Risk factors for infection in severe open tibial shaft fractures.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate risk factors for infection in severe open tibial shaft fractures. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective study investigated internal versus external fixation of severe open tibia fractures at 20 US Level I trauma centers. Adult patients, aged <65 years, with a Gustilo-Anderson Type IIIB or severe IIIA metaphyseal or diaphyseal tibia fracture were included. All fractures underwent definitive fixation with either a modern ring external fixator, intramedullary device, and/or plate. Fourteen variables previously identified as risk factors for infection were included in the analysis. Deep surgical site infection was defined as an infection treated with surgical debridement within 1 year of index surgery. RESULTS: The study cohort included 430 patients. Deep surgical site infection requiring reoperation occurred in 108 (25 %) patients. The final model identified four risk factors for infection: age >40 years (OR, 2.00; 95 % CI, 1.3-3.1), Gustilo-Anderson Type IIIB (OR, 1.80; 95 % CI, 1.1-3.0), embedded wound contamination (OR, 1.69; 95 % CI, 1.1-2.7), and wound length (OR, 1.02/cm; 95 % CI, 1.0-1.05). The model performed poorly at distinguishing infected from uninfected patients (Area Under the Curve=0.57; 95 % CI, 0.51-0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons can now counsel patients with these risk factors that they are at a markedly higher risk of infection. The identification of these risk factors may direct future research aimed at mitigating the risk of deep surgical site infection in this patient population.

External Validation of a Predictive Score for Fracture-Related Infections in Orthopedic Trauma Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to externally validate a predictive score for fracture-related infections, establishing generalizability for absolute and relative risk of infection in the setting of orthopedic fracture surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, case-control study performed at a level I academic trauma center that included 147 patients with fracture-related infection in the study group and 300 control patients. We analyzed the same 8 independent predictors of fracture-related infection cited by a previous study. We then used the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) to compare the derivation and validation cohorts. The validation and derivation cohorts were then compared by grouping patients into 4 strata of Wise score groups. This allowed for comparison of AUC and risk of fracture-related infection in our institution with those in the previously studied institution. RESULTS: The resulting data yielded an AUC (0.74) nearly identical to that of the previously studied institution. It was also found that the relative risk of infection correlated with the Wise score in the same way the initial model did with the absolute risks being similar. CONCLUSION: The previous predictive model was externally validated and shown to be generalizable to a different patient population. The relative risk of a fracture-related infection can be determined using this scoring model preoperatively with the goal of aiding in patient counseling and surgical decision-making, giving a quantitative value to patient risk factors. [Orthopedics. 202x;4x(x):xx-xx.].

Is the Orthopaedic Trauma Association-Open Fracture Classification (OTA-OFC) Better than the Gustilo-Anderson Classification at Predicting Fracture-Related Infections in the Tibia?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate and compare the predictive ability of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Open Fracture Classification (OTA-OFC) and the Gustilo-Anderson classification systems for fracture-related infections (FRI) in patients with open tibia fractures. METHODS: Design: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients aged 16 years or older with an operatively treated open tibia fracture (OTA-OTA 41, 42, and 43) between 2010 and 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: The primary outcome was FRI. The OTA-OFC and the Gustilo-Anderson classifications were compared in their ability to predict FRI. RESULTS: 890 patients (mean age, 43 years [range, 17 to 96]; 75% male) with 912 open tibia fractures were included. 142 (16%) had an infection. The OTA-OFC was not significantly better at predicting FRI than the Gustilo-Anderson classification (area under the curve, 0.66 vs. 0.66; P = 0.89). The Gustilo-Anderson classification was a stronger predictor of FRI than any single OTA-OFC domain, explaining 72% of FRI variance. Only the addition of the OTA-OFC wound contamination domain to Gustilo-Anderson significantly increased the variance explained (72% vs. 84%, P = 0.04). Embedded contamination increased the risk of FRI by approximately 10% as the risk of FRI with embedded contamination was 16% for Type I or IIs, 26% for Type IIIAs, 45% for Type IIIBs, and 46% for Type IIICs. CONCLUSIONS: The more complex OTA-OFC system was not better than the Gustilo-Anderson classification system in predicting FRIs in patients with open tibia fractures. Adding embedded wound contamination to the Gustilo-Anderson classification system significantly improved its prognostic ability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

What outcomes do patients value after orthopaedic trauma: A best-worst scaling choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-centered treatment and research should focus on the outcomes that matter to patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the outcome preferences of patients after musculoskeletal trauma. The secondary aim was to identify discrepancies between outcome preferences of surgeons and patients. METHODS: A Best-worst scaling choice experiment survey was administered to patients with operative lower extremity injuries and orthopaedic surgeons who take trauma call. Participants completed 13 choice sets of 3 randomly-ordered outcomes, including: a full recovery (back to normal) without any problems; a problem that requires additional surgery or hospital stay versus medication or treatment in clinic/emergency department; minimal to moderate versus severe pain for 6 weeks; need for crutches/walker versus wheelchair for 6-12 weeks; being unable to work for 6-12 weeks; requiring 2-4 weeks in a facility; a perfect versus poor or worst-possible EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) score at 1 year; and death. Within each set, participants ranked their "most-preferred" to "least-preferred" outcomes. Responses were aggregated to calculate the relative importance, or marginal utility, of each outcome stratified by respondent type. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients and 65 surgeons participated. The most preferred outcome for patients and surgeons was a full recovery (back to normal) without any problems, followed by minimal to moderate pain for 6 weeks and a perfect EQ-5D score. The least preferred outcomes were death and the worst EQ-5D score, which had similar marginal utility, followed by a poor EQ-5D score and a problem that needs another surgery or stay at a hospital, which also had similar marginal utility. Surgeons, in comparison to patients, assigned a higher marginal utility to perfect EQ-5D scores at one year (3.55 vs. 2.03; p < 0.0001) and a 2-4 week stay in a facility (0.52 vs. -0.21; p = 0.001), and a lower marginal utility to severe pain for 6 weeks (-0.58 vs. -0.08; p = 0.04) and a poor EQ-5D score (-1.88 vs. -1.03; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: A full recovery (back to normal) without any problems was the most-preferred outcome for both patients and surgeons. Patient-centered care and research should focus on both patients' return to baseline and the avoidance of complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Healthcare personnel opinions regarding the feasibility of a risk-tailored approach to contact precautions for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the acute care setting.

"All or none" approaches to the use of contact precautions for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) both fail to recognize that transmission risk varies. This qualitative study assessed healthcare personnel perspectives regarding the feasibility of a risk-tailored approach to use contact precautions for MRSA more strategically in the acute care setting.

Venous thromboembolism testing practices after orthopaedic trauma: prophylaxis regimen does not influence testing patterns.

Objectives: To determine venous thromboembolism (VTE) testing patterns in an orthopaedic trauma population and to evaluate for differences in VTE surveillance by prophylaxis regimen through a secondary analysis of the ADAPT trial. Design: Prospective randomized trial. Setting: Level I trauma center. Patients: Three hundred twenty-nine adult (18 years and older) trauma patients presenting with an operative extremity fracture proximal to the metatarsals/carpals or any pelvic or acetabular fracture requiring VTE prophylaxis. Intervention: VTE imaging studies recorded within 90 days post injury. Main Outcome Measurements: Percentage of patients tested for VTE were compared between treatment groups using Fisher's exact test. Subsequently, multivariable regression was used to determine patient factors significantly associated with risk of receiving a VTE imaging study. Results: Sixty-seven patients (20.4%) had VTE tests ordered during the study period. Twenty (29.9%) of these 67 patients with ordered VTE imaging tests had a positive finding. No difference in proportion of patients tested for VTE by prophylaxis regimen (18.8% on aspirin vs. 22.0% on LMWH, P = 0.50) was observed. Factors associated with increased likelihood of VTE testing included White race (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.26-5.42), increased Injury Severity Score (aOR for every 1-point increase: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.05-1.15), and lower socioeconomic status based on the Area Deprivation Index (aOR for every 10-point increase: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.00-1.30). Conclusions: VTE surveillance did not significantly differ by prophylaxis regimen. Patient demographic factors including race, injury severity, and socioeconomic status were associated with differences in VTE surveillance. Level of Evidence: Level I, Therapeutic.

Factors that Promote and Protect Against Financial Toxicity after Orthopaedic Trauma: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Financial toxicity is highly prevalent in patients after an orthopaedic injury. However, little is known regarding the conditions that promote and protect against this financial distress. Our objective was to understand the factors that cause and protect against financial toxicity after a lower extremity fracture. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 20 patients 3 months after surgical treatment of a lower extremity fracture. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify themes and subthemes. Data saturation occurred after 15 interviews. The percentage of patients who described the identified themes are reported. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients (median age, 44 years [IQR, 38 to 58]; 60% male) participated in the study. The most common injury was a distal tibia fracture (n = 8; 40%). Eleven themes that promoted financial distress were identified, the most common being work effects (n = 14; 70%) and emotional health (n = 12; 60%). Over half (n = 11; 55%) of participants described financial toxicity arising from an inability to access social welfare programs. Seven themes that protected against financial distress were also identified, including insurance (n = 17; 85%) and support from friends and family (n = 17; 85%). Over half (n = 13; 65%) of the participants discussed the support they received from their healthcare team, which encompassed expectation setting and connections to financial aid and other services. Employment protection and workplace flexibility were additional protective themes. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study of orthopaedic trauma patients found work and emotional health-related factors to be primary drivers of financial toxicity after injury. Insurance and support from friends and family were the most frequently reported protective factors. Many participants described the pivotal role of the healthcare team in establishing recovery expectations and facilitating access to social welfare programs.

Fix or Replace? Patient Preferences for the Treatment of Geriatric Lower Extremity Fractures: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Introduction: When considering treatment options for geriatric patients with lower extremity fractures, little is known about which outcomes are prioritized by patients. This study aimed to determine the patient preferences for outcomes after a geriatric lower extremity fracture. Materials and Methods: We administered a discrete choice experiment survey to 150 patients who were at least 60 years of age and treated for a lower extremity fracture at a Level I trauma center. The discrete choice experiment presented study participants with 8 sets of hypothetical outcome comparisons, including joint preservation (yes or no), risk of reoperation at 6 months and 24 months, postoperative weightbearing status, disposition, and function as measured by return to baseline walking distance. We estimated the relative importance of these potential outcomes using multinomial logit modeling. Results: The strongest patient preference was for maintained function after treatment (59%, P < .001), followed by reoperation within 6 months (12%, P < .001). Although patients generally favored joint preservation, patients were willing to change their preference in favor of joint replacement if it increased function (walking distance) by 13% (SE, 66%). Reducing the short-term reoperation risk (12%, P < .001) was more important to patients than reducing long-term reoperation risk (4%, P = .33). Disposition and weightbearing status were lesser priorities to patients (9%, P < .001 and 7%, P < .001, respectively). Discussion: After a lower extremity fracture, geriatric patients prioritized maintained walking function. Avoiding short-term reoperation was more important than avoiding long-term reoperation. Joint preservation through fracture fixation was the preferred treatment of geriatric patients unless arthroplasty or arthrodesis provides a meaningful functional benefit. Hospital disposition and postoperative weightbearing status were less important to patients than the other included outcomes. Conclusions: Geriatric patients strongly prioritize function over other outcomes after a lower extremity fracture.

Patient Preferences for Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment of LC1 Pelvis Fracture: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify how patients with lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvis fracture value attributes of operative versus nonoperative treatment. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment. SETTING: Three US Level 1 trauma centers. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult survivors of an LC1 pelvis treated between June 2016 and March 2023 were identified from institutional registries. The choice experiment was administered as a survey from March through August 2023. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Participants chose between 12 hypothetical comparisons of treatment attributes including operative or nonoperative care, risk of death, severity of pain, risk of secondary surgery, shorter hospital stay, discharge destination, and independence in ambulation within 1 month of injury. The marginal utility of each treatment attribute, for example, the strength of participants' aggregate preference for an attribute as indicated by their survey choices, was estimated by multinomial logit modeling with and without stratification by treatment received. RESULTS: Four hundred forty-nine eligible patients were identified. The survey was distributed to 182 patients and collected from 72 patients (39%) at a median 2.3 years after injury. Respondents were 66% female with a median age of 59 years (IQR, 34-69 years). Before injury, 94% ambulated independently and 75% were working; 41% received operative treatment. Independence with ambulation provided the highest relative marginal utility (21%, P < 0.001), followed by discharge to home versus skilled nursing (20%, P < 0.001), moderate versus severe postdischarge pain (17%, P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (16%, P < 0.001), secondary surgery (15%, P < 0.001), and mortality (10%, P = 0.02). Overall, no relative utility for operative versus nonoperative treatment was observed (2%, P = 0.54). However, respondents strongly preferred the treatment they received: operative patients valued operative treatment (utility, 0.37 vs. -0.37, P < 0.001); nonoperative patients valued nonoperative treatment (utility, 0.19 vs. -0.19, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LC1 pelvis fracture patients valued independence with ambulation, shorter hospital stay, and avoiding secondary surgery and mortality in the month after their injury. Patients preferred the treatment they received rather than operative versus nonoperative care.

Effect of Aspirin Versus Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin Thromboprophylaxis on Medication Satisfaction and Out-of-Pocket Costs: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend low-molecular-weight heparin for thromboprophylaxis after orthopaedic trauma. However, recent evidence suggests that aspirin is similar in efficacy and safety. To understand patients' experiences with these medications, we compared patients' satisfaction and out-of-pocket costs after thromboprophylaxis with aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the PREVENTion of CLots in Orthopaedic Trauma (PREVENT CLOT) trial, conducted at 21 trauma centers in the U.S. and Canada. We included adult patients with an operatively treated extremity fracture or a pelvic or acetabular fracture. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) twice daily or 81 mg of aspirin twice daily for thromboprophylaxis. The duration of the thromboprophylaxis, including post-discharge prescription, was based on hospital protocols. The study outcomes included patient satisfaction with and out-of-pocket costs for their thromboprophylactic medication measured on ordinal scales. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 12,211 patients (mean age and standard deviation [SD], 45 ± 18 years; 62% male), 9725 of whom completed the question regarding their satisfaction with the medication and 6723 of whom reported their out-of-pocket costs. The odds of greater satisfaction were 2.6 times higher for patients assigned to aspirin than those assigned to low-molecular-weight heparin (odds ratio [OR]: 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.39 to 2.80; p < 0.001). Overall, the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs for thromboprophylaxis medication were 51% higher for patients assigned to aspirin compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.37 to 1.66; p < 0.001). However, patients assigned to aspirin had substantially lower odds of out-of-pocket costs of at least $25 (OR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.18; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of aspirin substantially improved patients' satisfaction with their medication after orthopaedic trauma. While aspirin use increased the odds of incurring any out-of-pocket costs, it protected against costs of ≥$25, potentially improving health equity for thromboprophylaxis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Skin Antisepsis before Surgical Fixation of Extremity Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating surgical-site infection have had conflicting results with respect to the use of alcohol solutions containing iodine povacrylex or chlorhexidine gluconate as skin antisepsis before surgery to repair a fractured limb (i.e., an extremity fracture). METHODS: In a cluster-randomized, crossover trial at 25 hospitals in the United States and Canada, we randomly assigned hospitals to use a solution of 0.7% iodine povacrylex in 74% isopropyl alcohol (iodine group) or 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol (chlorhexidine group) as preoperative antisepsis for surgical procedures to repair extremity fractures. Every 2 months, the hospitals alternated interventions. Separate populations of patients with either open or closed fractures were enrolled and included in the analysis. The primary outcome was surgical-site infection, which included superficial incisional infection within 30 days or deep incisional or organ-space infection within 90 days. The secondary outcome was unplanned reoperation for fracture-healing complications. RESULTS: A total of 6785 patients with a closed fracture and 1700 patients with an open fracture were included in the trial. In the closed-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 77 patients (2.4%) in the iodine group and in 108 patients (3.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 1.00; P = 0.049). In the open-fracture population, surgical-site infection occurred in 54 patients (6.5%) in the iodine group and in 60 patients (7.3%) in the chlorhexidine group (odd ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.27; P = 0.45). The frequencies of unplanned reoperation, 1-year outcomes, and serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with closed extremity fractures, skin antisepsis with iodine povacrylex in alcohol resulted in fewer surgical-site infections than antisepsis with chlorhexidine gluconate in alcohol. In patients with open fractures, the results were similar in the two groups. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03523962.).

Risk Factors of Failure in 228 Periprosthetic Distal Femur Fractures: A Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify risk factors of reoperation to promote union or to address deep surgical-site infection (DSSI) in periprosthetic distal femur fractures treated with lateral distal femoral locking plates (LDFLPs). DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ten level-I trauma centers. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients with Orthopaedic Trauma Association/Association of Osteosynthesis (OTA/AO) 33A or 33C periprosthetic distal femur fractures who underwent surgical fixation between January 2012 and December 2019 exclusively using LDFLPs were eligible for inclusion. Patients with pathologic fractures or with follow-up less than 3 months without an outcome event (unplanned reoperation to promote union or for deep surgical infection) before this time point were excluded. Fracture fixation constructs used medial plates, intramedullary nails, or hybrid fixation constructs were excluded from analysis. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: To examine the influence of patient demographics, injury characteristics, and features of the fracture fixation construct on the occurrence of unplanned reoperation to promote union or to address a DSSI. RESULTS: There was an 8.3% rate (19/228) of unplanned reoperation to promote union. Predictive factors for the need for reoperation to promote union included increasing body mass index (odds ratio [OR] = 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.16; P = 0.01), increasing number of screws in the distal fracture segment (OR = 1.73; 95% CI: 1.06-2.95; P = 0.03), and decreasing proportion of proximal segment screws that are locking (OR = 0.17; 95% CI: 0.03-0.70; P = 0.02) There was a 4.8% rate (11/228) of reoperation to address DSSI. There were no statistically significant predictive factors identified as risk factors of the need for reoperation to address DSSI ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: 8.3% of periprosthetic distal femur fractures treated at 10 centers with LDFLPs underwent unplanned reoperation to promote union. Increasing patient body mass index and increasing number of screws in the distal fracture segment were found to be predictive factors, whereas increased locking screws in the proximal segment were found to be protective. 4.8% of patients in this cohort underwent reoperation to address DSSI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Quantify Patient Preferences.

Discrete choice experiments are a robust technique for quantifying preferences. With this method, respondents are presented with a series of hypothetical comparisons described by attributes with varying levels. The aggregated choices from respondents can be used to infer the relative importance of the described attributes and acceptable trade-offs between attributes. The data generated from discrete choice experiments can aid surgeons in aligning patient values with treatment decisions and support the design of research that is responsive to patient preferences. This article summarizes the application of discrete choice experiments to orthopaedics. We share best practices for designing discrete choice experiments and options for reporting study results. Finally, we suggest opportunities for this method within our field.

Social Media Influence and Gender Are Correlated with Industry Payments to Orthopaedic Sports Surgeons.

Social media, specifically Twitter, has become an increasingly used tool in academic orthopaedic surgery to help surgeons connect with patients and peers. This study seeks to understand correlations among social medial influence, academic influence, and gender among academic orthopaedic sport surgeons. A list of all orthopaedic sports surgeons serving as faculty of sports fellowships in the United States was compiled, along with publicly available demographic information. Their Hirsh indices (h-indices) were obtained using the Scopus database. The Physician Payments Sunshine Act Web site was used to determine their industry payments from 2014 through 2020. The number of Twitter followers was used as a measure of social media influence. Multivariable linear regression models were employed to explore the associations between these parameters and industry payments. Of the 633 surgeons, 33% had a Twitter account. Surgeons with > 1,000 followers (7.3%) were awarded 186% more in nonresearch funding (p = 0.01) and had a higher probability of receiving industry research funding compared with those with no followers (p = 0.03). Sports surgeons had an average h-index of 16, with 44% having ≤ 20 publications and 21% having ≥ 100 publications. Surgeons with ≥ 100 publications were awarded 453% more in nonresearch funding (p = 0.001) and had a 32% higher probability of receiving industry research funding (p < 0.001) when compared with their colleagues with ≤ 20 publications. Female sports surgeons accounted for only 7.9% of surgeons included in the study, and were awarded 65% less in industry nonresearch funding compared with their male colleagues (p = 0.004) when controlling for other factors. Both number of publications and a high level of Twitter activity (> 1,000 followers) had the strongest associations with the quantity of industry nonresearch funding and the highest probability of industry research funding. Female sports surgeons received significantly less industry nonresearch funding compared with their male colleagues. Future studies further exploring gender disparities in industry funding for orthopaedic surgeons may be warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, Level III.

Predicting Which Species of Bacteria Will Cause an Infection After Fracture Surgery.

The aim of this study was to develop and validate risk prediction models for deep surgical site infection (SSI) caused by specific bacterial pathogens after fracture fixation. A retrospective case-control study was conducted at a level I trauma center. Fifteen candidate predictors of the bacterial pathogens in deep SSI were evaluated to develop models of bacterial risk. The study included 441 patients with orthopedic trauma with deep SSI after fracture fixation and 576 control patients. The main outcome measurement was deep SSI cultures positive for methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA), gram-negative rods (GNRs), anaerobes, or polymicrobial infection within 1 year of injury. Prognostic models were developed for five bacterial pathogen outcomes. Mean area under the curve ranged from 0.70 (GNRs) to 0.74 (polymicrobial). Strong predictors of MRSA were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of III or greater (odds ratio [OR], 3.4; 95% CI, 1.6-8.0) and time to fixation greater than 7 days (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.9-5.9). Gustilo type III fracture was the strongest predictor of MSSA (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-3.9) and GNRs (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.3-5.0). ASA classification of III or greater was the strongest predictor of polymicrobial infection (OR, 5.9; 95% CI, 2.7-15.5) and was associated with increased odds of GNRs (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.5-5.5). Our models predict the risk of MRSA, MSSA, GNR, anaerobe, and polymicrobial infections in patients with fractures. The models might allow for modification of preoperative antibiotic selection based on the particular pathogen posing greatest risk for this patient population. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(1):e19-e25.].

Secondary Bony Defects after Soft Tissue Reconstruction in Limb-Threatening Lower Extremity Injuries: Does the Approach to Flap Elevation Matter?

BACKGROUND: Limb-threatening lower extremity injuries often require secondary bone grafting after soft tissue reconstruction. We hypothesized that there would be fewer wound complications when performing secondary bone grafting via a remote surgical approach rather than direct flap elevation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed at a single Level 1 trauma center comparing complications after secondary bone grafting in patients who had undergone previous soft tissue reconstruction after open tibia fractures between 2006 and 2020. Comparing bone grafting via a remote surgical incision versus direct flap elevation, we evaluated wound dehiscence requiring return to the operating room as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were deep infection and delayed amputation. RESULTS: We identified 129 patients (mean age: 40 years, 82% male) with 159 secondary bone grafting procedures. Secondary bone grafting was performed via a remote surgical approach in 54% (n = 86) and direct flap elevation in 46% (n = 73) of cases. Wound dehiscence requiring return to the operating room occurred in one patient in the flap elevation group (1%) and none of the patients in the remote surgical approach. The odds of deep wound infection (OR, 1.77; p = 0.31) or amputation (OR, 1.43; p = 0.73) did not significantly differ between surgical approaches. No significant differences were found in complications between the reconstructive surgeon elevating and re-insetting the flap and the orthopaedic trauma surgeon performing the flap elevation and re-inset. CONCLUSION: Direct flap elevation for secondary bone grafting after soft tissue reconstruction for open tibia fractures did not result in more complications than bone grafting via a remote surgical approach. These findings should reassure surgeons to allow other clinical factors to influence the surgical approach for bone grafting.

Risk-stratified thromboprophylaxis effects of aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin in orthopedic trauma patients: A secondary analysis of the PREVENT CLOT trial.

BACKGROUND: The PREVENT CLOT trial concluded that thromboprophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in preventing death after orthopedic trauma. However, it was unclear if these results applied to patients at highest risk of thrombosis. Therefore, we assessed if the effect of aspirin versus LMWH differed based on patients' baseline risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). METHODS: The PREVENT CLOT trial enrolled 12,211 adult patients with fractures. This secondary analysis stratified the study population into VTE risk quartiles: low (<1%) to high (>10%) using the Caprini score. We assessed stratum-specific treatment effects using the win ratio method, in which each patient assigned to aspirin was paired with each assigned to LMWH. In each pair, we compared outcomes hierarchically, starting with death, then pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and bleeding. The secondary outcome added patients' medication satisfaction as a fifth composite component. RESULTS: In the high-risk quartile (n = 3052), 80% had femur fracture, pelvic, or acetabular fractures. Thoracic (47%) and head (37%) injuries were also common. In the low risk quartile (n = 3053), most patients had a tibia fracture (67%), 5% had a thoracic injury, and less than 1% had head or spinal injuries. Among high risk patients, thromboembolic events did not differ statistically between aspirin and LMWH (win ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.08, p = 0.42). This result was consistent in the low (win ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.90-1.47, p = 0.27), low-medium (win ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85-1.29, p = 0.68), and medium-high risk quartiles (win ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.80-1.11, p = 0.48). When medication satisfaction was considered, favorable outcomes were 68% more likely with aspirin (win ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.60-1.77; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Thromboembolic outcomes were similar with aspirin or LMWH, even among patients at highest risk of VTE. Aspirin was favored if medication satisfaction was also considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II.

Frequency and Characteristics of Posterior Labral Injuries in Operative Acetabular Fractures Treated Through a Posterior Approach: A Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: The association between labral injuries and acetabular fractures is unknown. This study aimed to identify the frequency and characteristics of labral injuries in operatively treated acetabular fractures that cannot be identified on preoperative imaging. METHODS: . DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort. SETTING: Level I trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Adult patients with an acetabular fracture operatively treated through a posterior approach. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: The frequency and characteristics of labral injuries. RESULTS: Fifty-three of 71 acetabular fractures (75%; 95% confidence interval, 63%-83%) demonstrated a labral injury visible via the posterior approach. Posterior labral injuries occurred in 89% of operative acetabular fracture patterns involving the posterior wall and most commonly represent a detachment of the posteroinferior labrum (n = 39, 75%). Fractures with a labral injury were more likely to have gluteus minimus damage (93% vs. 61%, P = 0.02), femoral head lesions (38% vs. 17%, P = 0.03), joint capsule detachment (60% vs. 33%, P = 0.05), and fracture patterns involving the posterior wall (89% vs. 50%, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the high rate (89%) of posterior labral injuries in posterior wall fractures, the most common injury pattern being a detachment of the posteroinferior labrum. Labral injuries in acetabular fractures may have important clinical implications and this study is the first to identify the frequency and characteristics of these injuries. Further studies should assess the relationship between labral injuries, treatment strategies, and the progression to post-traumatic osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.