Nonoperative treatment of multiple rib fractures, the results to beat: International multicenter prospective cohort study among 845 patients.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment (i.e. nonoperative or operative) for patients with multiple rib fractures remains debated. Studies that compare treatments are rationalized by the alleged poor outcomes of nonoperative treatment. METHODS: The aim of this prospective international multicenter cohort study (between January 2018 and March 2021) with one-year follow-up, was to report contemporary outcomes of nonoperatively treated patients with multiple rib fractures. Including 845 patients with three or more rib fractures. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (HLOS), (pulmonary) complications, and quality of life. RESULTS: Mean age was 57.7 ± 17.0 years, median Injury Severity Score was 17 (13-22) and the median number of rib fractures was 6 (4-8). In-hospital mortality rate was 1.5% (n = 13), 112 (13.3%) patients had pneumonia and four (0.5%) patients developed a symptomatic non-union. The median HLOS was 7 (4-13) days, and median intensive care unit length of stay was 2 (1-5) days. Mean EQ-5D-5L index value was 0.83 ± 0.18 one year after trauma. Polytrauma patients had a median HLOS of 10 (6-18) days, a pneumonia rate of 17.6% (n = 77) and mortality rate of 1.7% (n = 7). Elderly patients (≥65 years) had a median HLOS of 9 (5-15) days, a pneumonia rate of 19.7% (n = 57) and mortality rate of 4.1% (n = 12). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, nonoperative treatment of patients with multiple rib fractures shows low mortality and morbidity rate and good quality of life after one year. Future studies evaluating the benefit of operative stabilisation should use contemporary outcomes to establish the therapeutic margin of rib fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Therapeutic/Care Management.

In patients with combined clavicle and multiple rib fractures, does fracture fixation of the clavicle improve clinical outcomes? A multicenter prospective cohort study of 232 patients.

BACKGROUND: Clavicle and rib fractures are often sustained concomitantly. The combination of injuries may result in decreased stability of the chest wall, making these patients prone to (respiratory) complications and prolonged hospitalization. This study aimed to assess whether adding chest wall stability by performing clavicle fixation improves clinical outcomes in patients with concurrent clavicle and rib fractures. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study was performed including all adult patients admitted between January 2018 and March 2021 with concurrent ipsilateral clavicle and rib fractures. Patients treated operatively versus nonoperatively for their clavicle fracture were matched using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (HLOS). Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, pain, complications, and quality of life at 6 weeks and 12 months of follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 232 patients with concomitant ipsilateral clavicle and rib fractures were included. Fifty-two patients (22%) underwent operative treatment of which 39 could be adequately matched to 39 nonoperatively treated patients. No association was observed between clavicle plate fixation and HLOS (mean difference, 2.3 days; 95% confidence interval, -2.1 to 6.8; p = 0.301) or any secondary endpoint. Eight of the 180 nonoperatively treated patients (4%) had a symptomatic nonunion, for which 5 underwent secondary clavicle fixation. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that, in patients with combined clavicle and multiple rib fractures, plate fixation of the clavicle reduces HLOS, pain, or (pulmonary) complications, nor that it improves quality of life. STUDY TYPE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Quality of life and clinical outcomes of operatively treated patients with flail chest injuries: A multicentre prospective cohort study.

Introduction: Most studies about rib fractures focus on mortality and morbidity. Literature is scarce on long term and quality of life (QoL) outcomes. Therefore, we report QoL and long-term outcomes after rib fixation in flail chest patients. Methods: A prospective cohort study of clinical flail chest patients admitted to six level 1 trauma centres in the Netherlands and Switzerland between January 2018 and March 2021. Outcomes included in-hospital outcomes and long-term outcomes, such as QoL measurements 12 months after hospitalization using the EuroQoL five dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Results: Sixty-one operatively treated flail chest patients were included. Median hospital length of stay was 15 days and intensive care length of stay was 8 days. Sixteen (26%) patients developed pneumonia and two (3%) died. One year after hospitalization the mean EQ5D score was 0.78. Complication rates were low and included hemothorax (6%) pleural effusion (5%) and two revisions of the implant (3%). Implant related irritation was commonly reported by patients (n = 15, 25%). Conclusions: Rib fixation for flail chest injuries can be considered a safe procedure and with low mortality rates. Future studies should focus on quality of life rather than solely short-term outcomes.Trial registration: Registered in the Netherlands Trial Register NTR6833 on 13/11/2017 and the Swiss Ethics Committees Registration Number 2019-00668.

Non-operative vs. operative treatment for multiple rib fractures after blunt thoracic trauma: a multicenter prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple rib fractures without a clinical flail chest are increasingly being treated with rib fixation; however, high-quality evidence to support this development is lacking. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicenter observational study comparing rib fixation to non-operative treatment in all patients aged 18 years and older with computed tomography confirmed multiple rib fractures without a clinical flail chest. Three centers performed rib fixation as standard of care. For adequate comparison, the other three centers performed only non-operative treatment. As such clinical equipoise formed the basis for the comparison in this study. Patients were matched using propensity score matching. RESULTS: In total 927 patients with multiple rib fractures were included. In the three hospitals that performed rib fixation, 80 (14%) out of 591 patients underwent rib fixation. From the nonoperative centers, on average 71 patients were adequately matched to 71 rib fixation patients after propensity score matching. Rib fixation was associated with an increase in hospital length of stay (HLOS) of 4.9 days (95%CI 0.8-9.1, p = 0.02) and a decrease in quality of life (QoL) measured by the EQ5D questionnaire at 1 year of 0.1 (95% CI - 0.2-0.0, p = 0.035) compared to non-operative treatment. A subgroup analysis of patients who received operative care within 72 h showed a similar decrease in QoL. Up to 22 patients (28%) who underwent surgery experienced implant-related irritation. CONCLUSIONS: We found no benefits and only detrimental effects associated with rib fixation. Based on these results, we do not recommend rib fixation as the standard of care for patients with multiple rib fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in the Netherlands Trial Register NTR6833 on 13/11/2017.

Factors Affecting Hospital Length of Stay in Geriatric Patients With a Surgically Treated Fragility Ankle Fracture.

Fragility ankle fractures in elderly have a rising incidence and hospitalization may be prolonged due to pre-existing comorbidities, compromised soft tissue and postoperative difficulties in the rehabilitation process. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate risk factors for longer total hospitalization duration in elderly patients with surgically treated fragility (Lauge Hansen supination external rotation type 4) fractures. We included all patients ≥ 70 years with a fragility fracture, who were treated surgically between 2011 and 2019 (n = 97) in a level 1 and 2 trauma center. Data on patient demographics, fracture characteristics, surgical treatment strategies and postoperative complications were retrieved from medical records. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for longer hospitalization duration. The mean age of the included patients was 78.27 (± 6.56) years; 71 patients (73.20%) were female. Ten fractures (10.30%) were classified as open and 49 (50.50%) as a luxation type fracture. Fifty-nine patients (60.80%) were hospitalized after admission to the emergency department. External fixation was performed in 34 patients (35.10%) and served as bridge to definitive fixation in 29 patients (85.30%). The mean total hospital length of stay of all patients was 7.04 (± 6.58) days. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that the use of external fixation (p < .001) and the postoperative discharge destination (p < .001) were independently associated with a prolonged hospital stay. External fixation and discharge destination were independent risk factors for a prolonged hospital stay in elderly patients with a fragility fracture.

The Value of Additional Gravity Stress Radiographs for Decision Making in the Treatment of Isolated Type B Distal Fibular Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Prior to treatment decisions concerning isolated Weber type B ankle fractures, assessment of the stability of the ankle joint is mandatory. The gravity stress (GS) radiograph is a radiographic tool to determine stability. We hypothesized that this additional GS radiograph would lead to fewer operative treatments by applying the criterion of operative treatment when medial clear space (MCS) > superior clear space (SCS) + 2 mm on the GS radiograph, compared with the nonstressed mortise view criteria of advising operative treatment in case of MCS > SCS + 1 mm. METHODS: This retrospective comparative cohort study analyzed 343 patients aged between 18 and 70 years with an isolated Weber type B ankle fracture diagnosed at the emergency department between January 2014 and December 2019. The cohort was divided into 2 groups based on whether an additional GS radiograph was performed. Group I consisted of 151 patients in whom a regular mortise and lateral radiograph were performed. Group II comprised 192 patients, with an additional GS radiograph. Primary outcome was type of treatment (conservative vs operative). Secondary outcomes were patient-reported functional outcomes and pain. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of both groups did not differ. In group I, surgery was performed in 60 patients (39.7%) compared with 108 patients (56.3%) in group II (P = .002). In the operatively treated patients, the mean MCS on regular mortise view was significantly smaller in patients in whom an additional GS radiograph was performed compared to patients without an additional GS radiograph (4.1 mm vs 5.2 mm, P < .001). Mean Olerud-Molander Ankle Score and mean visual analog scale (VAS) for pain did not differ significantly between groups I and II. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to what was hypothesized, the introduction of an additional gravity stress radiograph, by which operative treatment was indicated if the MCS was wider than the SCS + 2 mm, did not result in reduced operative treatment of Weber type B ankle fractures when operative treatment was indicated for MCS > SCS + 1 mm on non-gravity stress radiographs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III: retrospective comparative study.

Operative vs. nonoperative treatment for Mason type 2 radial head fractures: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment of isolated displaced partial articular radial head fractures remains controversial. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the functional outcome of operative treatment with nonoperative treatment in adults with an isolated Mason type 2 radial head fractures. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients from 18 years of age with an isolated partial articular fracture of the radial head were randomly assigned to operative treatment by means of open reduction and screw fixation or nonoperative treatment with a pressure bandage. The primary outcome was function assessed with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Questionnaires and clinical follow-up was conducted at admission and at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 45 patients were randomized, 23 patients to open reduction and screw fixation and 22 patients to nonoperative treatment with a pressure bandage. At 3, 6, and 12 months, patients treated operatively had similar functional outcomes compared to patients treated nonoperatively (DASH score at 12 months: 0.0 [0.0-4.2] vs. 1.7 [0.0-8.5]; P = .076). CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperatively treated adults with an isolated Mason type 2 radial head fracture have similar functional results after 1 year compared with operatively treated patients. In addition, complication rates were low for both operative and nonoperative treatment.

Routine Follow-Up Radiographs for Ankle Fractures Seldom Add Value to Clinical Decision-Making: A Retrospective, Observational Study.

Currently, the routine use of radiographs for uncomplicated ankle fractures represents good clinical practice. However, radiographs are associated with waiting time, radiation exposure, and costs. Studies have suggested that radiographs seldom alter the treatment strategy if no clinical indication for the imaging study was present. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effect of routine radiographs on the treatment strategy during the follow-up period of ankle fractures. All patients aged ≥18 years, who had visited 1 of the participating clinics with an eligible ankle fracture in 2012 and with complete follow-up data were included. The data were retrospectively analyzed. The sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and the number of, and indications for, the radiographs taken were collected from the medical records of the participating clinics. We assessed the changes in treatment strategy according to the radiographic findings. In 528 patients with an ankle fracture, 1174 radiographs were performed during the follow-up period. Of these radiographs, 936 (79.7%) were considered routine. Of the routine radiographs taken during the follow-up period, only 11 (1.2 %) resulted in changes to the treatment strategy. Although it is common practice to take radiographs routinely during the follow-up period for ankle fractures, the results from the present study suggest that routine radiographs seldom alter the treatment strategy. This limited clinical relevance should be weighed against the health care costs and radiation exposure associated with the use of routine radiographs. For a definitive recommendation, however, the results of our study should be confirmed by a prospective trial, which we are currently conducting.

Effect of Antibiotic Prophylaxis on Surgical Site Infections Following Removal of Orthopedic Implants Used for Treatment of Foot, Ankle, and Lower Leg Fractures: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Following clean (class I, not contaminated) surgical procedures, the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) should be less than approximately 2%. However, an infection rate of 12.2% has been reported following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single dose of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on the incidence of SSIs following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial including 500 patients aged 18 to 75 years with previous surgical treatment for fractures below the knee who were undergoing removal of orthopedic implants from 19 hospitals (17 teaching and 2 academic) in the Netherlands (November 2014-September 2016), with a follow-up of 6 months (final follow-up, March 28, 2017). Exclusion criteria were an active infection or fistula, antibiotic treatment, reimplantation of osteosynthesis material in the same session, allergy for cephalosporins, known kidney disease, immunosuppressant use, or pregnancy. Interventions: A single preoperative intravenous dose of 1000 mg of cefazolin (cefazolin group, n = 228) or sodium chloride (0.9%; saline group, n = 242). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was SSI within 30 days as measured by the criteria from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondary outcome measures were functional outcome, health-related quality of life, and patient satisfaction. Results: Among 477 randomized patients (mean age, 44 years [SD, 15]; women, 274 [57%]; median time from orthopedic implant placement, 11 months [interquartile range, 7-16]), 470 patients completed the study. Sixty-six patients developed an SSI (14.0%): 30 patients (13.2%) in the cefazolin group vs 36 in the saline group (14.9%) (absolute risk difference, -1.7 [95% CI, -8.0 to 4.6], P = .60). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing surgery for removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee, a single preoperative dose of intravenous cefazolin compared with saline did not reduce the risk of surgical site infection within 30 days following implant removal. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02225821.

Amputation: Not a failure for severe lower extremity combat injury.

INTRODUCTION: The use of improvised explosive devices is a frequent method of insurgents to inflict harm on deployed military personnel. Consequently, lower extremity injuries make up the majority of combat related trauma. The wounding pattern of an explosion is not often encountered in a civilian population and can lead to substantial disability. It is therefore important to study the impact of these lower extremity injuries and their treatment (limb salvage versus amputation) on functional outcome and quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All Dutch repatriated service members receiving treatment for wounds on the lower extremity sustained in the Afghan theater between august 2005 and August 2014, were invited to participate in this observational cohort study. We conducted a survey regarding their physical and mental health using the Short Form health survey 36, EuroQoL 6 dimensions and Lower Extremity Functional Scale questionnaires. Results were collated in a specifically designed electronic database combined with epidemiology and hospital statistics gathered from the archive of the Central Military Hospital. Statistical analyses were performed to identify differences between combat and non-combat related injuries and between limb salvage treatment and amputation. RESULTS: In comparison with non-battle injury patients, battle casualties were significantly younger of age, sustained more severe injuries, needed more frequent operations and clinical rehabilitation. Their long-term outcome scores in areas concerning well-being, social and cognitive functioning, were significantly lower. Regarding treatment, amputees experienced higher physical well-being and less pain compared to those treated with limb salvage surgery. CONCLUSION: Sustaining a combat injury to the lower extremity can lead to partial or permanent dysfunction. However, wounded service members, amputees included, are able to achieve high levels of activity and participation in society, proving a remarkable resilience. These long-term results demonstrate that amputation is not a failure for casualty and surgeon, and strengthen a life before limb (damage control surgery) mindset in the initial phase. For future research, we recommend the use of adequate coding and injury scoring systems to predict outcome and give insight in the attributes that are supportive for the resilience that is needed to cope with a serious battle injury.

Wound Infections Following Implant removal below the knee: the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis; the WIFI-trial, a multi-centre randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands about 18,000 procedures with implant removal are performed annually following open or closed reduction and fixation of fractures, of which 30-80% concern the foot, ankle and lower leg region. For clean surgical procedures, the rate of postoperative wound infections (POWI) should be less than ~2%. However, rates of 10-12% following implant removal have been reported, specifically after foot, ankle and lower leg fractures. Currently, surgeons individually decide if antibiotics prophylaxis is given, since no guideline exists. This leads to undesirable practice variation. The aim of the study is to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of a single intravenous gift of Cefazolin prior to implant removal following surgical fixation of foot, ankle and/or lower leg fractures. METHODS: This is a double-blind randomized controlled trial in patients scheduled for implant removal following a foot, ankle or lower leg fracture. Primary outcome is a POWI within 30 days after implant removal. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, functional outcome and costs at 30 days and 6 months after implant removal. With 2 x 250 patients a decrease in POWI rate from 10% to 3.3% (expected rate in clean-contaminated elective orthopaedic trauma procedures) can be detected (Power = 80%, 2-sided alpha = 5%, including 15% lost to follow up). DISCUSSION: If administration of prophylactic antibiotics prior to implant removal reduces the infectious complication rate, this will offer a strong argument to adopt this as standard practice of care. This will consequently lead to less physical and social disabilities and health care use. A preliminary, conservative estimation suggests yearly cost savings in the Netherlands of € 3.5 million per year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02225821 ) and the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR4393 ) and was granted permission by the Medical Ethical Review Committee of the Academic Medical Centre on October 7 2014.

Weight bearing or non-weight bearing after surgically fixed ankle fractures, the WOW! Study: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal post-operative care regimen after surgically fixed Lauge Hansen supination exorotation injuries remains to be established. This study compares whether unprotected weight bearing as tolerated is superior to protected weight bearing and unprotected non-weight bearing in terms of functional outcome and safety. METHODS/DESIGN: The WOW! Study is a prospective multicenter clinical trial. Patients between 18 and 65 years of age with a Lauge Hansen supination exorotation type 2, 3 or 4 ankle fractures requiring surgical treatment are eligible for inclusion. An expert panel validates the classification and inclusion eligibility. After surgery, patients are randomized to either the 1) unprotected non-weight-bearing, 2) protected weight-bearing, or 3) unprotected weight-bearing group. The primary outcome measure is ankle-specific disability measured by the Olerud-Molander ankle score. Secondary outcomes are 1) quality of life (e.g., return to work and resumption of sport), 2) complications, 3) range of motion, 4) calf wasting, and 5) maximum pressure load after 3 months and 1 year. DISCUSSION: This trial is designed to compare the effectiveness and safety of unprotected weight bearing with two commonly used post-operative treatment regimens after internal fixation of specified, intrinsically stable but displaced ankle fractures. An expert panel has been established to evaluate every potential subject, which ensures that every patient is strictly screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and that there is a clear indication for surgical fixation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The WOW! Study is registered in the Dutch Trial Register ( NTR3727 ). Date of registration: 28-11-2012.