Circular external fixation for revision of failed tibia internal fixation.

BACKGROUND: The management of failed tibial fracture fixation remains a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. This study investigate the utility and outcomes of circular external fixation in the management of failed internal fixation of tibial fractures. METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of a complex limb reconstruction unit at a major trauma centre was done during December 2022. Patients with failed internal fixation of tibial fracture who underwent revision surgery with circular external fixation frame were included. RESULTS: 20 patients with a mean age of 47.8 ± 16.5 years (range: 15-69) were included. Fourteen (70.0%) patients had failed plate and screws fixations, and the remaining six (30.0%) failed intramedullary nail fixation. The most common indication for revision surgery was development of early postoperative surgical site infection (5 patients; 25.0%). The mean duration of frame treatment was 199.5 ± 80.1 days (range = 49-364), while the mean follow-up duration following frame removal was 3.2 ± 1.8 years (range = 2-8). The overall union rate in this series was 100%; and all infected cases had complete resolution from infection. The total number of complications was 11, however, only two complications required surgical intervention. The most common complications reported were pin site infection (6; 30.0%) and limb length discrepancy of 2 cm (2; 10.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Circular external fixation is a reliable surgical option in the treatment of failed internal fixation of tibia fractures. This technique can provide limb salvage in complex infected and noninfected cases with a high union rate and minimal major complications.

Circular external fixation for knee fusion in complex indications.

PURPOSE: Reconstructive surgery for complex knee problems is limited and challenging. The aim of this study is to report the technique, outcomes and complications of circular external fixation for knee fusion in complex indications. METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of a complex limb reconstruction unit was done during December 2022. Patients with complex knee problems who underwent knee fusion with circular external fixator were included. RESULTS: Fourteen patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the patients was 63 ± 16.8 years. Deep infection was the indication for surgery in 11 patients (78.5%), of which 10 cases were related to previously failed revision arthroplasty. The mean duration of treatment in frame was 13 ± 4.1 months, while the mean follow-up duration following frame removal was 7.1 ± 4.2 years. Fusion was achieved in 13 patients (92.9%). The most common complication was pin site infection (6; 42.9%), of which three (21.4%) required pin/wire revision. One (7.1%) patient had fracture at the fusion site following frame removal that was treated with reapplication of the frame. CONCLUSION: Knee fusion using circular external fixation is a reliable surgical option for complex knee problems especially in infected failed revision total knee replacements.

A comparative evaluation of the time to frame removal for tibia fractures treated with hexapod and Ilizarov circular frames.

INTRODUCTION: Traditional Ilizarov and hexapod frames have different biomechanical properties and there is limited literature regarding their effect on time to fracture union or time to frame removal. METHODS: Tibial fractures managed with a circular frame at a tertiary limb reconstruction referral centre between 2011 and 2018 were retrospectively identified from a prospectively maintained database. They were classified into three treatment groups; Ilizarov style, Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) and TrueLok Hex (TL-Hex). Data were extracted from electronic patient records and digital radiographs. The primary outcome was time to frame removal, which was seen as an indicator of clinical and radiological fracture union. Odds ratios were calculated with the clinical significance set at 30 days. RESULTS: 274 patients (median age 49 years, 36% female) were included in the analysis. 8.4% Ilizarov, 10.5% TSF and 13.5% TL-Hex frames required further surgery to aid fracture healing (p = 0.38). 30% of patients had open fractures. Median time to removal for Ilizarov, TSF & TL Hex frames was 167, 198 and 185 days respectively. There was a significant difference between Ilizarov and hexapod frames. Both TSF (OR 2.2, p<0.003) and TL-Hex (OR 1.8, p<0.04) had a significantly increased time to removal of 30 days or more compared with Ilizarov frames.The time to frame removal in metaphyseal fractures was significantly shorter for Ilizarov frame fixation than hexapod frames (p = 0.04). Open fractures were significantly more likely to require at least 30 days extra time to removal than closed fractures (OR 3.3, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the time to frame removal between fracture location, age or sex. CONCLUSION: Ilizarov frames have demonstrated a reduced time to frame removal in the management of tibial fractures than hexapod frames. Differences in the time to frame removal, an indicator of time to fracture union, may be due to the different mechanical properties of the frame, or early disruption of the fracture haematoma through secondary frame manipulation and fracture reduction, increased proportion of metaphyseal fractures treated with Ilizarov, or patient selection. The healing time was comparable across the tibia. Pooled meta-analyses may be able to further quantify these associations.

The Incidence of Deep Infection Following Lower Leg Circular Frame Fixation with Minimum of 1-year Follow-up from Frame Removal.

Aim: Superficial pin site infection is a common problem associated with external fixation, which has been extensively reported. However, the incidence and risk factors with regard to deep infection are rarely reported in the literature. In this study, we investigate and explore the incidence and risk factors of deep infection following circular frame surgery. For the purpose of this study, deep infection was defined as persistent discharge or collection for which surgical intervention was recommended. Materials and methods: This study is retrospective review of all patients who underwent frame surgery between April 1, 2015 and April 1, 2019 in our unit with a minimum of 1 year follow-up following frame removal. We recorded patient demographics, patient risk factors, trauma or elective procedure, number of days the frame was in situ, location of infection and fracture pattern. Results: Three-hundred and four patients were identified. Twenty-seven patients were excluded as they were lost to follow-up or had their primary frame surgery as a treatment for infection. This provided us with 277 patients for analysis. The mean age was 47 years (range: 9-89 years), the male to female ratio was 1.5:1, and 80% were trauma frames. Thirteen patients (4.69%) developed deep infection, and all occurred in trauma patients. Of the 13 patients who developed deep infection, 4 had infection before frame removal, and infection occurred in 9 after frame removal. Deep infections occurred in 8 patients within a year of frame removal and in one patient between 1 and 2 years of frame removal.Within the 13 frame procedures for trauma, 12 were periarticular multi-fragmentary fractures, 3 of which were open, and the remaining were an open diaphyseal fracture. The periarticular fractures were more likely to develop deep infection than diaphyseal fractures (p = 0.033). Twelve patients (out of 13) also had concurrent minimally invasive internal fixation with screws in very close proximity of the wires. Conclusion: The rate of deep infection following circular frame surgery appears to be low. Pooled, multi-centre data would be required to analyse risk factors; however, multi-fragmentary, periarticular fracture and the requirement for additional internal fixation appear to be an associated factor. How to cite this article: Ting J, Moulder E, Muir R, et al. The Incidence of Deep Infection Following Lower Leg Circular Frame Fixation with Minimum of 1-year Follow-up from Frame Removal. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2022;17(2):88-91.

Is a staged reloading protocol effective to time the removal of circular frames? : a retrospective analysis.

AIMS: The timing of when to remove a circular frame is crucial; early removal results in refracture or deformity, while late removal increases the patient morbidity and delay in return to work. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a staged reloading protocol. We report the incidence of mechanical failure following both single-stage and two stage reloading protocols and analyze the associated risk factors. METHODS: We identified consecutive patients from our departmental database. Both trauma and elective cases were included, of all ages, frame types, and pathologies who underwent circular frame treatment. Our protocol is either a single-stage or two-stage process implemented by defunctioning the frame, in order to progressively increase the weightbearing load through the bone, and promote full loading prior to frame removal. Before progression, through the process we monitor patients for any increase in pain and assess radiographs for deformity or refracture. RESULTS: There were 244 frames (230 patients) included in the analyses, of which 90 were Ilizarov type frames and 154 were hexapods. There were 149 frames which underwent single-stage reloading and 95 frames which underwent a two-stage reloading protocol. Mechanical failure occurred after frame removal in 13 frames (5%), which suffered refracture. There were no cases of change in alignment. There was no difference between refracture patients who underwent single-stage or two-stage reloading protocols (p = 0.772). In all, 14 patients had failure prevented through identification with the reloading protocol. CONCLUSION: Our reloading protocol is a simple and effective way to confirm the timing of frame removal and minimize the rate of mechanical failure. Similar failure rates occurred between patients undergoing single-stage and two-stage reloading protocols. If the surgeon is confident with clinical and radiological assessment, it may be possible to progress directly to stage two and decrease frame time and patient morbidity. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(5):359-366.

Functional outcomes after tibial shaft fractures treated using the Taylor spatial frame.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze functional and radiologic outcomes of tibial shaft fractures treated with the Taylor spatial frame (TSF). DESIGN: Prospective follow-up study of radiologic and functional outcomes. SETTING: University teaching hospital. PATIENTS: From January 2006 to December 2012, prospective data were collected for 56 consecutive patients completing treatment of a tibial shaft fracture with the TSF. INTERVENTION: Treatment of tibial shaft fractures, including those with simple extension into the knee or ankle joints, using the TSF. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Residual deformity on x-ray and functional outcomes using the EQ-5D health status questionnaire, Iowa Knee and Ankle Evaluation Rating System scores, and Olerud and Molander Ankle score were recorded 1 year after frame removal. RESULTS: Average residual deformity was 1.8 degrees in the coronal and 1.6 degrees in the sagittal planes. EQ-5D outcomes showed patients returning to a health status no different from scores for the UK population as a whole. Iowa Knee scores demonstrated "good" or "excellent" outcomes in 87.3% of our cohort (mean, 90). Ankle Evaluation Rating System scores and Olerud and Molander Ankle scores showed "good" or "excellent" outcomes in 76.8% and 89.3% of our cohort, respectively (mean, 84.1 and 84). CONCLUSIONS: Use of the TSF for treatment of tibial fractures, with support from a dedicated limb reconstruction rehabilitation team, has a number of technical advantages while producing good functional and surgical outcomes, with patients recovering to a pre-injury health status. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The use of a spirit-level to improve radiograph quality in ring fixators.

The use of ring fixators in lower limb reconstruction and deformity correction both for trauma and elective procedures is now widespread. The long course of treatment requires regular outpatient review with frequent radiological imaging to assess the progression of treatment and plan correctional adjustment. Following publication of a technique using a frame mounted spirit-level to aid radiographers in accurately aligning the limb for optimal imaging we implemented a similar technique in our department and carried out a two part prospective comparative study to assess the impact on radiograph quality. Comparison was made of radiograph quality, X-rays taken, patient trips to the radiology department and X-ray exposure before and after implementation of the spirit-level guide technique in patients attending an out-patient clinic for routine follow up following ring fixator application. 26 patients were included in the control arm and 33 in the intervention group. On review, 42.3% of patients in the control group were deemed to have had suboptimal imaging compared with only 9.1% of those imaged using the spirit-level guide, a statistically significant improvement. When comparing total numbers of images taken for each group to achieve the requested number of adequate views there was less statistical significance, nor was there a statistically significant difference in radiation dose between the groups. A significant reduction in the number of inadequate images being taken, with a subsequent reduction in patients requiring return to the radiology department for re-imaging and then re-review in clinic, has clear implications for patients, clinicians and hospital efficiency. The patient journey time is reduced, less time and fewer resources are used in the radiology department and patients in clinic are seen more efficiently and with less wasted time. We conclude that the implementation of a simple frame mounted spirit-level as a guide for radiographers in the outpatient clinic significantly reduces the number of suboptimal and wasted images taken in the assessment of patients being treated by ring fixator.