to the radial nerve compared to straight plates. However, the distances remain small and attention must be paid to the musculocutaneous nerve and the brachial artery when MIPO is applied using ALPS, 45°- and 90°-helical implants.

Clinical performance of the Femoral Neck System within 1 year in 125 patients with acute femoral neck fractures, a prospective observational case series.

INTRODUCTION: Osteosynthesis of femoral neck fractures (FNFs) is an important treatment option, especially for younger patients. We aimed to assess the rate of early implant-related complications in FNF osteosynthesis using the Femoral Neck System (FNS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed with displaced or nondisplaced FNFs were treated with FNS in this prospective, observational, multicenter investigation. Patients were followed up for minimally 3 months and up to 12 months if radiologic bone union and no pain was not achieved beforehand. Predefined treatment-related adverse events (AEs, defined as implant failure, loss of reduction, iatrogenic fractures, deep infection, and surgical revision), radiologic bone union, and patient-reported Harris hip score (HHS) and EQ-5D-5L index score were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-five patients were included in the study. Thirty-eight (30.4%) fractures were displaced (Garden III and IV), and 37 (29.6%) were vertical fractures (Pauwels type III). Predefined treatment-related AE rate at 3 months was 8 patients, 6.4% (95% CI, 2.8-12.2), and at 12 months, 11 patients, 8.8% (95% CI, 4.5-15.2). Cumulative incidences of bone union were 68% at 3 months, 90% at 6 months, and 98% at 12 months. The mean changes of HHS and EQ-5D-5L index score between preinjury and at 12 months were -7.5 (95% CI, [ - 21.1] to [6.2]) and - 0.03 (95% CI, [ - 0.21] to [0.15]), respectively; neither were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The current study on osteosynthesis of FNFs with the FNS resulted in treatment-related complication rates of 6.4% (95% CI, 2.8-12.2) at 3 months and 8.8% (95% CI, 4.5-15.2) at 12 months. On average, patients returned to preinjury function and quality of life. The current study may also indicate that the conventional wisdom of treating stable FNF in patients aged between 60 and 80 years with osteosynthesis may need to be reconsidered. REGISTRATION: The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number: NCT02422355).

Rib fractures in the elderly population: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Multiple rib fractures are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in elderly patients. There is growing interest in surgical stabilization in this subgroup of patients. This systematic review compares conservative treatment to surgical fixation in elderly patients (older than 60 years) with multiple rib fractures. The primary outcome is mortality. Secondary outcomes include hospital and intensive care length of stay (HLOS and ILOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV) and pneumonia rates. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for comparative studies reporting on conservative versus operative treatment for rib fractures in patients older than 60 years. Both observational studies and randomised clinical trials were considered. RESULTS: Five observational studies (n = 2583) were included. Mortality was lower in operatively treated patients compared to conservative treatment (4% vs. 8%). Pneumonia rate and DMV were similar (5/6% and 5.8/6.5 days) for either treatment modality. Overall ILOS and HLOS of stay were longer in operatively treated patients (6.5 ILOS and 12.7 HLOS vs. 2.7 ILOS and 6.5 ILOS). There were only minimal reports on perioperative complications. Notably, the median number of rib fractures (8.4 vs. 5) and the percentage of flail chest were higher in operatively treated patients (47% vs. 39%). CONCLUSION: It remains unknown to what extent conservative and operative treatment contribute individually to reducing morbidity and mortality in the elderly with multiple rib fractures. To date, the quality of evidence is rather low, thus well-performed comparative observational studies or randomised controlled trials considering all confounders are needed to determine whether operative treatment can improve a patient's outcome.

High Percentage of Complications and Re-Operations Following Dynamic Locking Plate Fixation with the Targon® FN for Intracapsular Proximal Femoral Fractures: An Analysis of Risk Factors.

The ideal surgical treatment of femoral neck fractures remains controversial. When treating these fractures with internal fixation, many fixation constructs exist. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and specific risk factors associated with complication and re-operation following fixation of intracapsular proximal femoral fractures using the Targon-FN system (B.Braun Melsungen AG). A secondary aim was to identify if lateral prominence of the implant relative to the lateral border of the vastus ridge was a specific risk factor for elective plate removal. Methodically, a retrospective case series was conducted of all consecutive adult patients treated at a single level 1 trauma center in Switzerland for an intracapsular proximal femoral fracture with the Targon-FN. Demographic data were collected. Patients with a follow-up of less than three months were excluded. Complications as well as plate position were recorded. Statistical analysis to identify specific risk factors for re-operation and complications was performed. In result, a total of 72 cases with intracapsular femoral neck fractures were treated with the Targon-FN locking plate system between 2010 and 2017. Thirty-four patients (47.2%) experienced one or more complications. The most common complication was mechanical irritation of the iliotibial band (ITB) (23.6%, n = 17). Complications included intraarticular screw perforation (6.9%, n = 5), avascular necrosis (5.6%, n = 4), non-union (5.6%, n = 4) among others. In total, 46 re-operations were required. Younger age, fracture displacement and time to postoperative weight bearing were identified as risk factors for re-operation. In conclusion, intracapsular femoral neck fractures treated with the Targon-FN system resulted in a high rate of post-operative complication and re-operation. Statistical analysis revealed patient age, fracture displacement, time to postoperative full weight bearing were risk factors for re-operation. The main limitation is the limited number of cases and a short follow-up of less than 12 months in a subgroup of our patients.

Low profile dual plating for mid-shaft clavicle fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of observational studies.

INTRODUCTION: Low profile dual plate fixation using two mini fragment plates (< 2.7 mm thickness) is a relatively new technique and alternative to single plating for treating midshaft clavicle fractures. To date, no meta-analysis has been performed comparing these two techniques. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials was performed comparing single plating to low profile dual plating for midshaft clavicle fractures. METHODS: PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing both treatments. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. The primary outcome is overall complication rate and re-intervention rate. Secondary outcomes include healing, operation duration and functional scores. RESULTS: Low profile dual plating has favourable outcomes regarding overall complication rate (8.1% vs. 22.5%, OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.7, I2 = 16%, p = 0.007) and re-intervention rate (6.1% vs. 16.1%, OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.9, I2 = 25%, p = 0.02). The largest contributing factor behind these differences was the high incidence of implant related complaints in the single plating group (4.7% vs. 11.6%, OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, I2 = 0%, p = 0.02). The use of low profile dual plating does not have a detrimental effect on healing with union being attained in 99% compared to 97.4% in the single plating group (OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.3-10.7, I = 0%, p = 0.5). Data on operating time and functional results is limited. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis shows that dual plating low profile plates for midshaft clavicle fractures is a safe procedure attaining the same union rates seen in patients treated with single plating. In addition, it seems to have a lower overall complication and re-intervention rate, mostly driven by the lower incidence of implant related complaints. Low profile dual plating, however, is a fairly new technique and should be further explored in respect to more differentiated endpoints to test whether these first findings are valid. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

The value of fibular fixation in patients with stabilized distal tibia fractures.

PURPOSE: There is currently no consensus regarding the need for fixation of concomitant fibula fractures in patients with surgically treated distal tibia fracture. Although studies have shown it to be beneficial for fractures involving the syndesmosis, it remains unclear for suprasyndesmotic fractures. This study evaluates what effect the fixation of such suprasyndesmotic fibula fractures had on patients who underwent fixation of distal tibia fractures. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all consecutive adult patients who received surgical treatment for an extra-articular or simple intraarticular distal tibia fracture between 2012 and 2020 and had a concomitant fibula fracture proximal to the syndesmosis. Two groups were formed depending on whether the fibula was stabilized. The need for revision surgery, the occurrence of complications, fracture healing, rotational and angular malalignment were evaluated for both groups. RESULTS: This study included 120 patients, of which 40 (33.3%) had operative treatment of the fibula fracture. Of those with stabilized fibula fractures, 28 (70%) were treated with a plate and 12 (30%) with a titanium elastic nail. The group of patients with surgically treated fibula fractures had significantly more angular malalignments (10% vs 1.2%, p = 0.042), while there was no difference regarding rotational malalignment or fracture healing. Further, infections of the fibular surgical site occurred in 15% of surgically treated patients leading to significantly more revision surgeries in this group (40% vs 20%, p = 0.03). All infections occurred when a plate was used. CONCLUSION: This study was unable to show any benefit from stabilizing concomitant, suprasyndesmotic fibula fractures in surgically treated distal tibia fractures. On the contrary, infection, revision surgery and angular malalignment were more frequent when the fibula was fixed. Therefore, such concomitant fibula fractures should not routinely be fixed and if stabilization is deemed necessary, the implant should be chosen carefully.

Routine X-Rays after the Osteosynthesis of Distal Radius and Ankle Fractures.

BACKGROUND: The utility of routine x-rays after the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures and ankle fractures is questionable. We performed a trial to determine whether such x-rays are justified in patients who have undergone standardized imaging with C-arm fluoroscopy during surgery. METHODS: Patients requiring surgery for a distal radius fracture or an ankle fracture were candidates for inclusion in this prospective, randomized, controlled, non-blinded trial. Standardized intraoperative images were obtained with C-arm fluoroscopy and stored at the end of the operation. The next day, patients in the control group underwent imaging with a standard postoperative x-ray, while those in the intervention group did not. The primary endpoint was a change in the treatment plan, defined as additional imaging or a second operation. The secondary endpoints included the range of motion, pain as rated on the Visual Analog Scale, and a functional outcome analysis (PRWE/FAOS). RESULTS: 316 patients were included in the trial (163 in the control group, 153 in the intervention group), of whom 202 (64%) had radius fractures and 114 (36%) had ankle fractures. The treatment plan changed in twelve patients (3.8%; four in the control group and eight in the intervention group), seven of whom (2.2%; three in the control group and four in the intervention group) underwent a second operation. The frequency of changes in the treatment plan and of reoperations was comparable in the two groups (p = 0.36). On follow-up at six weeks and one year, the results with respect to functional outcomes and pain were comparable. CONCLUSION: In this trial, routine postoperative x-rays after the osteosynthesis of distal radial fractures and ankle fractures did not improve the care of patients who had undergone standardized intraoperative imaging.

Inter-rater agreement in pPOSSUM scores of geriatric trauma patients: a prospective evaluation.

PURPOSE: Risk prediction models are widely used in the perioperative setting to identify high-risk patients who may benefit from additional care and to aid clinical decision-making. pPOSSUM is such a prediction model, however, little is known about the inter-rater agreement when scoring subjective parameters. This study assessed the inter-rater agreement between clinicians of different specialties and work-level when scoring 30 clinical case reports of geriatric hip fracture patients with pPOSSUM. METHODS: Eighteen clinicians of the department of Surgery (three specialists, four residents), Anaesthesiology (four specialists, two residents) and Emergency Medicine (three specialists, two residents) who were familiar with the pPOSSUM scoring system were asked to calculate the scores. The kappa statistic and the statistical method of Fleiss were used to analyse inter-rater agreement. RESULTS: The response rate was 100%. Among surgeons, Anaesthesiologists and Emergency department doctors (ED), the overall mean kappa values were 0.42, 0.08 and 0.20, respectively. Among surgery, anaesthesiology and ED residents the overall mean kappa values were 0.21, 0.33 and 0.37, respectively. Within the department of Surgery, Anaesthesiology and Emergency Medicine the overall mean kappa values were 0.23, 0.12 and 0.22, respectively. An overall mean kappa value of 0.19 was seen among all specialists. All residents had an overall mean kappa value of 0.21 and all clinicians had an overall mean kappa value of 0.21. CONCLUSION: The overall inter-rater agreement of clinicians and interdisciplinary agreement when scoring geriatric hip fracture patients with pPOSSUM was low and prone to subjectivity in our study. A higher work-experience level did not lead to better agreement. When pPOSSUM is calculated without clinical assessment by the same clinician, caution is advised to prevent over-reliance on the pPOSSUM risk prediction model. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.