ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the usefulness of the routinely planned six-week outpatient visit and x-ray in patients treated surgically for the most common upper extremity fractures including clavicle, proximal humerus, humeral shaft, olecranon, radial shaft and distal radius. METHOD: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients treated surgically for the most common upper extremity fractures between 2019 and 2022 in a level 1 trauma center. The first outcome of interest was the incidence of abnormalities found on the x-ray made at the 6-week outpatient visit. Abnormalities were defined as all differences between the intra-operative (or direct postoperative) and 6-week x-ray. In case an abnormality was detected, the hospital records were screened to determine its clinical consequence. The clinical consequences were categorized into requiring either additional diagnostics, additional interventions, change of standard postoperative immobilization, weightbearing or allowed range of motion (ROM). The second outcome of interest was the incidence of deviations from the local standard post operative treatment and follow-up protocol based on the 6-week outpatient visit as a whole. Deviations were also categorized into either requiring additional diagnostics, additional interventions, change of standard postoperative immobilization, weightbearing or allowed range of motion. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were included. Abnormalities on x-ray at 6 weeks postoperatively were found in only 10 (3.7%) patients of which only 4 (1.5%) had clinical implications (in three patients extra imaging was required and in one patient it was necessary to deviate from standard weightbearing/ROM limitation regime). The clinical/radiological findings during the 6-week outpatient visit led to a deviation from standard in only 8 (3.0%) patients. Notably, the majority of these patients experienced symptoms suggestive for complications. CONCLUSION: The routine 6-week outpatient visit and x-ray, after surgery for common upper extremity fractures, rarely has clinical consequences. It should be questioned whether these routine visits are necessary and whether a more selective approach should be considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV; Case Series; Prognosis Study.
ABSTRACT
Background: This study investigated the incidence and clinical consequences of abnormal radiological and clinical findings during routinely performed 6-week outpatient visits in patients treated conservatively for multiple (3 or more) rib fractures. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted among patients with multiple rib fractures treated conservatively between 2018 and 2021 (Opvent database). The primary outcome was the incidence of abnormalities on chest X-ray (CXR) and their clinical consequences, which were categorized as requiring intervention or additional clinical/radiological examination. The secondary focus was the incidence of deviation from standard treatment in response to the findings (clinical or radiological) at the routine 6-week outpatient visit. Results: In total, 364 patients were included, of whom 246 had a 6-week visit with CXR. The median age was 57 years (interquartile range, 46-70 years) and the median Injury Severity Score was 17 (interquartile range, 13-22). Forty-six abnormalities (18.7%) were found on CXR. These abnormalities resulted in additional outpatient visits in 4 patients (1.5%) and in chest drain insertion in 2 (0.8%). Only 2 patients (0.8%) with an abnormality on CXR presented without symptoms. None of the 118 patients who had visits without CXR experienced problems. Conclusion: Routine 6-week outpatient visits for patients with conservatively treated multiple rib fractures infrequently revealed abnormalities requiring treatment modifications. It may be questioned whether the 6-week outpatient visit is even necessary. Instead, a more targeted approach could be adopted, providing follow-up to high-risk or high-demand patients only, or offering guidance on recognizing warning signs and providing aftercare through a smartphone application.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The treatment of traumatic thoracic and lumbar spine fractures remains controversial. To date no consensus exists on the correct choice of surgical approach and technique. Research question: to provide a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the available different surgical methods and their quantified outcomes. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched between 2001 and 2020 using the term 'spinal fractures'. Inclusion criteria were: adults, ≥10 cases, ≥12 months follow-up, thoracic or lumbar fractures, and surgery <3 weeks of trauma. Studies were categorized per surgical technique: Posterior open (PO), posterior percutaneous (PP), stand-alone vertebral body augmentation (SA), anterior scopic (AS), anterior open (AO), posterior percutaneous and anterior open (PPAO), posterior percutaneous and anterior scopic (PPAS), posterior open and anterior open (POAO) and posterior open and anterior scopic (POAS). The PO group was used as a reference group. Results: After duplicate removal 6042 articles were identified. A total of 102 articles were Included, in which 137 separate surgical technique cohorts were described: PO (n = 75), PP, (n = 39), SA (n = 12), AO (n = 5), PPAO (n = 1), PPAS (n = 1), POAO (n = 2) and POAS (n = 2). Discussion and conclusion: For type A3/A4 burst fractures, without severe neurological deficit, posterior percutaneous (PP) technique seems the safest and most feasible option in the past two decades. If needed, PP can be combined with anterior augmentation to prevent secondary kyphosis. Furthermore, posterior open (PO) technique is feasible in almost all types of fractures. Also, this technique can provide for an additional posterior decompression or fusion. Overall, no neurologic deterioration was reported following surgical intervention.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment (i.e. nonoperative or operative) for patients with multiple rib fractures remains debated. Studies that compare treatments are rationalized by the alleged poor outcomes of nonoperative treatment. METHODS: The aim of this prospective international multicenter cohort study (between January 2018 and March 2021) with one-year follow-up, was to report contemporary outcomes of nonoperatively treated patients with multiple rib fractures. Including 845 patients with three or more rib fractures. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (HLOS), (pulmonary) complications, and quality of life. RESULTS: Mean age was 57.7 ± 17.0 years, median Injury Severity Score was 17 (13-22) and the median number of rib fractures was 6 (4-8). In-hospital mortality rate was 1.5% (n = 13), 112 (13.3%) patients had pneumonia and four (0.5%) patients developed a symptomatic non-union. The median HLOS was 7 (4-13) days, and median intensive care unit length of stay was 2 (1-5) days. Mean EQ-5D-5L index value was 0.83 ± 0.18 one year after trauma. Polytrauma patients had a median HLOS of 10 (6-18) days, a pneumonia rate of 17.6% (n = 77) and mortality rate of 1.7% (n = 7). Elderly patients (≥65 years) had a median HLOS of 9 (5-15) days, a pneumonia rate of 19.7% (n = 57) and mortality rate of 4.1% (n = 12). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, nonoperative treatment of patients with multiple rib fractures shows low mortality and morbidity rate and good quality of life after one year. Future studies evaluating the benefit of operative stabilisation should use contemporary outcomes to establish the therapeutic margin of rib fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Therapeutic/Care Management.
