Immediate Unprotected Weightbearing vs 2 Weeks Nonweightbearing After Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Ankle Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative care protocols for ankle fracture surgery remain controversial with variability among care providers. This prospective controlled trial compared 12-week postoperative outcomes for immediate unprotected weightbearing (IMWB) vs nonweightbearing (NWB) for 2 weeks in a splint followed by weightbearing as tolerated (WBAT) in a boot after surgical fixation of selected low-energy ankle fractures without superior articular involvement. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients undergoing surgical fixation of ankle fractures at a single level 1 trauma center were recruited according to specific criteria and enrolled by presentation date. The first 43 eligible patients were allocated to the control group, with NWB in a splint for 2 weeks followed by WBAT in a walker boot. The next 44 patients recruited were allocated to the IMWB group. The primary outcome was the Olerud-Molander score (OMAS). Secondary outcome measures included the Euroquol-5D (EQ5D) score and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Specific Health Problem (WPAI:SHP) scores, ankle range of motion (ROM), wound complications, time to return to work, radiograph measurements, and fracture reduction loss. In this perioperative-focused study, we collected data on patients until 12 weeks postoperation. RESULTS: The IMWB group had 5 superficial wound complications vs 1 in the control group. At 12 weeks, we found no difference in OMAS, EQ5D, WPAI:SHP scores, ROM, time to return to work, or radiographic measurements. CONCLUSION: In this short-term and relatively small prospective trial, we found more wound complications among patients treated with immediate unprotected weightbearing compared with patients treated with 2 weeks of NWB followed by protected weightbearing. Given the low incidence and small sample size, we do not know if these observed findings are generalizable. However, we also found no difference in functional outcomes at 12 weeks postoperation between these 2 groups. In light of that, we do not recommend IMWB after open reduction internal fixation of low-energy ankle fractures with plate and/or screw fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective controlled trial.

The Influence of Sagittal Proximal Tibial Anatomy in Tibial Intramedullary Nailing.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify anatomic variation in sagittal proximal tibial anatomy and determine if anatomy or nail insertion method influences the radiographic nail position. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort of prospectively collected data. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Forty-five patients with 46 tibia fractures (OTA/AO 41A, 42, and 43) treated with infrapatellar (IP) or suprapatellar (SP) nailing. The average patient age was 40.6 years (range 19-62 years). INTERVENTION: Patients received IP or SP nailing. Cohorts were analyzed based on the nailing technique and proximal tibial anatomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Proximal tibial radiographic anatomy was quantified using novel measurements [anterior tubercle angle (ATA) and entry point position (EPP)]. Nail entry point, entry point displacement after reaming, nail position, and quality of reduction was measured and compared between groups. RESULTS: ATA was highly variable between patients. ATA was strongly correlated with EPP with a higher ATA associated with EPP more colinear with the intramedullary canal. Patients with low ATA treated with IP nailing had significantly longer operative times (60.0 vs. 45.7 minutes). Low ATA tibias had a higher incidence of entry point displacement due to eccentric reaming compared with high ATA tibias (70% vs. 38%) with the highest incidence of entry point displacement and absolute displacement in low ATA tibias treated with IP nailing (86%, 2.8 mm). SP nailing demonstrated shorter operative times relative to IP nailing (45.5 vs. 55.6 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variability in proximal tibial anatomy and these features influences the nail position within the tibia. These differences in anatomy should be considered to potentially reduce operative times, entry point displacement and anteriorization of tibial nails. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Plate-Assisted Intramedullary Nailing of Proximal Third Tibia Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To report on the safety of unicortical plate stabilization in conjunction with intramedullary nailing (IMN) of proximal third tibia fractures. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: A Level I trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: All Orthopaedic Trauma Association 41A and 42A/B/C proximal tibia fractures treated with IMN from January 2011 to May 2018 were reviewed. Fifty-three proximal tibia fractures in 50 patients were included in the study. Twenty-four patients were treated with plate-assisted reduction and IMN, and 29 were treated with IMN alone. The plate-assisted IMN cohort was subdivided into patients with plate retention and those that had the plate removed. INTERVENTION: Plate-assisted IMN and IMN only. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patients were followed up for evidence of nonunion, reduction quality, postoperative infection, and rate of implant removal. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between plate-assisted IMN and IMN only for age, fracture type, mechanism of injury, quality of reduction, or implant removal rate. Open fractures were treated more often with plate-assisted IMN (88%) compared with the number of open fractures treated with IMN only (12%). There were no differences in nonunion rate or rate of postoperative infection between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Plate-assisted IMN of proximal third tibia fractures can safely be performed even in open tibia fractures with similar rates of nonunion, infection, and implant removal rates to patients treated with IMN only. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Reoperation following open reduction and plate fixation of displaced mid-shaft clavicle fractures.

BACKGROUND: Operative fixation of displaced, mid-shaft clavicle fractures has become an increasingly common practice. With this emerging trend, data describing patient outcomes with longer follow-up are necessary. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of subjects treated with plate fixation for displaced mid-shaft clavicle fractures from 2003 to 2009 at a Level I trauma hospital. All subjects were greater than 12 months post-index surgery. Treatment involved ORIF with either a low-contact dynamic compression plate (LCDC) or a contoured plate (pre-contoured or pelvic reconstruction plate). Our primary outcome was reoperation for any indication. RESULTS: 143 subjects were included. The mean age was 36 ± 14 years and the mean time to reoperation or chart review was 33 months. Contoured plates were used in 64% of cases and LCDC plates were used in the remaining subjects. Twenty-nine subjects (20%) underwent reoperation: 23.5% of subjects treated with LCDC plates and 18.5% of subjects treated with contoured plates (p=0.52). Indications for reoperation included implant irritation (n=25), implant failure (n=2), and non-union (n=2). There was near statistically significant association with reoperation and female gender (p=0.05) but no association between reoperation and age (p=0.14), fracture class (p=0.53), plate type (p=0.49), or plate location (p=0.93). The mean QuickDASH score for the population surveyed was 8.8 (5.5-12.1; 95% CI) with near statistically significant and clinically relevant difference between those considering reoperation and those not 22.3 (8.6-36.0; 95% CI) versus 6.7 (3.6-9.8; 95% CI). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents a large series of displaced clavicle fractures treated with open reduction and plate fixation. Reoperation following plate fixation is relatively common, but primarily due to implant irritation. No difference in reoperation rates between plate types or location could be detected in our current sample size. Also, excellent functional outcomes continue to be observed several years after clavicle fracture fixation.

A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial of open reduction--internal fixation versus total elbow arthroplasty for displaced intra-articular distal humeral fractures in elderly patients.

We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial to compare functional outcomes, complications, and reoperation rates in elderly patients with displaced intra-articular, distal humeral fractures treated with open reduction-internal fixation (ORIF) or primary semiconstrained total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Forty-two patients were randomized by sealed envelope. Inclusion criteria were age greater than 65 years; displaced, comminuted, intra-articular fractures of the distal humerus (Orthopaedic Trauma Association type 13C); and closed or Gustilo grade I open fractures treated within 12 hours of injury. Both ORIF and TEA were performed following a standardized protocol. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score were determined at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 2 years. Complication type, duration, management, and treatment requiring reoperation were recorded. An intention-to-treat analysis and an on-treatment analysis were conducted to address patients randomized to ORIF but converted to TEA intraoperatively. Twenty-one patients were randomized to each treatment group. Two died before follow-up and were excluded from the study. Five patients randomized to ORIF were converted to TEA intraoperatively because of extensive comminution and inability to obtain fixation stable enough to allow early range of motion. This resulted in 15 patients (3 men and 12 women) with a mean age of 77 years in the ORIF group and 25 patients (2 men and 23 women) with a mean age of 78 years in the TEA group. Baseline demographics for mechanism, classification, comorbidities, fracture type, activity level, and ipsilateral injuries were similar between the 2 groups. Operative time averaged 32 minutes less in the TEA group (P = .001). Patients who underwent TEA had significantly better MEPSs at 3 months (83 vs 65, P = .01), 6 months (86 vs 68, P = .003), 12 months (88 vs 72, P = .007), and 2 years (86 vs 73, P = .015) compared with the ORIF group. Patients who underwent TEA had significantly better DASH scores at 6 weeks (43 vs 77, P = .02) and 6 months (31 vs 50, P = .01) but not at 12 months (32 vs 47, P = .1) or 2 years (34 vs 38, P = .6). The mean flexion-extension arc was 107 degrees (range, 42 degrees -145 degrees) in the TEA group and 95 degrees (range, 30 degrees -140 degrees) in the ORIF group (P = .19). Reoperation rates for TEA (3/25 [12%]) and ORIF (4/15 [27%]) were not statistically different (P = .2). TEA for the treatment of comminuted intra-articular distal humeral fractures resulted in more predictable and improved 2-year functional outcomes compared with ORIF, based on the MEPS. DASH scores were better in the TEA group in the short term but were not statistically different at 2 years' follow-up. TEA may result in decreased reoperation rates, considering that 25% of fractures randomized to ORIF were not amenable to internal fixation. TEA is a preferred alternative for ORIF in elderly patients with complex distal humeral fractures that are not amenable to stable fixation. Elderly patients have an increased baseline DASH score and appear to accommodate to objective limitations in function with time.

A survey of the surgical management of acute and chronic scapholunate instability.

PURPOSE: Scapholunate instability is a challenging problem and controversy persists among hand surgeons with respect to treatment choice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the pattern of practice among specialized hand surgeons in the management of both acute and chronic scapholunate instability. METHODS: A mailed survey study was sent to the 1,628 members of the American and Canadian Societies for Surgery of the Hand. Hand surgeons were asked to complete a comprehensive management questionnaire that examined a surgeon's treatment algorithm in the clinical case of acute and chronic scapholunate instability. The algorithm included the choices of further investigation, timing of surgery, surgical approach, surgical procedure, fixation, and predicted outcome. RESULTS: Of the 468 hand surgeons who responded to the survey the vast majority elected to perform surgery when confronted with a case of scapholunate instability. Early surgical intervention within 6 weeks of injury using an open dorsal approach was favored in both acute and chronic cases. The preferred surgical procedure in the acute case was scapholunate repair combined with a capsulodesis followed by scapholunate ligament repair alone. Favored management of the chronic case included Blatt capsulodesis alone, capsulodesis combined with a scapholunate ligament repair, or scaphotrapezium-trapezoid arthrodesis. A majority of surgeons used K-wire fixation, especially of the scapholunate and scaphocapitate in both acute and chronic cases. CONCLUSIONS: This survey confirms a consensus for the early soft tissue surgical management of acute scapholunate instability using a scapholunate ligament repair with or without a capsulodesis. The management of chronic scapholunate instability is highly variable among respondents and the choice of either a soft tissue or bony procedure may depend to a large extent on intraoperative findings.