Do Transtibial Amputations Outperform Amputations of the Hind- and Midfoot Following Severe Limb Trauma?: A Secondary Analysis of the OUTLET Study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare 18-month clinical and patient-reported outcomes between patients with severe lower-limb injuries treated with a transtibial amputation or a hind- or midfoot amputation. Despite the theoretical benefits of hind- and midfoot-level amputation, we hypothesized that patients with transtibial amputations would report better function and have fewer complications. METHODS: The study included patients 18 to 60 years of age who were treated with a transtibial amputation (n = 77) or a distal amputation (n = 17) and who were enrolled in the prospective, multicenter Outcomes Following Severe Distal Tibial, Ankle, and/or Foot Trauma (OUTLET) study. The primary outcome was the difference in Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) scores, and secondary outcomes included pain, complications, amputation revision, and amputation healing. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between patients with distal versus transtibial amputation in any of the domains of the SMFA: dysfunction index [distal versus transtibial], 31.2 versus 22.3 (p = 0.13); daily activities, 37.3 versus 26.0 (p = 0.17); emotional status, 41.4 versus 29.3 (p = 0.07); mobility, 36.5 versus 27.8 (p = 0.20); and bother index, 34.4 versus 23.6 (p = 0.14). Rates of complications requiring revision were higher for distal amputations but not significantly so (23.5% versus 13.3%; p = 0.28). One distal and no transtibial amputees required revision to a higher level (p = 0.18). A higher proportion of patients with distal compared with transtibial amputation required local surgical revision (17.7% versus 13.3%; p = 0.69). There was no significant difference between the distal and transtibial groups in scores on the Brief Pain Index at 18 months post-injury. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical complication rates did not differ significantly between patients who underwent transtibial versus hind- or midfoot amputation for severe lower-extremity injury. The average SMFA scores were higher (worse), although not significantly different, for patients undergoing distal compared with transtibial amputation, and more patients with distal amputation had a complication requiring surgical revision. Of note, more patients with distal amputation required closure with an atypical flap, which likely contributed to less favorable outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Locked Plating versus Nailing for Proximal Tibia Fractures: A Multicenter RCT.

OBJECTIVES: The main 2 forms of treatment for extraarticular proximal tibial fractures are intramedullary nailing (IMN) and locked lateral plating (LLP). The goal of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to determine whether there are significant differences in outcomes between these forms of treatment. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: 16 academic trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: 108 patients were enrolled. 99 patients were followed for 12 months. 52 patients were randomized to IMN, and 47 patients were randomized to LLP. INTERVENTION: IMN or lateral locked plating. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Functional scoring including Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment, Bother Index, EQ-5Dindex and EQ-5DVAS. Secondary measures included alignment, operative time, range of motion, union rate, pain, walking ability, ability to manage stairs, need for ambulatory aid and number, and complications. RESULTS: Functional testing demonstrated no difference between the groups, but both groups were still significantly affected 12 months postinjury. Similarly, there was no difference in time of surgery, alignment, nonunion, pain, walking ability, ability to manage stairs, need for ambulatory support, or complications. CONCLUSIONS: Both IMN and LLP provide for similar outcomes after these fractures. Patients continue to improve over the course of the year after injury but remain impaired even 1 year later. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Locked Lateral Plating Versus Retrograde Nailing for Distal Femur Fractures: A Multicenter Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The 2 main forms of treatment for distal femur fractures are locked lateral plating and retrograde nailing. The goal of this trial was to determine whether there are significant differences in outcomes between these forms of treatment. DESIGN: Multicenter randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty academic trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixty patients with distal femur fractures were enrolled. One hundred twenty-six patients were followed 12 months. Patients were randomized to plating in 62 cases and intramedullary nailing in 64 cases. INTERVENTION: Lateral locked plating or retrograde intramedullary nailing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Functional scoring including Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment, bother index, EQ Health, and EQ Index. Secondary measures included alignment, operative time, range of motion, union rate, walking ability, ability to manage stairs, and number and type of adverse events. RESULTS: Functional testing showed no difference between the groups. Both groups were still significantly affected by their fracture 12 months after injury. There was more coronal plane valgus in the plating group, which approached statistical significance. Range of motion, walking ability, and ability to manage stairs were similar between the groups. Rate and type of adverse events were not statistically different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both lateral locked plating and retrograde intramedullary nailing are reasonable surgical options for these fractures. Patients continue to improve over the course of the year after injury but remain impaired 1 year postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Suprapatellar versus infrapatellar approach for intramedullary nail fixation of tibial shaft fractures: a review of the literature.

Semi-extended suprapatellar intramedullary nail fixation of tibial fractures has recently been gaining popularity. Several recent studies and meta-analyses compare the outcomes of the suprapatellar approach with the traditional infrapatellar approach. Despite concerns with intra-articular placement of instruments, studies show the suprapatellar approach to be a safe alternative. Several articles conclude that the suprapatellar approach may be superior to the infrapatellar approach. This review discusses recent findings comparing suprapatellar and infrapatellar approaches for nail insertion.

Open Ankle Fractures: What Predicts Infection? A Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the patient, injury, and treatment factors associated with an acute infection during the treatment of open ankle fractures in a large multicenter retrospective review. To evaluate the effect of infectious complications on the rates of nonunion, malunion, and loss of reduction. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective review. SETTING: Sixteen trauma centers. PATIENTS: One thousand and 3 consecutive skeletally mature patients (514 men and 489 women) with open ankle fractures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Fracture-related infection (FRI) in open ankle fractures. RESULTS: The charts of 1003 consecutive patients were reviewed, and 712 patients (357 women and 355 men) had at least 12 weeks of clinical follow-up. Their average age was 50 years (range 16-96), and average BMI was 31; they sustained OTA/AO types 44A (12%), 44B (58%), and 44C (30%) open ankle fractures. The rate FRI rate was 15%. A multivariable regression analysis identified male sex, diabetes, smoking, immunosuppressant use, time to wound closure, and wound location as independent risk factors for infection. There were 77 cases of malunion, nonunion, loss of reduction, and/or implant failure; FRI was associated with higher rates of these complications (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Several patient, injury, and surgical factors were associated with FRI in the treatment of open ankle fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Unilateral Sacral Fractures Demonstrate Slow Recovery of Patient-Reported Outcomes Irrespective of Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: To report functional outcomes of unilateral sacral fractures treated both operatively and nonoperatively. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, observational study. SETTING: Sixteen Level 1 trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Skeletally mature patients with unilateral zone 1 or 2 sacral fractures categorized as displaced nonoperative (DN), displaced operative (DO), nondisplaced nonoperative (NN), and nondisplaced operative (NO). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Pelvic displacement was documented on injury plain radiographs. Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) scores were obtained at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after injury. Displacement was defined as greater than 5 mm in any plane at the time of injury. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-six patients with unilateral sacral fractures were initially enrolled, with a mean age of 40 years and mean injury severity score of 16. One hundred twenty-three patients completed the 2-year follow-up as follows: 29 DN, 30 DO, 47 NN, and 17 NO with 56% loss to follow-up at 2 years. Highest dysfunction was seen at 3 months for all groups with mean SMFA dysfunction scores: 25 DN, 28 DO, 27 NN, and 31 NO. The mean SMFA scores at 2 years for all groups were 13 DN, 12 DO, 17 NN, and 17 NO. CONCLUSIONS: All groups (operative/nonoperative and displaced/nondisplaced) reported worst function 3 months after injury, and all but (DN) continued to recover for 2 years after injury, with peak recovery for DN seen at 1 year. No functional benefit was seen with operative intervention for either displaced or nondisplaced injuries at any time point. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Smith-Petersen Versus Watson-Jones Approach Does Not Affect Quality of Open Reduction of Femoral Neck Fracture.

OBJECTIVE: To compare immediate quality of open reduction of femoral neck fractures by alternative surgical approaches. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Twelve Level 1 North American trauma centers. PATIENTS: Eighty adults 18-65 years of age with isolated, displaced, OTA/AO type 31-B2 or -B3 femoral neck fractures treated with internal fixation. INTERVENTION: Thirty-two modified Smith-Petersen anterior approaches versus 48 Watson-Jones anterolateral approaches for open reduction performed by fellowship-trained orthopaedic trauma surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME: Reduction quality as assessed by 3 senior orthopaedic traumatologists as "acceptable" or "unacceptable" on AP and lateral postoperative radiographs. RESULTS: No difference was observed in the rate of acceptable reduction by modified Smith-Petersen (81%) versus Watson-Jones (81%) approach (risk difference null, 95% confidence interval -17.4% to 17.4%, P = 1.00) with 90.4% panel agreement (Fleiss' weighted κ = 0.63, P < 0.01). Stratified analyses did not identify a significant difference in the rate of acceptable reduction between approaches when stratified by Pauwels angle, basicervical or transcervical fracture location, or posterior comminution. The Smith-Petersen approach afforded a better reduction when preoperative skeletal traction was not applied (RR = 1.67 [95% CI 1.10-2.52] vs. RR = 0.87 [95% CI 0.70-1.08], P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: No difference was observed in the quality of open reduction of displaced femoral neck fractures in young adults when a Watson-Jones anterolateral approach versus a modified Smith-Petersen anterior approach was performed by orthopaedic trauma surgeons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Impact of centre volume, surgeon volume, surgeon experience and geographic location on reoperation after intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures

Background: Tibial shaft fractures are the most common long-bone injury, with a reported annual incidence of more than 75 000 in the United States. This study aimed to determine whether patients with tibial fractures managed with intramedullary nails experience a lower rate of reoperation if treated at higher-volume hospitals, or by higher-volume or more experienced surgeons. Methods: The Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures (SPRINT) was a multicentre randomized clinical trial comparing reamed and nonreamed intramedullary nailing on rates of reoperation to promote fracture union, treat infection or preserve the limb in patients with open and closed fractures of the tibial shaft. Using data from SPRINT, we quantified centre and surgeon volumes into quintiles. We performed analyses adjusted for type of fracture (open v. closed), type of injury (isolated v. multitrauma), gender and age for the primary outcome of reoperation using multivariable logistic regression. Results: There were no significant differences in the odds of reoperation between high- and low-volume centres (p = 0.9). Overall, surgeon volume significantly affected the odds of reoperation (p = 0.03). The odds of reoperation among patients treated by moderate-volume surgeons were 50% less than those among patients treated by verylow-volume surgeons (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28­0.88), and the odds of reoperation among patients treated by high-volume surgeons were 47% less than those among patients treated by very-low-volume surgeons (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30­0.93). Conclusion: There appears to be no significant additional patient benefit in treatment by a higher-volume centre for intramedullary fixation of tibial shaft fractures. Additional research on the effects of surgical and clinical site volume in tibial shaft fracture management is needed to confirm this finding. The odds of reoperation were higher in patients treated by very-low-volume surgeons; this finding may be used to optimize the results of tibial shaft fracture management. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00038129

Contexte: La fracture de la diaphyse tibiale est la plus commune des fractures des os longs, avec une incidence annuelle déclarée de plus 75 000 cas aux États-Unis. Cette étude visait à déterminer si les patients traités par enclouage intramédullaire pour une fracture du tibia sont moins souvent réopérés quand l'intervention est effectuée dans des établissements qui traitent de plus forts volumes de cas ou par des chirurgiens opérant un plus fort volume de cas ou plus expérimentés. Méthodes: L'étude SPRINT (Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures) est un essai clinique multicentrique randomisé qui a comparé l'effet de l'enclouage alésé c. non alésé sur le taux des réinterventions visant à promouvoir la consolidation osseuse de la fracture, à traiter une infection ou à préserver le membre chez des patients victimes de fractures fermées ou ouvertes de la diaphyse tibiale. À partir des données de l'étude SPRINT, nous avons classé les établissements et les chirurgiens en quintiles selon les volumes de cas traités. Nous avons effectué des analyses ajustées en fonction du type de fracture (ouverte c. fermée), du type de blessure (isolée c. polytraumatisme), du sexe et de l'âge, pour établir le taux de réintervention (paramètre principal), en utilisant la régression logistique multivariée. Résultats: On n'a noté aucune différence significative quant au risque de réintervention entre les centres qui traitaient des volumes élevés c. bas (p = 0,9). Dans l'ensemble le volume d'opérations des chirurgiens a significativement influé sur le risque de réintervention (p = 0,03). Le risque de réintervention chez les patients traités par des chirurgiens dont le volume d'interventions était moyen était de 50 % de moins que chez les patients traités par des chirurgiens dont le volume était très bas (risque relatif [RR] 0,50, intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % 0,28­0,88) et le risque de réintervention chez les patients traités par des chirurgiens dont le volume était très élevé était de 47 % de moins que chez les patients traités par des chirurgiens dont le volume était très bas (RR 0,53, IC à 95 % 0,30­0,93). Conclusion: Il ne semble y avoir aucun bienfait additionnel significatif au fait d'être opéré dans un centre où le volume d'interventions pour enclouage intramédullaire des fractures de la diaphyse tibiale est élevé. Il faudra approfondir la recherche sur les effets du volume chirurgical et de l'expérience clinique des établissements pour confirmer cette observation. Le risque de réintervention a été plus élevé chez les patients traités par des chirurgiens dont le volume d'interventions était très bas; cette observation pourrait être utilisée pour optimiser l'issue du traitement des fractures de la diaphyse tibiale. Enregistrement de l'essai clinique : ClinicalTrials. gov, NCT00038129.

Operative vs. Nonoperative Treatment of Isolated Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Prospective Cohort Study.

The purpose was to compare plate and screw fixation (open reduction internal fixation [ORIF]) and functional bracing (FB) of isolated humeral shaft fractures with treatment and patient-based outcomes. We performed a prospective trial of ORIF v. FB at 12 centers. Surgeons counseled patients on treatment options and a patient centered decision was made. We enrolled 179 patients, of which 6-month data was analyzed for 102 (39 female; 63 male). Forty-five were treated with ORIF and 57 with FB. We found no difference in the disability of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score, visual analogue score (VAS) or elbow range of motion (ROM) at 6 months. However, 11% of the FB group developed nonunion. Complications in the ORIF group included a 2% infection and nonunion rate and 13% iatrogenic radial nerve dysfunction (RND). ORIF can be expected to result in higher union rates with the inherent risks of infection and RND. Finally, at 6 months, both groups demonstrated higher DASH scores than population norms, indicating a lack of full recovery. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 30(2):067-072, 2021).

Is There a Critical Radiographic Angle That Portends Poor Functional Outcome Scores in Nonoperative Treatment of Isolated Humeral Shaft Fractures?

Our purpose was to evaluate radiographic alignment of nonoperatively treated humerus fractures and determine if there is a critical angle associated with worse outcomes. All patients with humeral shaft fractures that were prospectively followed as part of a larger multicenter trial were reviewed. These patients were selected for nonoperative management based on shared decision making. There were 80 patients that healed with adequate data. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) had best fit with a sagittal radiographic angle of 10° (AUC: 0.731) and coronal angle of 15° (AUC: 0.580) at 1-year follow-up. We found increased or worse disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) scores with > 10° sagittal alignment or > 15° of coronal alignment. Poor DASH scores were observed at angles lower than previously accepted for nonoperative treatment. These findings are useful in decision making and patient guidance. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 30(2):073-077, 2021).

In-Hospital Morbidity and Mortality of Traumatic Lower-Extremity Amputations.

Traumatic lower-extremity amputations often result in complications and surgical revisions. The authors report the in-hospital morbidity and mortality of traumatic lower-extremity amputations at a metropolitan level I trauma center for a large rural region and compare below-knee (BK) vs higher-level amputation complications. They retrospectively reviewed 168 adult patients during a 10-year period (2005 to 2015) who had a traumatic injury to the lower extremity that required an amputation. Main outcome measurements included amputation level, complication rates, intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates, length of stay, total trips to the operating room (OR), and Injury Severity Score (ISS). A total of 95 patients had through-knee/above-knee (TK/AK) amputations, and 73 patients had BK amputations. The majority of injuries occurred in the non-urban setting. The TK/AK group had higher ICU admission rates (76% vs 35%, P<.0001), longer overall hospital length of stay (22.0 vs 15.5 days, P=.01), more total OR trips (6.5 vs 5.0, P=.04), and higher ISS (17.0 vs 11.5, P<.0001). A complication was experienced by 64% of all patients during the initial hospitalization. The TK/AK group had higher complication rates than the BK group, including wound infection, pulmonary embolus, rhabdomyolysis, compartment syndrome, and death. Patients with TK/AK traumatic amputations have a greater burden of injury with higher complication rates, increased ICU admissions, increased length of stay, and increased ISS and require more return trips to the OR compared with patients with BK amputations. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):e561-e566.].

Prevalence of ligamentous knee injuries in pedestrian versus motor vehicle accidents.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and characteristics of ligamentous knee injuries and to compare patient demographics, associated injuries and hospital stay to pedestrians who did not sustain a ligamentous knee injury. METHODS: A retrospective review of all adult patients presenting as pedestrians struck by a motor vehicle to a level 1 trauma center over a three-year period was performed. Demographics, length of stay, orthopedic and non-orthopedic traumatic injuries were recorded. Magnetic resonance imaging was reviewed for ligamentous, bony and chondral injuries. RESULTS: Five hundred thirty-nine patients were included. Sixty-seven (12.4%) patients sustained a total of 84 ligamentous knee injuries. OF these knee injuries that had MRI (55/84), the majority (96%) were multi-ligamentous in nature. Patients with ligamentous knee injury were more likely to also be affected by traumatic brain injury, solid organ injury, cervical and lumbar spine injury, pelvic ring injuries, distal femur fractures, patella fractures, knee dislocations, tibial plateau fractures, tibial pilon fractures, and deep vein thrombosis when compared to patients who did not sustain ligamentous knee injury. Patients who sustained ligamentous knee injury were more likely to require hospital and intensive care admission and had a longer overall hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Given the high prevalence of ligamentous knee injuries in this patient population, these patients should be thoroughly evaluated for a ligamentous knee injury. If ligamentous knee injury is suspected, MRI should be considered as a majority of these injuries involved multiple structures. Patients with ligamentous knee injuries often had multi-system injuries with resulting longer hospital stay when compared to those without ligamentous knee injuries.

Are Routine Follow-up Radiographs Necessary for Extra-articular Scapula Body Fractures Managed Conservatively?

INTRODUCTION: Extra-articular scapula body fractures have been shown to have good outcomes with nonsurgical management. What is not known is whether routine postinjury imaging of these fractures is necessary for monitoring healing and alignment. As the shift toward providing cost-effective healthcare continues, we sought to evaluate if routine postinjury imaging of these fractures resulted in any change in management while secondarily evaluating the imaging for fracture patterns at risk of displacement. METHODS: A retrospective review of all extra-articular scapula body fractures managed nonsurgically at our institution was performed from January 2013 to December 2017. We measured the glenopolar angle, lateral border offset, sagittal angulation, and translation on both injury CT scans and follow-up radiographs to evaluate if any displacement occurred. In fractures that displaced more than 10 mm or 10° in any measurement, we evaluated the fracture pattern to see if any particular pattern posed a risk for displacement. In addition, we evaluated the cost of imaging for all radiographs obtained in the follow-up period. RESULTS: A total of 139 patients with 147 extra-articular scapula body fractures were included in our analysis. No patient experienced a change in management based on postinjury radiographs. A total of 120 patients underwent postinjury imaging with a total of 204 radiographic series ordered, equating to $172,769.50 in radiograph expenses. Final radiographs were obtained at an average of 48.4 days postinjury, and overall, no significant difference was observed (P < 0.05) in any radiographic measurement when compared with the initial injury imaging; however, when looking at fractures that displaced, transverse fracture patterns of the scapula body represented a risk factor for displacement (relative risk = 6.5). DISCUSSION: Satisfactory outcomes have previously been demonstrated with nonsurgical management of scapula body fractures and for most of these injuries postinjury imaging may not be necessary or cost effective. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Open Reduction Is Associated With Greater Hazard of Early Reoperation After Internal Fixation of Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures in Adults 18-65 Years.

OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) which factors are associated with the choice to perform an open reduction and (2) by adjusting for these factors, if the choice of reduction method is associated with reoperation. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with radiograph and chart review. SETTING: Twelve Level 1 North American trauma centers. PATIENTS: Two hundred thirty-four adults 18-65 years of age with an isolated, displaced, OTA/AO type 31-B2 or type 31-B3 femoral neck fracture treated with internal fixation with minimum of 6-month follow-up or reoperation. Exclusion criteria were pathologic fractures, associated femoral head or shaft fractures, and primary arthroplasty. INTERVENTION: Open or closed reduction technique during internal fixation. MAIN OUTCOME: Cox proportional hazard of reoperation adjusting for propensity score for open reduction based on injury, demographic, and medical factors. Reduction quality was assessed by 3 senior orthopaedic traumatologists as "acceptable" or "unacceptable" on AP and lateral postoperative radiographs. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 1.5 years. One hundred six (45%) patients underwent open reduction. Reduction quality was not significantly affected by open versus closed approach (71% vs. 69% acceptable, P = 0.378). The propensity to receive an open reduction was associated with study center; younger age; male sex; no history of injection drug use, osteoporosis, or cerebrovascular disease; transcervical fracture location; posterior fracture comminution; and surgery within 12 hours. A total of 35 (33%) versus 28 (22%) reoperations occurred after open versus closed reduction (P = 0.056). Open reduction was associated with a 2.4-fold greater propensity-adjusted hazard of reoperation (95% confidence interval 1.3-4.4, P = 0.004). A total of 35 (15%) patients underwent subsequent total hip arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Open reduction of displaced femoral neck fractures in nonelderly adults is associated with a greater hazard of reoperation without significantly improving reduction. Prospective randomized trials are indicated to confirm a causative effect of open versus closed reduction on outcomes after femoral neck fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Antibiotic utilization in open fractures.

Open fractures are complex presentations with elevated risks of infection and nonunion due to a multitude of factors. Along with early surgical debridement, antibiotics have been heavily utilized and have become part of standard of care to reduce the risks of fracture-related infections. Many aspects of their use have been studied and debated. The early administration of intravenous antibiotics has been shown to significantly reduce the incidence of infection. Furthermore, current standards do not recommend prolonged antibiotic administration post wound closure. Recently, an increasing number of studies have assessed the utility of locally administered antibiotics. Clinical and basic science studies have been relatively supportive of their usage, but further studies are still warranted to further delineate their effects.

Does Operative Intervention Provide Early Pain Relief for Patients With Unilateral Sacral Fractures and Minimal or No Displacement?

OBJECTIVES: To compare pain after operative versus nonoperative pelvic ring injuries with unilateral sacral fractures. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, observational. SETTING: Sixteen trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Skeletally mature patients with pelvic ring injury and minimally displaced unilateral zone 1 or 2 sacral fractures and without anteroposterior compression injuries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Pelvic displacement was documented on injury plain radiographs and computed tomography scans; a 10 point Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain was obtained in the anterior and posterior pelvic ring during the time of union (12 weeks). RESULTS: One hundred ninety-four patients with unilateral sacral fractures displaced less than 5 mm, mean age of 38.7, and mean Injury Severity Score of 14.5 were included. Ninety-nine percent had lateral compression injuries, and 62% were in zone 1. Seventy-four percent were treated nonoperatively. Nonoperative patients had more zone 1 fractures (71%, P = 0.004). Nonoperative patients reported mean VAS 2.7 points higher in the posterior pelvis (P = 0.01) and 1.9 points higher anteriorly (P = 0.11) 24 hours after injury compared with patients treated operatively. After 3 months, nonoperative patients reported higher VAS scores than operative patients: 4.0 versus 2.9 posteriorly (P = 0.019) and 3.2 versus 2.3 anteriorly (P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: For sacrum fractures with minimal or no displacement, slight differences in the VAS were noted within 24 hours after injury or surgery, but limited differences were seen at 3 months for either operatively treated minimally or undisplaced sacrum fractures. It is unknown whether this represents clinical relevance. These differences were below the minimally important clinical difference for VAS scores for other orthopaedic conditions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Surgery for Unilateral Sacral Fractures: Are the Indications Clear?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate unilateral sacral fractures and compare those treated operatively versus nonoperatively to determine indications for surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, observational study. SETTING: Sixteen trauma centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Skeletally mature patients with pelvic ring injury and unilateral zone 1 or 2 sacral fractures and without anteroposterior compression injuries. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Injury plain anteroposterior, inlet, and outlet radiographs and computed tomography scans of the pelvis were evaluated for fracture displacement. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-three patients with unilateral sacral fractures and a mean age of 41 years with a mean Injury Severity Score of 15 were included. Ninety-two percent sustained lateral compression injuries, and 63% of all fractures were in zone 1. Thirty-three percent of patients were treated operatively, including all without lateral compression patterns. Operative patients were more likely to have zone 2 fractures (54%) and to have posterior cortical displacement (29% vs. 6.2%), both with P < 0.001. Over 60% of all patients had no posterior displacement. Mean rotational displacements comparing the injured side versus the intact side were no different for patients treated operatively compared with those treated nonoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Most unilateral sacral fractures are minimally or nondisplaced. Many patients with radiographically similar fractures were treated operatively and nonoperatively by different surgeons. This suggests an opportunity to develop consistent indications for treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Thromboprophylaxis an update of current practice: Can we reach a consensus?

Diagnosis, prophylaxis, and management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with fractures remain a highly controversial topic with little consensus in clinical practice or the literature. The following manuscript represents a summary of evidence presented at the 2017 OTA Annual Meeting Symposium; "Thromboprophylaxis an Update of Current Practice: Can We Reach A Consensus?" The need for prophylaxis in pelvic and acetabular fracture patients; the existing body of evidence related to VTE, pulmonary embolism (PE), and prophylaxis for patients with fractures about the knee; current evidence in Edinburgh Scotland, regarding VTE prophylaxis in patients with isolated ankle fractures and the risk of VTE in patients with a hip fracture are topics that are addressed. The reader will benefit from the wisdom of this compilation of global contributions on thromboprophylaxis.

Outcomes After Severe Distal Tibia, Ankle, and/or Foot Trauma: Comparison of Limb Salvage Versus Transtibial Amputation (OUTLET).

Severe foot and ankle injuries are complex and challenging to treat, often requiring multiple operations to salvage the limb contributing to a prolonged healing period. There is some evidence to suggest that early amputation for some patients may result in better long-term outcomes than limb salvage. The challenge is to identify the regional injury burden for an individual that would suggest a better outcome with an amputation. The OUTLET study is a prospective, multicenter observational study comparing 18-month outcomes after limb salvage versus early amputation among patients aged 18-60 years with severe distal tibia, ankle, and foot injuries. This study aims to build upon the previous work of the Lower Extremity Assessment Project by identifying the injury and patient characteristics that help define a subgroup of salvage patients who will have better outcomes had they undergone a transtibial amputation.

Disaster Management Response Guidelines for Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery.

Complacency and lack of preparation are major barriers to an effective disaster response. Leadership assignments and departmental organization for a response should be outlined in advance. Response rehearsal and after-action reviews allow for thoughtful change to a response plan. Hospital disaster alert notification systems should be standardized and should be understood. Communication systems used in a disaster should have redundancy. A department's response plan must be integrated into the overall hospital plan. Large casualty volumes require appropriate triage and resource allocation. Response provider emotional and health support is an important consideration.