Expert Consensus for a Principle-based Classification for Treatment of Diaphyseal Pediatric Femur Fractures.

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies demonstrate considerable deviation from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of pediatric diaphyseal femur fractures (PDFFs). This study aimed to determine if expert-consensus can be reached on a principle-based classification to be applied broadly to a wide variety of PDFF scenarios and if outcomes correspond to adherence to the classification. METHODS: A 2-stage study was performed. First, a survey of experts using a principle-based approach to PDFF. We conducted a survey of 17 thought-leaders (criteria≥20 y' experience+authors of the seminal pediatric femur fracture studies) who were asked to classify 15 cases of PDFF using the principle-based classification for agreement. Next, we conducted a retrospective review of 289 consecutive PDFF treated (2011-2015) at a level 1 pediatric trauma center. For each case, we compared the actual treatment and proposed "ideal" principle-based classification. We then compared clinical results and outcome data points including the length of stay, physician visits, and hospital charge data. RESULTS: A substantial (κ=0.7) expert-agreement was noted for assigning treatment principles with near-perfect (κ=0.93) agreement on conservative versus surgical management. We obtained agreement on employing a flexible implant (κ=0.84) rigid fixation (κ=0.75) and damage control philosophy (κ=0.64). Suboptimal clinical results were noted in 43% of the undertreated patients (24/56), 18.8% of the adequately treated, and 14.3% of overtreated (P<0.01) patients. An increasing trend for the length of hospital stay and a number of clinic visits was noted as the treatment class increased (P<0.01). Charges were 4.2 times higher for an episode of operative versus nonoperative care (P<0.01). Rigid fixation (class 4) had significantly (P=0.01) higher total and material charges than flexible fixation (class 3). DISCUSSION: The proposed classification has a substantial agreement among thought-leaders. Clinical results demonstrated significantly more suboptimal results in undertreated fractures, compared with ideally treated or more invasively treated fractures. More invasive treatments led to increased burden to families and the system in terms of length of stay and hospital charges. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Reliability of International Classification of Disease-9 Versus International Classification of Disease-10 Coding for Proximal Femur Fractures at a Level 1 Trauma Center.

INTRODUCTION: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid services proposed that transitioning from the 9th to the 10th revision of the International Classification of Disease (ICD) would provide better data for research. This study sought to determine the reliability of ICD-10 compared with ICD-9 for proximal femur fractures. METHODS: Available imaging studies from 196 consecutively treated proximal femur fractures were retrospectively reviewed and assigned ICD codes by three physicians. Intercoder reliability (ICR) was calculated. Collectively, the physicians agreed on what should be the correct codes for each fracture, and this was compared with coding found in the medical and billing records. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in ICR for both ICD-9 and ICD-10 exact coding, which were both unreliable. Less specific coding improved ICR. ICD-9 general coding was better than ICD-10. Electronic medical record coding was unreliable. Billing codes were also unreliable, yet ICD-10 was better than ICD-9. DISCUSSION: ICD-9 and ICD-10 lack reliability in coding proximal femur fractures. ICD-10 results in data that are no more reliable than those found with ICD-9. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I diagnostic.

Is there any purpose in classifying subtrochanteric fractures? The reproducibility of four classification systems.

INTRODUCTION: Classification systems are used for communication, planning treatment options, predicting outcomes and research purposes. The majority of subtrochanteric fractures are now treated with intramedullary nails and therefore questioning the need for classification. OBJECTIVES: To assess the intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of the Seinsheimer, AO and Russell-Taylor (RT) classification systems and to assess a new simple system (MCG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MCG system was developed to alert the surgeon to potential hazards: type 1-subtrochanteric fracture (ST#) with intact trochanters, type 2-ST# involving greater trochanter (entry point for nailing difficult), and type 3-ST# involving lesser trochanter (most unstable). Thirty-two anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of subtrochanteric fractures were classified independently for each of the 4 classification systems by 4 observers on 2 separate occasions. RESULTS: The intra- and inter-observer variation was poor in all systems (highest Kappa 0.35). MCG had the best reproducibility followed by RT, then AO and Seinsheimer. The data were re-analysed to determine whether the findings were due to the presence of too many subgroups and whether the observers could more accurately identify important individual subclassifications: Seinsheimer 3a, AO31-A3.1, RT 1 or 2, RT a or b, and MCG3. The MCG3 had the narrowest ranges for intra- and inter-observer reproducibility. CONCLUSIONS: The classification systems analysed in this study have poor reproducibility and seem to be of little value in predicting the outcome of intramedullary nailing as all of the fractures achieved union. The MCG system may be of some use in alerting the surgeon to potential problems.

Mortality after periprosthetic fracture of the femur.

BACKGROUND: Management of periprosthetic femoral fractures is often complex, and few studies have documented its associated mortality. METHODS: We retrospectively identified from our trauma and surgical registries 106 patients who underwent surgery for a periprosthetic femoral fracture. We then identified a contemporaneous age and sex-matched control cohort of 309 patients who had a hip fracture (femoral neck or intertrochanteric) and 311 patients who underwent primary hip or knee replacement. Mortality at one year was identified with use of the Social Security database. RESULTS: Twelve (11%) of 106 patients died within one year following surgical treatment of a periprosthetic fracture. During the same follow-up period, fifty-one (16.5%) of 309 patients died following surgery for a hip fracture and nine (2.9%) of 311 patients died following primary joint replacement. The mortality rate after a periprosthetic femoral fracture was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) compared with that for matched patients who had undergone primary joint replacement, and it was similar to the mortality rate after a hip fracture. For periprosthetic fractures, a delay of greater than two days from admission to the time of surgery was associated with an increased mortality rate at one year (p < 0.0007). Forty-nine patients underwent revision arthroplasty for the treatment of a Vancouver type-B periprosthetic fracture, and six (12%) died. In contrast, twenty-four patients with a Vancouver type-B periprosthetic fracture were treated with open reduction and internal fixation and eight (33%) died. The difference was significant (p < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate within one year following surgical treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures is high and is similar to that after treatment for hip fractures. Because revision arthroplasty for the treatment of type-B periprosthetic fractures was associated with a one-year mortality rate that was significantly less than that after surgical treatment with open reduction and internal fixation, in instances when either treatment option is feasible, revision arthroplasty may be the preferred option.

[Further development of the diagnosis-related groups system--fact or fiction? Differentiation of case severities in patients with proximal femoral fractures 2003-2005]. / Weiterentwicklung im G-DRG-System -- Fact or Fiction? Differenzierung der Fallschwere bei Patienten mit proximaler Femurfraktur 2003 -- 2005.

BACKGROUND: The previous system of hospital financing based on the returns (consisting of payments received minus cost of patient treatment) is undergoing considerable changes on the basis of learning to apply the new Diagnosis-Related Groups (G-DRG) system which differentiates the financial returns according to the individual severity of each case. AIM OF THE STUDY: 1. What are the differences in cost and returns when applying the G-DRG systems 2003, 2004 and 2005 to well-defined groups of patients (for example, surgery of proximal femoral fractures)? 2. The influence exercised by secondary (supplementary) diagnosis on the grouping of the patients. 3. Has the G-DRG system been appropriately developed further in respect of improved differentiation according to severity of the cases and homogenisation of the patient groups? PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was based on comprehensive clinical data of 169 proximal femur fracture patients. We assessed the Case-Mix index, relative weights and returns, basic DRG, DRG, the number and weight of secondary diagnoses relevant for complexity and comorbidity levels (CCL), the summands of the CCL's and the resulting PCCL values (Patient Clinical Complexity Levels). The data were subjected to analysis of variance and graphically descriptive analysis. RESULTS: The effective Case Mix index decreases in the 2004 and 2005 systems compared to 2003. This is due to a significant drop in returns based on an unchanged rate of receipts of 3000 . The progressive development of the systems was partly associated with major changes in grouping without significant intra-group homogenisation or improved inter-group discrimination of indications. The differentiation process does not fully utilise the differentiation potential of the basic data. CONCLUSIONS: No definite improvement of the differentiation potential of the G-DRG systems seems to have been achieved by the 2004 and 2005 systems compared to 2003 using the data of the relevant group of patients with proximal femoral fractures. From 2005 onward the financial lumpsum receipts and returns will definitely affect hospital budgets. Hence, a substantial improvement of the the basis of calculation is imperative for 2005 as well as complete publication of the relevant data. It is indeed doubtful whether the extension of the convergence phase to 5 years presently under discussion would provide sufficient time for an adequate solution of the financial and system problems.

Assessment of the AO classification of intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur.

There are a number of classification systems for intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur, but none has been shown to be practical with satisfactory reproducibility and accurate predictive value. We have investigated the AO classification and evaluated intra- and interobserver accuracy and its value in predicting treatment and outcome. We found it to have very poor intra- and interobserver reliability and to be of limited predictive use for the outcome of treatment. A simplified system in which the subdivisions were allocated to one of three groups of undisplaced, displaced and basal fractures was found to be of value. We conclude that this is the only division which is appropriate for these fractures and that the AO system for intracapsular fractures is too complicated and should not be used.

Intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures in adolescents.

Twenty-two femoral shaft fractures in 20 patients aged 10-14 years with open physes treated with closed reamed intramedullary nailing were studied retrospectively. Follow-up averaged 26.7 months in 18 of 20 patients. Eleven additional patients with 11 femoral shaft fractures treated with casting and traction were included for comparison of hospitalization time, cost, and time to mobilization. All of the fractures treated with an intramedullary nail healed without malunion or leg length inequality, and there was no evidence of growth plate arrest. The patients treated with an intramedullary nail had statistically significant shorter hospitalizations and shorter times to mobilization, and treatment had an estimated cost of less than half of traction treatment. Results of this study suggest that closed intramedullary nailing of femur fractures in adolescents is an effective treatment option.