A comparison of six outcome measures across the recovery period after distal radius fixation-Which to use and when?

PURPOSE: Many standardized outcome measures exist to measure recovery after surgical fixation of distal radius fractures, however, choosing the optimal instrument is difficult. We evaluated responsiveness, ceiling/floor effects, and criterion validity over multiple time intervals across a 2-year follow-up period for six commonly used instruments. METHODS: A total of 259 patients who received open reduction and internal fixation for distal radius fractures between 2012 and 2015 were recruited. Patients were administered the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), Shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), Green and O'Brien score (Cooney modification) (CGNO), Gartland and Werley score (Sarmiento modification) (SGNW), flexion-extension arc (FEArc), and grip fraction test (GripFrac) at 1.5, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Responsiveness was evaluated by calculating standardized response means (SRM) and Cohen's d effect sizes (ES), and by correlating each instrument's change scores against those of QuickDASH and PRWE, which were also used as external comparators to assess criterion validity. Ceiling/floor effects were calculated for all measures at each time point. RESULTS: SRM (1.5-24 months) were 1.81, 1.77, 1.43, 1.16, 2.23, 2.45 and ES (1.5-24 months) were 1.81, 1.82, 1.95, 1.31, 1.99 and 2.90 for QuickDASH, PRWE, CGNO, SGNW, FEArc, and GripFrac respectively. Spearman correlation coefficients against QuickDASH at 24 months were: 0.809, 0.248, 0.563, 0.285, and 0.318 for PRWE, CGNO, SGNW, FEArc, and GripFrac respectively. Significant (>15% of patients reaching maximum score) ceiling effects were observed before 6 months for PRWE and SGNW. CONCLUSIONS: Our evidence supports the use of QuickDASH, PRWE, FEArc and GripFrac up to 6 months postsurgery, and QuickDASH and PRWE after 6 months. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Calcaneal fracture: results of earlier rehabilitation after open reduction and internal fixation.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to analyze the clinical and radiological outcomes of early weight-bearing and rehabilitation after open reduction and internal fixation (OR/IF) of calcaneal fracture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted on 78 patients with unilateral calcaneal fracture who underwent OR/IF. A mean follow-up period was 45.8 months (range 12-135). Two weeks after surgery, the range of motion (ROM) exercise was started, brace or heel off shoe was applied, and forefoot weight-bearing was allowed. Four weeks after surgery, tolerable weight-bearing ambulation without crutch was allowed. When the patient was not walking, the braces were removed to perform peritalar ROM exercises. Radiologic evaluation was performed by measuring the Böhler angle and incongruency of the subtalar joint surface. Paley grade was used to assess traumatic arthritis. Clinical evaluation was performed by measuring the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS) and ankle ROM. RESULTS: The mean postoperative Böhler angle was 31.7° (P < 0.001) at 2 weeks, 31.2° at 3 months, and 30.1° at the last (P = 0.4). The average Paley grade of the subtalar OA was 1.12. CT imaging revealed that the average step-off of the subtalar joint was 1.26 mm in coronal and 0.84 mm in sagittal. The average ROM results were as follows (contralateral, affected side): there was no significant difference in dorsiflexion [16.9° vs. 16° (P = 0.6)], whereas plantarflexion and inversion were significantly decreased [39.5° vs. 35.3° (P = 0.049) and 50.5° vs. 34.8° (P = 0.04)]. The average FAOS score was 86.1 points, and the highest score was "function" (mean 92.5 points). CONCLUSIONS: Earlier rehabilitation after OR/IF is recommended for the treatment of calcaneal fracture.

Better functional outcomes for ORIF in tibial eminence fracture treatment: a national comparative multicentric study of ORIF vs ARIF.

PURPOSE: Tibial eminence fractures can occur in adults and are equivalent to an acute ACL rupture. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the therapeutic outcomes of ARIF versus ORIF in tibial eminence fractures. Our hypothesis was that ARIF does not offer better results. METHODS: A retrospective national multicentric study was conducted in five university hospitals between 2010 and 2015. A total of 65 consecutive patients were included. 33 patients were treated with ARIF and 32 with ORIF. Clinical functional outcomes were assessed using the Lysholm score and IKDC score. Radiographic findings were recorded, and a statistical analysis carried out. RESULTS: IKDC score at the mean last follow-up of 68.8 ± 11.8 months was significantly higher in the ORIF group with a mean difference of 20.2 points ± 8.9 (p = 0.028). There were early osteoarthritis findings in 12 patients (18.4%). At last follow-up, 7 patients (10.7%) presented complications. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective multicentric study, better functional outcomes were observed in the ORIF group. This difference needs to be carefully interpreted as many confounding factors exist. In terms of complications, the results for both ORIF and ARIF are similar at midterm follow-up. ORIF should remain gold standard for tibial eminence fracture treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Management of pediatric tibial tubercle fractures: Is surgical treatment really necessary?

Fractures of the anterior tibial tubercle are infrequent lesions. They often occur in male adolescent athletes, usually in relation with sports involving powerful jumps. We present a retrospective study of 10 patients, with an average age of 15.1 years, all of them males, and a total of 11 acute avulsions of the anterior tibial tubercle. We analyzed the etiology of the lesion, the type of treatment used as well as non-weight bearing period, protected immobilization period, and time until sports reincorporation. We obtained 11 acute avulsions: one case of type I; three cases of type II; four cases of type III; and three cases of type IV. Five cases were treated conservatively, including the three cases of type IV, and surgery was only performed in six cases since an anatomical reduction was not obtained with closed reduction. The results were satisfactory in all cases, with 100% percentage of sport reincorporation in less de 25 weeks. We registered only one complication, intolerance of material, which did not require additional surgeries. These fractures, although rare, have an excellent prognosis. Even if they are often treated surgically, we have obtained good results with the conservative treatment in patterns previously reported as surgical.

A Comparison of the Effect of One, Three, or Six Weeks of Immobilization on Function and Pain After Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Distal Radial Fractures in Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimum period of immobilization following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radial fractures has not been established. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-three adults with a distal radial fracture treated with ORIF (using a volar locked plate) were randomly allocated, with stratification according to age, to 1, 3, or 6 weeks of postoperative immobilization in a parallel-design, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT). After cast removal, a standardized education and exercise program was followed for 6 weeks. Primary outcomes were function (according to the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation [PRWE]), worst (visual analog scale [VAS]-W) and usual (VAS-U) pain in the past week, and active wrist extension and forearm supination range of motion. All measures were recorded at 6, 12, and 26 weeks following surgery. Secondary outcomes were wrist flexion, radial deviation, ulnar deviation, and forearm pronation active range of motion; function (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH]); grip strength; postoperative adverse events; return to work and/or usual daily activities; and compliance with the home exercise program. RESULTS: More than 90% of the participants received treatment as allocated, and 87% completed the 6-month follow-up. At 6 weeks, both the 1-week and 3-week groups had significantly better PRWE scores, wrist extension, and flexion active range of motion than the 6-week group. However, no treatment group was superior to another with respect to primary or secondary outcomes at 12 weeks or 6 months following surgery. Analyses considering only the main effect of the intervention group indicated a preference for the 3-week group, which performed significantly better than the 6-week group with respect to the PRWE, pain (VAS-W and VAS-U), wrist flexion, ulnar deviation, forearm pronation active range of motion, and DASH score. CONCLUSIONS: For patient function, range of motion, and pain, this investigation demonstrated that immobilization periods of 1 and 3 weeks produced superior short-term outcomes compared with those after 6 weeks of immobilization. These differences were not evident at 3 and 6 months following surgery, with the immobilization period having no significant effect on long-term function, range of motion, or pain. There were no significant differences in adverse events associated with shorter immobilization periods. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[Intramedullary nailing in diaphyseal clavicle fractures using minimally invasive percutaneous reduction]. / Die intramedulläre Nagelung der diaphysären Klavikulafraktur in minimal-invasiver Repositionstechnik.

OBJECTIVE: Closed reduction and intramedullary nailing is common in diaphyseal clavicle fractures. The aim of this report is to demonstrate a surgical method with minimally invasive percutaneous reduction in cases where closed reduction fails. The procedure is associated with good cosmetic results. INDICATIONS: Percutaneous reduction using two reduction forceps enables intramedullary nailing without an open procedure. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Open, multifragmented or non-dislocated fractures, oblique fractures due to postoperative dislocation or shortening risk, fracture having potential to become compound fractures, neurovascular complications, pseudoarthroses. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: The patient is in beach-chair position. After an incision, the nail is entered from medial, two reduction forceps are mounted percutaneously at the lateral and medial fragment. After reduction the nail is pushed forward into the lateral fragment. Thereby, the fracture hematoma is not disturbed for the most part. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Early functional rehabilitation with maximal abduction and anteversion of 90° for 6 weeks. RESULTS: Anatomic reduction can be achieved with mild cosmetic impairment.

[Principles of management of periprosthetic fractures]. / Prinzipien des Managements periprothetischer Frakturen.

BACKGROUND: The increasing numbers of primary total hip and knee replacements have subsequently led to growing rates of periprosthetic fractures. In many cases geriatric patients with osteopenia or osteoporotic bone quality are affected. The goal of treatment is the retention or reconstruction of joint function using open reduction and internal fixation or a revision prosthesis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is a description of the basic principles of treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the lower extremities. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An exact description of the fracture using current classification systems with imaging diagnostics is mandatory. This also includes an assessment of the stability of the prosthesis. In the case of a stable prosthesis and a good bone stock open reduction and internal fixation should be performed. In these cases locking plates are standard procedure. If fracture reduction is possible minimally invasive procedures can be performed which help to reduce the surgical trauma and accelerate rehabilitation. If the prosthesis is loose it has to be exchanged for a revision implant. If vast bony defects result they can be augmented using wedges. Conservative treatment plays only a subordinate role in selected cases. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Periprosthetic fractures show an increasing incidence and occur more frequently in the geriatric patient population. Due to comorbidities and poor bone quality surgical treatment is a challenge. The fracture must be exactly classified using the appropriate classification system in order to clarify if the prosthesis can be retained or if it has to be exchanged.