Short-Term Patient Outcomes after Placement of an Internal Joint Stabilizer for Terrible Triad Injuries: A Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the functional and patient-reported outcomes after the use of the internal joint stabilizer (IJS) for unstable terrible triad injuries. Specifically, we sought to determine our complication rate and the impact of complications on patient outcomes. METHODS: We identified all patients who had an IJS placed as a supplemental fixation for a terrible triad injury at two urban, level 1 academic medical centers. We reviewed these patients' charts for demographic information, complication profiles, postoperative range of motion (ROM), and pain-level data. We also collected the QuickDASH and Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE) scores. Descriptive statistics were reported. Final visit data were compared between patients who returned to the OR for a complication and those who did not. RESULTS: From 2018 to 2020, 29 patients had an IJS placed for a terrible triad injury. The median final follow-up was 6.3 months after surgery (IQR: 6.2 months). There were 38 complications in 19 patients (65.5%) that required 12 patients to return to the OR (41.3%) for procedures beyond simple IJS removal. There were no significant differences in the ROM between patients who returned to the OR for a complication and those who did not. QuickDASH and PREE scores were greater (indicating more disability) in patients who had a complication that required a secondary surgical procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who receive an IJS incur a high rate of complications. When patients sustain complications that require secondary surgeries, their ultimate functional outcome scores worsen. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

The Effectiveness of Mini-C-Arm Fluoroscopy for the Closed Reduction of Distal Radius Fractures in Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Most distal radius (DR) fractures are initially managed with closed reduction and orthosis application. Mini-C-arm fluoroscopy provides assessment of reduction quality in real time. Our null hypothesis was that there would be no difference in the reduction quality of DR fractures in the emergency department when using mini-C-arm fluoroscopy during reduction compared with standard reduction techniques (evaluating reduction quality with orthogonal radiographs taken in an orthosis). METHODS: Sixty-three consecutive patients with closed DR fractures requiring reduction between April 2015 and April 2017 were prospectively randomized to standard versus fluoroscopically aided reductions. Reductions were performed by orthopedic surgery residents. The primary outcome measurement was reduction quality (radial height, radial inclination, ulnar variance, and volar tilt) as measured on postreduction radiographs. RESULTS: Standard reductions were performed in 34 patients and fluoroscopically aided reductions in 29 patients. The 2 groups were similar in regards to all potential confounders that were analyzed. No differences in postreduction radial height, radial inclination, ulnar variance, or volar tilt were noted. Overall reduction attempts and subjective difficulty of fracture reduction were increased when using fluoroscopy. The rate of initial operative management did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mini-C-arm fluoroscopy during the initial closed reduction of adult DR fractures results in equivalent postreduction radiographic parameters when compared with conventional reduction techniques. Additional research regarding time spent in the emergency department and overall cost could elucidate potential benefits of fluoroscopically aided DR fracture reduction. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic I.

Management of extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia: intramedullary nailing versus plate fixation.

Intramedullary nailing and plate fixation represent two viable approaches to internal fixation of extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia. Although both techniques have demonstrated success in maintaining reduction and promoting stable union, they possess distinct advantages and disadvantages that require careful consideration during surgical planning. Differences in soft-tissue health and construct stability must be considered when choosing between intramedullary nailing and plating of the distal tibia. Recent advances in intramedullary nail design and plate-and-screw fixation systems have further increased the options for management of these fractures. Current evidence supports careful consideration of the risk of soft-tissue complications, residual knee pain, and fracture malalignment in the context of patient and injury characteristics in the selection of the optimal method of fixation.

Reamer Irrigator Aspirator Versus Iliac Crest Bone Grafting and Proximal Tibial Curettage: Is There a Difference in Blood Loss and Transfusion Rates?

OBJECTIVES: To compare blood loss and transfusion rates among reamer irrigator aspirator (RIA), iliac crest bone graft (ICBG), and proximal tibial curettage (PTC) for autograft harvest. DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: The study included 139 adult patients treated between 2011 and 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Nonunion repair of the femur or tibia using either RIA (n = 64), ICBG (n = 59), or PTC (n = 16) for autograft. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Estimated blood loss and transfusion rates. RESULTS: Patient demographics, surgical indications, and medical comorbidities that affect bleeding did not differ among the groups. Estimated blood loss (mL) was significantly higher in the RIA group [RIA: 388 ± 368 (50-2000), ICBG: 286 ± 344 (10-2000), PTC: 196 mL ± 219 (10-700), P < 0.01]. The transfusion rate was also significantly higher in the RIA group (RIA 14%, ICBG 0%, PTC 0%, P < 0.01). The amount of graft obtained was higher in the RIA group (RIA = 48.3 mL, ICBG = 31.0 mL, PTC = 18.8 mL, P < 0.01), and the operative time (hours) was longer in the RIA group (RIA = 2.8, ICBG = 2.6, PTC = 1.9, P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Estimated blood loss and transfusion rates were significantly higher in patients undergoing RIA compared with those in patients undergoing ICBG and PTC; however, the incidence of transfusion after RIA (14%) was considerably lower than previous reports. These findings suggest that the risk of transfusion after RIA is present and clinically significant but lower than previously believed, and it is likely affected by the amount of graft obtained and complexity of the nonunion repair. The risk of transfusion should be discussed with patients and the choice of RIA carefully evaluated in patients who have anemia or risk factors of bleeding. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Factors Predictive of Blocking Screw Placement in Retrograde Nailing of Distal Femur Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: (1) Identify factors that predict blocking screw placement in the treatment of a distal femur fracture with retrograde nail fixation and (2) determine whether acceptable alignment and stability were achieved in fractures that received blocking screws. DESIGN: Retrospective Comparative Study. SETTING: Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Between 2011 and 2017, we identified 84 patients with distal third femur fractures treated with a retrograde femoral nail. Data were analyzed according to those who did (BLOCK, n = 30) and did not (NO BLOCK, n = 54) receive blocking screws. Patients in both groups were treated by orthopaedic trauma surgeons; postoperative weight-bearing radiographs were obtained of every patient. INTERVENTION: Fixation using a retrograde femoral nail with or without blocking screws. Blocking screws were placed at the discretion of the treating surgeon to reduce malaligned fractures or improve stability. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: (1) Demographics, radiographic apparent bone gap (RABG), space available for the nail (SAFN), and distal segment length [as a ratio of bicondylar width (BCW)]; and (2) post-operative alignment and stability (change in alignment over time). RESULTS: Patients treated with blocking screws had a higher body mass index (BMI) (BLOCK: 29.0, NO BLOCK 25.7, P = 0.03). In addition, the BLOCK group had larger RABGs (BLOCK: 8.2 mm, NO BLOCK: 3.6 mm, P = 0.02), more SAFN (BLOCK: 51.4 mm, NO BLOCK: 39.8 mm, P = 0.02), and shorter distal segments (BLOCK: 1.7 × BCW, NO BLOCK: 2.0 × BCW, P = 0.01). In a multivariable logistic regression, the combination of these factors was significantly predictive of blocking screw placement with a large effect size (R = 0.36, P < 0.01). A distal segment length ≤ ×2 BCW was 77% sensitive for blocking screw placement, and a BMI ≥25 kg/m was 70% sensitive. Negative predictive values for blocking screw placement were distal segment length > ×2 BCW (79%), BMI <25 kg/m (77%), RABG <4 mm (76%), and SAFN <50 mm (71%). Patients that received blocking screws had acceptable postoperative alignment and stability, similar to fractures that did not receive blocking screws (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study of distal femur fractures treated with retrograde nails identified several factors that can be used to predict when blocking screw placement may be useful for increasing stability and maintaining alignment in distal third femur fractures treated with retrograde IM nails. Patients treated with blocking screws had a higher BMI, greater cortical bone loss, more SAFN, and shorter distal segments. There was no difference in postoperative alignment or stability between the 2 groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Reduction plating for provisional fracture fixation.

Obtaining and maintaining the reduction of high-energy, complex fractures involving the periarticular or shaft regions of the bone often is difficult with standard reduction clamps. We present and review a technique in which unicortical fracture fixation plates are applied at provisional states of reduction to maintain that reduction until definitive fixation can be applied. We have termed the technique "reduction plating," and modifications of this concept have proven useful in metadiaphyseal and diaphyseal fractures, periarticular fractures and acetabular fractures. This overarching concept and its modifications are described.

Iatrogenic Radial Nerve Palsy After Humeral Shaft Nonunion Repair: More Common Than You Think.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate of iatrogenic radial nerve palsy (RNP) after surgical repair of established humeral shaft nonunion (HSNU). DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Level I trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-four patients with HSNU, 10 (18.5%) of whom developed an iatrogenic RNP after nonunion repair. INTERVENTION: HSNU repair with compression plate stabilization with or without autogenous bone graft. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Postoperative iatrogenic RNP. RESULTS: Ten (18.5%) patients developed iatrogenic radial nerve palsies: 8 experienced complete resolution (mean, 2.5 months) and 2 experienced partial resolution. There were no statistically significant differences between patients who developed nerve palsy and those who did not in regard to age, gender, tobacco use, diabetic status, previous RNP, initial management (operative vs. nonoperative), surgical approach, presence of infected nonunion, number of previous surgeries, or operative time (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of iatrogenic RNP for patients undergoing surgical repair of an HSNU was 18.5%. According to historical data, this rate is nearly 3 times higher than for those undergoing open reduction and internal fixation of either acute humeral shaft fractures or HSNUs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of Levels of Evidence.

Management of complex elbow dislocations: a mechanistic approach.

Complex elbow dislocations (ie, fracture-dislocations) are challenging injuries to treat and may result in significant patient morbidity. Chronic instability, posttraumatic arthrosis, and poor functional outcomes are frequent. Orthopaedic surgeons should strive to optimize elbow function through restoration of articular congruity and stability coupled with early rehabilitation. Although most of these injuries require surgical management, not all complex elbow dislocations are equivalent. Understanding elbow biomechanics and the injury mechanism provides valuable insight into the variations of pathology that may be observed. Identifying the particular fracture pattern, such as an axial loading, valgus posterolateral rotatory, or varus posteromedial rotatory injury mechanism, helps guide appropriate treatment.

Prospective Randomized Comparison of Locked Plates Versus Nonlocked Plates for the Treatment of High-Energy Pilon Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the radiographic and functional outcome of patients with high-energy pilon fractures treated with locked versus nonlocked plates. DESIGN: Randomized prospective trial. SETTING: Academic level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Between December 2006 and December 2008, 60 consecutive patients with 62 AO/OTA type A, B, and C tibial pilon fractures were enrolled in the study. Thirty-two of the fractures were treated using locked plates and 29 were treated with nonlocked plates. Follow-up data were available for 33 of the 60 patients. INTERVENTION: Treatment with locked versus nonlocked plates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) questionnaire and the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale (AHS). Radiographic measurements on anteroposterior and lateral views for the quality of reduction and maintenance of alignment immediately postoperatively compared with the latest follow-up. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the mechanism or injury pattern, average age of the patients, ratio of males to females, tourniquet time, operative time, interval to surgery, AHS, or SMFA scores. One of 15 fractures in the locked plate group lost reduction at the latest follow-up compared with 3 of 19 fractures in the nonlocked group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, there seems to be no difference between the 2 constructs. Thus, one must question the routine use of locked plates in the treatment of high-energy pilon fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Fix it or discard it? A retrospective analysis of functional outcomes after surgically treated patella fractures comparing ORIF with partial patellectomy.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to compare functional outcomes of patients with patella fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with those treated with partial patellectomy (PP). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Urban Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS: Seventy-three patients with isolated displaced patella fractures underwent operative treatment between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2009, at our institution. Of these, 52 (71%) patients with isolated patella fractures with minimum 1-year follow-up agreed to participate and were enrolled in the study. INTERVENTION: PP or ORIF. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patients completed outcome questionnaires and participated in a physical examination. Outcome instruments included the Knee Outcome Survey-Activities of Daily Living Scale, Short Form (SF)-36 Health Survey, and SF Musculoskeletal Function Assessment Survey. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients underwent PP and 26 underwent ORIF. There were no significant differences in any of the functional outcome instruments, including Knee Outcome Survey-Activities of Daily Living Scale (ORIF: 64.1 ± 11, PP: 62.1 ± 7.9, P = 0.76), SF-36 physical component score (ORIF: 40.8 ± 5.4, PP: 41.1 ± 5.2, P = 0.94), SF-36 mental component (ORIF: 47.7 ± 5.1, PP: 51.8 ± 4.9, P = 0.19), Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) Function Index (ORIF: 28.6 ± 9.1, PP: 27.7 ± 6.7, P = 0.78), or SMFA Bother Index (ORIF: 26.0 ± 9.7, PP: 23.6 ± 8.8, P = 0.72). Complication rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that functional impairment persists after operative treatment of patella fractures. Both ORIF and PP demonstrated similar final range of motion, functional scores, and complication rates. Despite its purported benefits, in this study, ORIF did not result in superior outcomes compared with PP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Proximal row carpectomy and intercarpal arthrodesis for the management of wrist arthritis.

For advanced noninflammatory wrist arthritis, the most common surgical treatments to preserve motion are proximal row carpectomy and scaphoid excision with capitohamate-lunotriquetral arthrodesis. Both procedures have documented successful outcomes. Proximal row carpectomy is simpler but typically is contraindicated when degeneration of the capitate head cartilage exists. Scaphoid excision with capitohamate-lunotriquetral arthrodesis is more complex but may provide greater grip strength and can be successful in the presence of capitate degeneration. Treatment selection should be based on surgeon preference and experience as well as on the patient's understanding of the possible complications and benefits of each procedure.

The influence of insurance status on the transfer of femoral fracture patients to a level-I trauma center.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate transfer patterns and insurance status for patients with a femoral fracture who were definitively managed within a six-hospital health-care system. We hypothesized that insurance status significantly influenced transfer of these patients to the level-I trauma center and that the level-I center provided definitive care for a disproportionate percentage of uninsured femoral fracture patients. METHODS: The present retrospective cohort study was performed within a six-hospital health-care system. The system comprises a single American College of Surgeons-designated level-I trauma center and five nondesignated community hospitals. We identified 243 patients with 251 femoral shaft fractures that had been definitively treated with intramedullary nail fixation within the system. From the health-care system billing database and trauma registries, we obtained diagnosis and procedure codes, insurance status, and trauma center transfer data. Differences in the proportions of uninsured and insured patients were calculated. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-two (71%) of the 243 patients who were definitively managed within our health-care system initially had been taken to the regional level-I center, and thirty-eight patients (16%) had been transferred to the trauma center. Of the thirty-eight patients who had been transferred, eighteen (47%) had met appropriate transfer criteria. Of the twenty patients with an isolated femoral fracture who had been transferred from hospitals with regular orthopaedic coverage, four (20%) had met appropriate transfer criteria. Twenty-two (58%) of the thirty-eight patients who had been transferred were uninsured, and all thirty-three patients who had not been transferred were insured (p = 0.0008); this observation remained when controlling for injury severity and available orthopaedic coverage (p < 0.0001). The proportion of insured patients definitively managed at the trauma center (52%) differed significantly from the proportion of insured patients definitively managed at the community hospitals (100%) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority (71%) of the patients with a femoral fracture who had been managed definitively within our health-care system, regardless of injury severity, had been taken directly to the trauma center. This finding suggests over-triage, which errs on the side of patient well-being. Because there was a significant difference in insurance status between patients who had been transferred to the level-I center and those who had not been transferred as well as between patients who had been definitively managed at the level-I center and those who had been managed in community hospitals, it can be assumed that insurance status as well as injury severity and orthopaedic surgeon availability influence the decision to transfer femoral fracture patients to a level-I trauma center.