Proximal Humerus Fractures: How to Achieve Best Outcomes.

The treatment of proximal humerus fractures remains controversial. Although treatment modalities may vary, the goal of obtaining the best outcomes for patients remains the same. Most proximal humerus fractures can be treated nonsurgically but should still be managed actively. Deciding on surgical management requires a good understanding of indications and options. Indications for open reduction and internal fixation include younger or active patients with displaced two-, three-, and four-part fractures as well as fracture-dislocations with head-split patterns. Obtaining ideal outcomes requires anatomic reduction with restoration of the medial calcar as well as optimal position of implants to favor biomechanical stability. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is indicated for patients with severe and displaced fractures in older or low-demand patients. Obtaining the best functional outcomes depends on implant position, tuberosity healing, and early surgical intervention. Regardless of the treatment modality, these fractures can be challenging, and proper patient rehabilitation must be implemented. Future research will focus on patient selection and improving surgical techniques to maximize outcomes.

Limb position affects intraoperative assessment of condylar width.

PURPOSE: We sought to define how changes in position and rotation of fluoroscopic imaging may affect the assessment of condylar widening intraoperatively. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with tibial plateau fractures were prospectively identified and included in this study. Fluoroscopic images of the uninjured tibial plateau were obtained in (1) full extension and (2) slight flexion on foam ramp. Beginning with a plateau view, additional views of the tibial plateau were then obtained by rotating the fluoroscope around the knee in 5 degree increments up to 15 degrees in both internal and external rotation. Measurements of distal femoral condylar width (DFW), distal femoral articular width (FAW), proximal tibial articular width (TAW) and lateral plateau width (LPW) were performed. RESULTS: LPW was decreased in flexion compared to extension at all degrees of rotation (p = 0.04-0.00001). There was a trend toward increasing LPW with increasing degrees of internal rotation which reached significance at 15˚ of internal rotation when the knee was flexed. On ANOVA, there was a significant difference of LPW with increasing degree of internal rotation when the knee was in flexion (p = 0.008), but not in extension. There were no differences in DFW, FAW, TAW and DFW/TAW at any point though LPW was decreased in flexion at all degrees of rotation. The FAW/TAW ratio was increased in flexion at all degrees of rotation. DISCUSSION: The knee in flexion will underestimate the measurement of condylar width compared to the knee in full extension, by ~ 2 mm. Rotation of the knee, in comparison, did not have a significant effect on condylar width assessment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic II.

Incisional negative pressure wound therapy may not protect against post-operative surgical site complications in bicondylar tibial plateau fractures.

PURPOSE: To determine if incisional negative pressure wound therapy is protective against post-operative surgical site complications following definitive fixation of bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with an acute bicondylar tibial plateau fracture (AO/OTA 41-C) undergoing ORIF from 2010 to 2020 was performed. Patients received either a standard sterile dressing (SD) or incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT). Primary outcomes included surgical site infection, osteomyelitis, and wound dehiscence. Secondary outcomes included non-union and return to the operating room. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: 180 patients were included and 22% received iNPWT (n = 40) and 78% received standard dressings (n = 140). iNPWT was more common in active smokers (24.7% vs. 19.3%, p = 0.002) and the SD group was more likely to be lost to follow up (3.6% vs. 0%, p = 0.025). iNPWT was not protective against infection or surgical site complications, and in fact, was associated with higher odds of post-operative infection (OR: 8.96, p = 0.005) and surgical site complications (OR:4.874, p = 0.009) overall. Alcohol abuse (OR: 19, p = 0.005), tobacco use (OR: 4.67, p = 0.009), and time to definitive surgery (OR = 1.21, p = 0.033) were all independent risk factors for post-operative infection. CONCLUSION: In this series of operatively treated bicondylar tibial plateau fractures, iNPWT did not protect against post-operative surgical site complications compared to conventional dressings. Tobacco use, alcohol abuse, and time to definitive surgery, were independent risk factors for post-operative infection. Further studies are needed to determine if iNPWT offers a protective benefit in exclusively high-risk patients with relevant medical and social history.

Interaction of preoperative chemoprophylaxis and tranexamic acid use does not affect transfusion in acetabular fracture surgery.

PURPOSE: While the effects of tranexamic acid (TXA) use on transfusion rates after acetabular fracture surgery are unclear, previous evidence suggests that holding deep vein thrombosis (DVT) chemoprophylaxis may improve TXA efficacy. This study examines whether holding DVT chemoprophylaxis in patients receiving TXA affects intraoperative and postoperative transfusion rates in acetabular fracture surgery. METHODS: We reviewed electronic medical records (EMR) of 305 patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation of acetabular fractures (AO/OTA 62) and stratified patients per the following perioperative treatment: (1) no intraoperative TXA (noTXA), (2) intraoperative TXA and no preoperative DVT prophylaxis (opTXA/noDVTP), or (3) intraoperative TXA and preoperative DVT prophylaxis (opTXA/opDVTP). The primary outcomes were need for intraoperative or postoperative transfusion. Risk factors for each primary outcome were assessed using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Intraoperative or postoperative transfusion rates did not significantly differ between opTXA/opDVTP and opTXA/noDVTP groups (46.2% vs. 36%, p = 0.463; 15.4% vs. 28%, p = 0.181). Median units transfused did not differ between groups (2 ± 1 vs. 2 ± 1, p = 0.515; 2 ± 1 vs. 2 ± 0, p = 0.099). There was no association between preoperative DVT chemoprophylaxis and TXA with intraoperative or postoperative transfusions. EBL, preoperative hematocrit, and IV fluids were associated with intraoperative transfusions; age and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were associated with postoperative transfusions. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest holding DVT prophylaxis did not alter the effect of TXA on blood loss or need for transfusion.

The use of hinged elbow orthosis following surgical management of terrible triad injuries of the elbow.

PURPOSE: To determine outcomes following surgical management of terrible triad injuries in patients treated with and without a hinged elbow orthosis (HEO) in the post-operative setting. METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of 41 patients who underwent surgical treatment of terrible triad injuries including radial head fracture, coronoid fracture, and ulnohumeral dislocation between 2008 and 2023 with at least 10-week follow-up. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated post-operatively without HEO, and 22 patients were treated with HEO. There were no differences in range of motion (ROM) between patients treated with and without HEO in final flexion-extension arc (118.4° no HEO, 114.6° HEO, p = 0.59) or pronation-supination arc (147.8° no HEO, 141.4° HEO, p = 0.27). Five patients treated without HEO and one patient treated with HEO returned to the operating room for stiffness (26%, 5%, p = 0.08). QuickDASH scores were similar between groups (p = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: This study found no difference in post-operative ROM, complications, or QuickDASH scores in patients treated post-operatively with or without HEO. Based on these results, we cannot determine whether the use of HEO adds additional stability to the elbow while initiating ROM exercises post-operatively.

Drilling the cement mantle in well-fixed periprosthetic femur fractures is not associated with arthroplasty-related complications.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if screw fixation across a cement mantle is safe and effective during plate fixation of well-fixed periprosthetic femur fractures. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS: Twenty-eight patients with AO/OTA 32A[B1] or 32A[C] periprosthetic femur fractures treated with open reduction and internal plate and screw fixation after cemented or uncemented hip arthroplasty. INTERVENTION: Screw placement into the cement mantle during internal fixation. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was revision arthroplasty for aseptic loosening. Secondary outcomes included radiographic evidence of aseptic loosening, infection, nonunion, implant failure, and overall reoperation rate. RESULTS: There were 28 patients who met inclusion criteria. A total of 9 patients had screws placed in the cement mantle while the remaining 19 patients had screws placed around an uncemented stem. At a mean of 3.7-year follow-up, there were no cases of revision arthroplasty or aseptic loosening in either group. There were no significant differences in rates of infection, nonunion, implant failure, or reoperation rate between patients who had screw placement into a cement mantle vs around an uncemented stem. CONCLUSION: Drilling into the cement mantle during fixation of a periprosthetic femur fracture around a well-fixed cemented hip stem appears safe and effective. When possible, surgeons can consider bicortical screws around a cemented stem, given the biomechanical advantages over unicortical screw or cerclage fixation. Larger prospective trials confirming the safety of this technique are warranted prior to routine implementation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A framework to make PROMs relevant to patients: qualitative study of communication preferences of PROMs.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome measures are tools for evaluating symptoms, magnitude of limitations, baseline health status, and outcomes from the patient's perspective. Healthcare professional organizations and payers increasingly recommend PROMs for clinical care, but there lacks guidance regarding effective communication of PROMs with orthopedic surgery patients. This qualitative study aimed to identify (1) patient attitudes toward the use and communication of PROMs, and (2) what patients feel are the most relevant or important aspects of PROM results to discuss with their physicians. METHODS: Participants were recruited from a multispeciality orthopedic clinic. Three PROMs: the EuroQol-5 Dimension, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function Computer Adaptive Test were shown and a semi-structured interview was conducted to elicit PROMs attitudes and preferences. Interviews were transcribed and inductive-deductively coded. Coded excerpts were aggregated to (1) identify major themes and (2) analyze how themes interacted. RESULT: Three themes emerged: (1) Beliefs toward the purpose of PROMs, (2) PROMs as a reflection of self, and (3) PROMs to facilitate communication and guide healthcare decisions. These themes informed a framework outlining the patient perspective on communicating PROMs during clinical care. CONCLUSION: Patient attitudes toward the use and communication of PROMs start with the incorporation of patient beliefs, which can facilitate or act as a barrier to engagement. Patients should ideally believe that PROMs are an accurate reflection of personal health state before incorporation into care. Clinicians should endeavor to communicate the purpose of a chosen PROM in line with a patient's unique needs and what they feel is most relevant to their own care. Aspects of PROMs results which may be helpful to address include providing context for what scores mean and how they are calculated, and using scores as a way to weigh risks and benefits of treatment and tracking progress over time. Future research can focus on the effect of communication strategies on patient outcomes and engagement in care.

Augmentation of Fracture Repair: Is Anything Ready for Prime Time?

There continues to be a significant burden of disease associated with the delayed healing of common fractures. Despite a number of trials focused on the augmentation of fracture repair, management remains controversial and evidence regarding cost-effectiveness is lacking. The recent evidence that has challenged traditional thinking regarding management of fracture healing problems will be evaluated.

Biomechanical analysis of recently released cephalomedullary nails for trochanteric femoral fracture fixation in a human cadaveric model.

BACKGROUND: Recently, two novel concepts for intramedullary nailing of trochanteric fractures using a helical blade or interlocking dual screws have demonstrated advantages as compared to standard single-screw systems. However, these two concepts have not been subjected to a direct biomechanical comparison so far. The aims of this study were to investigate in a human cadaveric model with low bone quality (1) the biomechanical competence of nailing with the use of a helical blade versus interlocking screws, and (2) the effect of cement augmentation on the fixation strength of the helical blade. METHODS: Twelve osteoporotic and osteopenic human cadaveric femoral pairs were assigned for pairwise implantation using either a short TFN-ADVANCED Proximal Femoral Nailing System (TFNA) with a helical blade head element or a short TRIGEN INTERTAN Intertrochanteric Antegrade Nail (InterTAN) with interlocking screws. Six osteoporotic femora, implanted with TFNA, were augmented with bone cement. Four groups were created: group 1 (TFNA) paired with group 2 (InterTAN), both consisting of osteopenic specimens, and group 3 (TFNA augmented) paired with group 4 (InterTAN), both consisting of osteoporotic specimens. An unstable trochanteric AO/OTA 31-A2.2 fracture was simulated and all specimens were tested until failure under progressively increasing cyclic loading. RESULTS: Stiffness in group 3 was significantly higher versus group 4, p = 0.03. Varus (°) and femoral head rotation around the femoral neck axis (°) after 10,000 cycles were 1.9 ± 1.0/0.3 ± 0.2 in group 1, 2.2 ± 0.7/0.7 ± 0.4 in group 2, 1.5 ± 1.3/0.3 ± 0.2 in group 3 and 3.5 ± 2.8/0.9 ± 0.6 in group 4, being significantly different between groups 3 and 4, p = 0.04. Cycles to failure and failure load (N) at 5° varus or 10° femoral head rotation around the neck axis in groups 1-4 were 21,428 ± 6020/1571.4 ± 301.0, 20,611 ± 7453/1530.6 ± 372.7, 21,739 ± 4248/1587.0 ± 212.4 and 18,622 ± 6733/1431.1 ± 336.7, being significantly different between groups 3 and 4, p = 0.04. CONCLUSIONS: Nailing of trochanteric femoral fractures with use of helical blades is comparable to interlocking dual screws fixation in femoral head fragments with low bone quality. Bone cement augmentation of helical blades provides significantly greater fixation strength compared to interlocking screws constructs.

Indications for cement augmentation in fixation of geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures: a systematic review of evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Achieving durable mechanical stability in geriatric intertrochanteric proximal femur fractures remains a challenge. Concomitant poor bone quality, unstable fracture patterns, and suboptimal reduction are additional risk factors for early mechanical failure. Cement augmentation of the proximal locking screw or blade is one proposed method to augment implant anchorage. The purpose of this review is to describe the biomechanical and clinical evidence for cement augmentation of geriatric intertrochanteric fractures, and to elaborate indications for cement augmentation. METHODS: The PubMed database was searched for English language studies up to January 2021. Studies that assessed effect of calcium phosphate or methylmethacrylate cement augmentation during open reduction and internal fixation of intertrochanteric fractures were included. Studies with sample size < 5, nontraumatic or periprosthetic fractures, and nonunion or revision surgery were excluded. Study selection adhered to PRISMA criteria. RESULTS: 801 studies were identified, of which 40 met study criteria. 9 studies assessed effect of cement augmentation on fracture displacement. All but one found that cement decreased fracture displacement. 10 studies assessed effect of cement augmentation on total load or cycles to failure. All but one demonstrated that augmented implants increased this variable. Complication rates of cement augmentation during ORIF of intertrochanteric fractures ranged from 0 to 47%, while non-augmented implants ranged from 0 to 51%. Reoperation rates ranged from 0 to 11% in the cement-augmented group and 0 to 11% in the non-augmented group. Fixation failure ranged from 0 to 11% in the cement-augmented group and 0 to 20% in the non-augmented group. Nonunion ranged from 0 to 3.6% in the cement-augmented group and 0 to 34% in the non-augmented group. CONCLUSIONS: Calcium phosphate or PMMA-augmented CMN fixation of IT fractures increased construct stability and improved outcomes in biomechanical and early clinical studies. The findings of these studies suggest an important role for cement augmentation in patient populations at high risk of mechanical failure.

Biomechanically superior treatments do not translate into improved outcomes in randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Significant time and resources are devoted to conducting orthopaedic biomechanics research; however, it is not known how these studies relate to their subsequent clinical studies. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether biomechanically superior treatments were associated with improved clinical outcomes as determined by analogous randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to find RCTs that tested a research question based on a prior biomechanical study. PubMed and SCOPUS databases were queried for orthopaedic randomized controlled trials, and full text articles were reviewed to find RCTs which cited biomechanical studies with analogous comparison groups. A random-effects multi-level logistic regression model was conducted examining the association between RCT outcome and biomechanics outcome, adjusting for multiple outcomes nested within study. RESULTS: In total, 20,261 articles were reviewed yielding 21 RCTs citing a total of 43 analogous biomechanical studies. In 7 instances (16.2%), the RCT and a cited biomechanical study showed concordant results (i.e. the superior treatment in the RCT was also the superior construct in the biomechanical study). RCT outcome was not associated with biomechanical outcome (ß = -1.50, standard error = 0.78, p = .05). CONCLUSION: This study assessed 21 orthopaedic RCTs with 43 corresponding biomechanical studies and found no association between superior biomechanical properties of a given orthopaedic treatment and improved clinical outcomes. Favourable biomechanical properties alone should not be the primary reason for selecting one treatment over another. Furthermore, RCTs based on biomechanical studies should be carefully designed to maximize the chance of providing clinically relevant insights.

Tranexamic acid does not affect intraoperative blood loss or in-hospital outcomes after acetabular fracture surgery.

PURPOSE: Tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces need for transfusion in total joint arthroplasty, though findings in acetabular surgery are conflicting. We compared outcomes after acetabular fracture surgery with or without perioperative intravenous (IV) TXA administration. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 305 patients with acetabular fractures that underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). Eighty-nine patients received TXA, and 216 did not. The primary outcome was rates of intraoperative and postoperative allogeneic blood transfusion. RESULTS: Baseline demographics and characteristics were similar. Time from injury to surgery and estimated blood loss were comparable. Operative time (p < 0.01) and intraoperative IV fluids (p < 0.01) were greater in the non-TXA group. The proportion of patients who received blood transfusion and mean units transfused intraoperatively and postoperatively did not differ. Mean differences in preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin and hematocrit, hospital length of stay, and perioperative complications also did not differ. In a multivariable regression model, age 60-70 years, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Injury Severity Score, and fracture patterns likely to bleed were independently associated with intraoperative transfusion. Anterior surgical approaches and intraoperative transfusion requirement were independently associated with postoperative transfusion. CONCLUSION: In this study, perioperative IV TXA did not decrease blood loss, need for transfusion, or improve in-hospital outcomes of acetabular fracture surgery. Age 60-70, CCI, ISS, and fracture patterns likely to bleed were independently associated with intraoperative transfusion. Anterior surgical approach and need for intraoperative transfusion were independently associated with postoperative transfusion. Further prospective trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Does a Question Prompt List Improve Perceived Involvement in Care in Orthopaedic Surgery Compared with the AskShareKnow Questions? A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Most conditions in orthopaedic surgery are preference-sensitive, where treatment choices are based on the patient's values and preferences. One set of tools increasingly used to help align treatment choices with patient preferences are question prompt lists (QPLs), which are comprehensive lists of potential questions that patients can ask their physicians during their encounters. Whether or not a comprehensive orthopaedic-specific question prompt list would increase patient-perceived involvement in care more effectively than might three generic questions (the AskShareKnow questions) remains unknown; learning the answer would be useful, since a three-question list is easier to use compared with the much lengthier QPLs. QUESTION/PURPOSE: Does an orthopaedic-specific question prompt list increase patient-perceived involvement in care compared with the three generic AskShareKnow questions? METHODS: We performed a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of all new patients visiting a multispecialty orthopaedic clinic. A pragmatic design was used to mimic normal clinical care that compared two clinically acceptable interventions. New patients with common orthopaedic conditions were enrolled between August 2019 and November 2019 and were randomized to receive either the intervention QPL handout (orthopaedic-specific QPL with 45 total questions, developed with similar content and length to prior QPLs used in hand surgery, oncology, and palliative care) or a control handout (the AskShareKnow model questions, which are: "What are my options? What are the benefits and harms of those options? How likely are each of those benefits and harms to happen to me?") before their visits. A total of 156 patients were enrolled, with 78 in each group. There were no demographic differences between the study and control groups in terms of key variables. After the visit, patients completed the Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS), a validated instrument designed to evaluate patient-perceived involvement in their care, which served as the primary outcome measure. This instrument is scored from 0 to 13, with higher scores indicating higher perceived involvement. RESULTS: There was no difference in mean PICS scores between the intervention and control groups (QPL 8.3 ± 2.3, control 8.5 ± 2.3, mean difference 0.2 [95% CI -0.53 to 0.93 ]; p = 0.71. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery, a QPL does not increase patient-perceived involvement in care compared with providing patients the three AskShareKnow questions. Implementation of the three AskShareKnow questions can be a more efficient way to improve patient-perceived involvement in their care compared with a lengthy QPL. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Perioperative Laboratory Markers as Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection After Elective Hand Surgery.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the null hypothesis that there is no association between perioperative laboratory markers (serum albumin and hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]) and incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) after soft tissue upper extremity surgery. METHODS: We analyzed patient-level data from a large, insurance-based database containing supplemental laboratory results. We identified patients undergoing soft tissue upper extremity surgery (defined as carpal tunnel release, trigger finger release, wrist ganglion excision, cubital tunnel release, Dupuytren partial fasciectomy, or first dorsal compartment release) with serum albumin or HbA1c measurements within 90 days of surgery. We stratified patients into cohorts based on serum albumin concentration (<3.5 g/dL) and HbA1c (≥7%) thresholds. The primary outcome was incidence of SSI within 30 days following surgery. We constructed multivariable logistic regression models to adjust for patient demographics and baseline comorbidities using the Elixhauser comorbidity index. RESULTS: Patients with hypoalbuminemia experienced an SSI incidence of 3.5% compared to 0.9% in patients with normal serum albumin. In multivariable analysis, the odds ratio of SSI with hypoalbuminemia was 3.32 (95% CI, 2.32-4.65). Patients with HbA1c ≥ 7% experienced an SSI incidence of 1.1% compared to 0.7% in patients with HbA1c < 7%. Multivariable analysis revealed odds ratios for SSI of 1.47 (95% CI, 1.02-2.11) in patients with HbA1c ≥ 7% compared to those with HbA1c < 7%. CONCLUSIONS: Hypoalbuminemia and elevated HbA1c (in patients with diabetes) are risk factors for SSI within 30 days following soft tissue upper extremity surgery. Preoperative measurement of these laboratory markers may be a useful tool for risk stratification and identification of high-risk patients for nutritional or glycemic optimization. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.

Outcomes after locking plate fixation of distal clavicle fractures with and without coracoclavicular ligament augmentation.

BACKGROUND: The need for coracoclavicular (CC) ligament augmentation when performing locking plate fixation of unstable distal clavicle fractures is controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the results after locking plate fixation for treatment of Neer type-II and type-V distal clavicle fractures with and without suture suspensory augmentation of the CC ligaments. METHODS: This was a retrospective case series of all Neer type-II and type-V distal clavicle fractures treated with locking plates at a single Level I trauma center. Patients were separated into locking plate-only and locking plate with CC ligament augmentation groups. Postoperative complications and fracture healing rates were recorded. Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) scores were recorded as functional outcomes during follow-up phone interviews. Standard descriptive statistics were performed. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were treated with locking plate fixation-only, and seven patients were treated with additional CC ligament augmentation. There was a similar distribution of Neer fracture types with each group. All fractures in both groups went onto union without loss of reduction or implant failure. There were no cases of infection or wound complications in either group. QuickDASH scores were comparable between locking plate-only fixation (mean 4.1 ± 3.9) and additional suspensory suture fixation (mean 4.5 ± 3.6). CONCLUSION: This comparative study of Neer type-II and type-V distal clavicle fractures demonstrated comparable outcomes after locking plate fixation with and without CC ligament augmentation. CC ligament augmentation may not be necessary when treating unstable distal clavicle fractures if locking plate fixation is used.

Distal femoral fine wire traction assisted retrograde nailing of the femur.

Here we describe the surgical technique for using distal femoral fine wire traction during retrograde femoral nailing and present case examples. This technique allows for hands-free distraction across the fracture site to restore length and alignment, while not interfering with the preparation and insertion of the retrograde femoral nail. Distal femoral fine wire traction is a useful adjunctive technique to restore length and effect an indirect reduction in femur fractures being stabilized with a retrograde nail.

Is percutaneous screw fixation really superior to non-operative management after valgus-impacted femoral neck fracture: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The optimal management of valgus-impacted femoral neck fractures remains controversial. Internal fixation is associated with significant rates of re-operation, while historical non-operative management strategies consisting of prolonged bed rest also resulted in patient morbidity. Our hypothesis was that screw fixation would have comparable failure rates to non-operative treatment and immediate mobilization for valgus-impacted femoral neck fractures. METHODS: Retrospective cohort at a single academic Level I trauma center of patients with valgus-impacted femoral neck fractures (AO/OTA 31-B1) treated with percutaneous screw fixation (n = 97) or non-operatively (n = 28). Operative treatment consisted of percutaneous screw fixation. Non-operative treatment consisted of early mobilization. The primary outcome was a salvage operation. Patient demographics were assessed between groups. RESULTS: More non-operatively treated patients were permitted unrestricted weight-bearing (WBAT; p = 0.002). There was no increase in complication rates or mortality, and return to previous ambulatory status was comparable between operatively and non-operatively treated patients. 35.7% (10/28) of non-operatively treated patients underwent a subsequent operation, compared to 15.5% (15/97) of patients with screw fixation (p = 0.03). Only WBAT was independently associated with treatment failure (OR 3.1, 95%CI 1.2-8.3, p =0.02). WBAT was predictive of treatment failure only in the non-operatively treated group (64.3%, 9/14 WBAT vs 8.3%, 1/12 partial, p =0.005). CONCLUSION: After controlling for weight-bearing restrictions, we found no difference in failure rates between non-operative treatment and screw fixation. Non-operative treatment with partial weight-bearing had low failure rates, comparable complication and mortality rates, and equivalent functional outcomes to operative treatment and is reasonable if a patient would like to avoid surgery and accepts the risk of subsequent arthroplasty. Overall, there were relatively high failure rates in all groups.

Trochanteric fixation nail advanced with helical blade and cement augmentation: early experience with a retrospective cohort.

Intra-articular screw cut-out is a potential complication of intertrochanteric femur fracture fixation with a cephalomedullary nail. Cement augmentation of fixation in the proximal segment offers the prospect of increased stability and fewer complications, but clinical experience with non-resorbable cement is limited. To determine the handling properties and efficacy of this new technique, we performed a retrospective propensity-matched cohort of forty-four geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures treated with a cephalomedullary nail with (n = 11) or without (n = 33) augmentation with non-resorbable cement injected into the proximal segment. In the patients treated with cement augmentation, at minimum 3-month follow-up, there were no instances of intra-articular cut-out, and no increase in re-operation compared to conventional fixation. Cement augmentation appears to be safe and effective in geriatric intertrochanteric femur fractures to mitigate risk of cut-out.

Trochanteric osteotomy for acetabular fracture fixation: a case series and literature review.

PURPOSE: This study examined osteotomy union and heterotopic ossification (HO) after performing digastric trochanteric osteotomies during open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of acetabular and combined femoral head fractures. Femoral head osteonecrosis and trochanteric screw removal were secondarily assessed. METHODS: Twenty-six patients treated at a Level I trauma center, from years 2003 to 2019, who received a digastric trochanteric osteotomy during acetabular and combined femoral head fracture ORIF through a posterior surgical approach were retrospectively identified. Osteotomies were fixed with two 3.5 mm cortical lag screws. Rates of osteotomy union, HO, femoral head osteonecrosis, and trochanteric screw removal were determined. RESULTS: All osteotomies went onto union without displacement or failure of fixation. Only three (12%) patients developed severe HO (modified-Brooker class III-IV). There were no instances of femoral head osteonecrosis and only one (7%) patient required trochanteric screw removal. CONCLUSIONS: The digastric trochanteric osteotomy heals reliably with low rates of severe HO, femoral head osteonecrosis, and screw removal for soft-tissue irritation. A review of the literature is presented and found comparable findings.

Management of the posterior wall fracture in associated both column fractures of the acetabulum.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes in patients with associated both column (ABC) acetabular fractures with fracture of the posterior wall (PW), in which the PW underwent reduction and fragment-specific fixation versus those that were treated with column fixation alone. Secondary aims were to assess PW fracture incidence and morphology, as well as to compare radiographic outcomes including fracture healing and interval displacement of the PW in those that did and did not undergo fragment-specific fixation of the PW. METHODS: This was a retrospective series of ABC acetabular fractures treated at a single Level I trauma center. Separate fractures of the PW were identified, and associated features were assessed. Associated both column fractures that underwent reduction and fragment-specific fixation of the PW where then compared to ABC fractures with PW involvement that underwent column reconstruction alone. Radiographic and clinical outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Fractures of the PW occurred in 55.7% of ABC fractures and were associated with central displacement of the femoral head. The majority of PW fractures were large and involved the acetabular roof. All PW fractures healed without displacement by 3 months, regardless of whether or not reduction and stabilization was performed. Mid-term outcomes at 1-year were similar regardless of whether or not the PW was reduced and stabilized, with regards to Tönnis grade, Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score, and conversion to total hip arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: Reduction and fragment-specific fixation of the PW component of ABC acetabular fractures did not improve outcomes in this small comparative study. Posterior wall fractures associated with ABC patterns are frequently large-sized fragments that involve the acetabular roof and are rendered stable after reconstruction of the columns.