Effects of Delayed Hip Fracture Surgery on Severely Ill Patients: Defining the Time to Medical Optimization.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple comorbidities often have delayed hip fracture surgery due to medical optimization. The goal of this study is to identify the allowable time for medical optimization in severely ill hip fracture patients. METHODS: The 2016-2019 NSQIP database was used to identify patients over age 60 with ASA classification scores 3 and 4 for severe and life-threatening systemic diseases. Patients were divided into immediate (<24 hours), early (24-48 hours), or late (>48 hours) groups based on time to surgery (TTS). Risk-adjusted multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to compare relationships between 30-day postoperative outcomes and TTS. RESULTS: 43,071 hip fracture cases were analyzed for the purposes of this study. Compared to patients who underwent surgery immediately, patients who had surgeries between 24 and 48 hours were associated with higher rates of pneumonia (OR 1.357, CI 1.194-1.542), UTIs (OR 1.155, CI 1.000-1.224), readmission (OR 1.136, CI 1.041-1.240), postoperative LOS beyond 6 days (OR 1.249, CI 1.165-1.340), and mortality (OR 1.205, CI 1.084-1.338). Patients with surgeries delayed beyond 48 hours were associated with higher rates of CVA (OR 1.542, CI 1.048-2.269), pneumonia (OR 1.886, CI 1.611-2.209), UTIs (OR 1.546, CI 1.283-1.861), readmission (OR 1.212, CI 1.074-1.366), postoperative LOS beyond 6 days (OR 1.829, CI 1.670-2.003), and mortality (OR 1.475, CI 1.286-1.693) compared to patients with immediate surgery. DISCUSSION: Severely ill patients with the hip fracture may have a 24-hour window for medical optimization. Hip fracture surgery performed beyond 48 hours is associated with higher complication rates and mortality among those who are severely ill. Further prospective studies are warranted to examine the effects of early surgical intervention among severely ill patients.

Comparison of Extramedullary and Intramedullary Implants for Stable Intertrochanteric Fractures: Have We Swung the Pendulum Too Far the Other Way?

INTRODUCTION: Although intramedullary implants are commonly used to treat stable intertrochanteric (IT) fractures, there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate their superiority over extramedullary implants in treating these fractures. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term outcomes (<30 days) between intramedullary and extramedullary implants in patients with closed nondisplaced stable IT fractures. METHODS: Patients with closed nondisplaced stable IT fractures were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database between 2016 and 2019. Patients who either underwent extramedullary implant or intramedullary implant fixation were selected for this analysis. Postoperative outcomes included transfusion, surgical complications (stroke, myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism, pneumonia, renal failure/insufficiency, surgical site infection, urinary tract infections, and sepsis), weight-bearing on postoperative day 1, discharge destination, place of residence at 30 days after the operation, days from operation to discharge, readmission related to the index procedure, any readmission, revision surgery, and mortality. RESULTS: Of the 3,244 cases identified for the study, 2,521 (77.7%) underwent intramedullary nailing (IMN). Based on adjusted multivariable analysis, surgical complications between the two intervention groups were not statistically significantly (odds ratio [OR] 1.142; confidence interval [CI], 0.838 to 1.558; P = 0.4). However, patients who underwent IMN were associated with higher rates of blood transfusions (OR, 1.35, CI, 1.042 to 1.748, P = 0.023), more likely discharged to a place other than home (OR, 1.372, CI, 1.106 to 1.700, P = 0.004), and more likely to get readmitted (OR, 1.783, CI, 1.157 to 2.75, P = 0.009). Patients treated with IMN were associated with lower postoperative length of stay (OR 0.982, CI 0.967 to 0.998, P = 0.030). DISCUSSION: Our study found that extramedullary implants were associated with lower transfusions rates, lower readmissions, and better patient disposition. We recommend surgeons to consider extramedullary implants when treating stable IT fractures, especially if the patient is anemic or at high risk for hospital readmission. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. Retrospective cohort study.