Predicting secondary surgery after operative fixation of olecranon fractures: a model using data from 800 patients.

BACKGROUND: High rates of secondary surgery after fixation of olecranon fractures have been reported. Identification of risk factors can aid surgeons to reduce complications leading to additional surgical procedures. METHODS: Olecranon fractures treated at seven hospitals from 2007 to 2017 were identified, and the radiographs were classified. Isolated, displaced olecranon fractures treated operatively with tension band wiring (TBW) or precontoured plate fixation (PF) were reviewed. Adjusted risk factors for secondary surgery were analyzed, and a multivariable predictive model for secondary surgery was built. RESULTS: After the initial review of 1259 olecranon fractures, 800 isolated, displaced olecranon fractures met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The distribution of two-part and multifragmented fractures was equal. TBW was used in 636 patients and PF in 164 patients. Multifragmentation was a significant variable influencing preference for PF. Secondary surgery was performed in 41% patients and symptomatic hardware removal was the most frequent primary indication. In both the TBW and PF group, the rates of major complications leading to secondary surgery were 13% (P = .96). The adjusted risk of secondary surgery was lower with increasing age (odds ratio by 10 years increments, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.80, P < .01). Compared with PF, TBW with transcortical K-wires (odds ratio, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-3.14; P < .01) and TBW with intramedullary K-wires (odds ratio, 4.32; 95% confidence interval, 2.16-8.86, P < .01) had significantly higher adjusted risk of secondary surgery. CONCLUSION: Surgeons preferred to use PF in younger patients and multifragmented fractures. Patients should be counseled that secondary surgery is common after surgical fixation of olecranon fractures. Symptomatic hardware removal was the most frequently reported reason for secondary surgery and more frequent after TBW. When using TBW, intramedullary K-wire positioning should be avoided. The rate of major complications leading to secondary surgery was similar in the TBW and PF groups. Overall, the risk of subsequent secondary surgery was higher in younger patients and patients treated with TBW.

Biomechanical comparison of tension band wiring and plate fixation with locking screws in transverse olecranon fractures.

BACKGROUND: Tension band wiring (TBW) is the standard method for treating transverse olecranon fractures, but high rates of complications and reoperations have been reported. Plate fixation (PF) with locking screws has been introduced as an alternative method that may retain the fracture reduction better with a higher load to failure. METHODS: Twenty paired cadaveric elbows were used. All soft tissues except for the triceps tendon were removed. A standardized transverse fracture was created, and each pair was allocated randomly to TBW or PF with locking screws. The triceps tendon was mounted to the materials testing machine with the elbow in 90° of flexion. Construct stiffness was compared 3 times. Then, the elbows underwent a chair lift-off test by loading the triceps tendon to 300 N for 500 cycles. Finally, a load-to-failure test was performed, and failure mechanism was recorded. RESULTS: The construct stiffness of PF was higher in the first of 3 measurements. No difference was observed in the cyclic test or in load to failure. Hardware failure was the failure mechanism in 8 of 10 TBW constructs, and all failures occurred directly under the twists of the metal wire. Hardware failure was the cause of failure in only 1 elbow in the PF group (P < .01). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in fracture displacement following fixation with TBW and PF with locking screws in transverse olecranon fractures. However, assessment of the mode of hardware failure identified the metal cerclage twist as the weakest link in the TBW construct.

Radiological and functional outcomes 2.7 years following conservatively treated completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

OBJECTIVES: It is unclear whether all completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures require primary surgical intervention. The aim of this study was to elucidate the radiological and clinical outcomes after conservative treatment, and to identify subgroups at risk of an inferior outcome. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Level II trauma center. PATIENTS: Between 2005 and 2008, 122 patients were conservatively treated for a completely displaced midshaft clavicle fracture of whom 92 were eligible for inclusion in this study. Of these, 59 completed the study after a median of 2.7 years after the fracture (min-max, 1.1-4.9). INTERVENTION: The patients received the standard treatment administered at our institution at the time: nonsurgically with a sling without physiotherapy. Patients with painful nonunions were subsequently offered surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: At follow-up, the patients' Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) and the Constant scores were evaluated. Radiographs were taken at follow-up and compared to those taken acutely. RESULTS: Nonunion was found in 9 of the 59 (15.3%) patients. Twenty-four (24%) patients reported a fair-to-poor DASH score (i.e. >20). Patients with fractures that were vertically displaced by more than 100% (one bone width) were significantly less satisfied than those with fractures vertically displaced at 100% (p = 0.04). Initial shortening of more than 15 mm was not associated with a worse outcome or nonunion. The odds ratio of developing a nonunion increased with age (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: By treating completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures conservatively with a sling and offering plate fixation for eventual painful nonunions, we found a 24% risk of a fair or poor clinical result with a DASH score over 20. A vertical displacement of more than 100 % between the main fragments on the initial radiograph was associated with an inferior clinical outcome in this study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

[Osteoarthritis]. / Artrose.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is among the most common causes of functional disability and severe pain, and the prevalence of arthritic symptoms among adults is more than 50%. The article discusses epidemiology, pathology and treatment options. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The review is based on a non-systematic search in PubMed and the authors' experience with treating this patient group. RESULTS: Osteoarthritis is a degenerative disease which leads to loss of joint functioning. Symptoms usually present in the hip, hands and knees. Women are affected more often than men and the prevalence increases with increasing age. Some families have an increased prevalence of osteoarthritis, but the genetic etiology is not clear. Mechanic conditions such as overweight and heavy physical work explain some of the pathogenesis, but non-mechanical factors are probably involved as well. Loss of weight is likely to have a preventive effect, and surgical correction of mechanic conditions such as hip dysplasia and varus deformity can prevent development of osteoarthritis. Treatment of symptomatic osteoarthritis includes educating the patient and continues with stretching, physical exercise, weight reduction, technical aids (supporting braces, walking sticks) and analgesics. Subsequent options are treatment with paracetamol, NSAIDs and possibly opiates and finally insertion of an artificial joint. Many patients with disabling osteoarthritis function much better and have markedly less pain with an artificial joint. INTERPRETATION: Current treatment options alleviate but do not cure arthritic symptoms; preventive actions should be instigated when possible. Treatment of osteoarthritis involves many medical specialties and treatment modalities.

The effect of middle-age body weight and physical activity on the risk of early revision hip arthroplasty: a cohort study of 1,535 individuals.

BACKGROUND: Overweight and a high level of physical activity are known risk factors for loosening of a total hip arthroplasty (THA) due to primary osteoarthritis. We wanted to investigate how these factors, together with age and sex, affect the risk of revision surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We matched data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register with information on risk factors collected at a cardiovascular screening. We identified 1,535 primary THAs in the screened cohort (930 cemented implants using well-documented cement). Of the participants included, 969 were female. Mean age at screening was 49 years, at primary THA 63 years, and 69 years at the end of follow-up. We used Cox regression analysis to estimate relative risks (RRs). Event was defined as implant revision due to aseptic loosening of cup, stem or both. Follow-up was time from primary THA to event or censoring. RESULTS: Men were at greater risk than women of loosening of the femoral stem (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-3.2). Both men and women with upper-quartile body weight were at increased risk of revision due to loosening of the stem (RR 2.5 and 2.7, respectively). Men with a high level of physical activity during leisure time were at increased risk of revision due to loosening of the cup (RR 4.8, 95% CI 1.3-18). In the multivariate model with adjustment for activity, there was little association between age at primary THA and risk of revision due to loosening. INTERPRETATION: We found that body weight and physical activity recorded long before THA affected the survival of total hip arthroplasties. Controlling for these variables weakened the association between age at primary surgery and aseptic loosening. Men had an increased risk of loosening of the femoral stem, also after controlling for lifestyle factors.