Retrospective cohort study analyzing outcomes of the SIGN Fin Nail in adult femoral fractures using the retrograde approach.

Purpose: There is high burden of long bone fractures in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Given a limited availability of fluoroscopy in LMICs, the Surgical Implant Generation Network (SIGN) developed two types of intramedullary nails: the SIGN standard nail and the SIGN Fin Nail. A limited number of studies have analyzed healing outcomes with the SIGN Fin Nail and the current study is the largest one to date. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes between the SIGN standard nail and SIGN Fin Nails in adult femoral shaft fractures treated with a retrograde approach. Method: A retrospective cohort study of adults with femoral shaft fractures was performed using the Sign Online Surgical Database (SOSD). The primary outcome was achieving full painless weight bearing and the secondary outcomes assessed were radiographic healing and infection. A propensity-score adjustment was performed for potential confounders and effect modification due to fracture location was tested using a Mantel-Haenszel test for heterogeneity. Results: Of 19,928 adults with femoral shaft fractures, 2,912 (14.7%) had the required 6-month follow-up to be included. The overall propensity score weighted relative risk between the Fin and Standard Nail for achieving painless weight-bearing was 0.99, 95% CI [0.96-1.03] and for radiographical healing was 0.99, 95%CI [0.97-1.02]. The propensity score weighted relative risk for infection was 1.30, 95% [0.85-1.97]. Use of the Fin nail was also significantly associated with shorter surgery times (p < 0.005, effect size = 24 min). Sub-group analysis based on fracture location and injury cause demonstrated no change in relative risk. Conclusion: The Fin nail showed no change in relative risk in terms of achieving full painless weightbearing or radiographic healing compared to the standard nail for retrograde nailing of femoral shaft fractures in adults. The heterogeneous nature of the cohort and large sample size allow for generalizability and add to a growing base of literature supporting use of the Fin Nail for retrograde femoral nailing. However, there are limitations as we could not correct for comminution at the fracture site or measure radiographic alignment or shortening.

Preclinical models of orthopaedic trauma: Orthopaedic Research Society (ORS) and Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) symposium 2022.

Orthopaedic trauma remains a leading cause of patient morbidity, mortality, and global health care burden. Although significant advances have been made in the diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of these injuries, complications such as malunion, nonunion, infection, disuse muscle atrophy and osteopenia, and incomplete return to baseline function still occur. The significant inherent clinical variability in fracture care such as differing patient demographics, injury patterns, and treatment protocols make standardized and replicable study, especially of cellular and molecular based mechanisms, nearly impossible. Hence, the scientists dedicated to improving therapy and treatments for patients with orthopaedic trauma rely on preclinical models. Preclinical models have proven to be invaluable in understanding the timing between implant insertion and bacterial inoculation on the bioburden of infection. Posttraumatic arthritis (PTOA) can take years to develop clinically, but with a porcine pilon fracture model, posttraumatic arthritis can be reliably induced, so different surgical and therapeutic strategies can be tested in prevention. Conversely, the racehorse presents a well-accepted model of naturally occurring PTOA. With preclinical polytrauma models focusing on chest injury, abdominal injury, multiple fractures, and/or head injury, one can study how various injury patterns affect fracture healing can be systemically studied. Finally, these preclinical models serve as a translational bridge to for clinical application in human patients. With selection of the right preclinical model, studies can build a platform to decrease the risk of emerging technologies and provide foundational support for therapeutic clinical trials. In summary, orthopaedic trauma preclinical models allow scientists to simplify a complex clinical challenge, to understand the basic pathways starting with lower vertebrate models. Then, R&D efforts progress to higher vertebrate models to build in more complexity for translation of findings to the clinical practice.

Estimating the economic impact of complications after open tibial fracture: A secondary analysis of the pilot Gentamicin Open Tibia trial (pGO-Tibia).

Objectives: To estimate the indirect economic impact of tibial fractures and their associated adverse events (AEs) in Tanzania. Design: A secondary analysis of the pilot Gentamicin Open (pGO)-Tibia randomized control trial estimating the indirect economic impact of suffering an AE, defined as a fracture-related infection (FRI) and/or nonunion, after an open tibial fracture in Tanzania. Setting: The pGO-Tibia trial was conducted from November 2019 to August 2021 at the Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Patients/Participants: One hundred adults with open tibial shaft fractures participated in this study. Intervention: Work hours were compared between AE groups. Cost data were analyzed using a weighted-average hourly wage and converted into purchasing power parity-adjusted USD. Main Outcome Measurements: Indirect economic impact was analyzed from the perspective of return to work (RTW), lost productivity, and other indirect economic and household costs. RTW was analyzed using a survival analysis. Results: Half of patients returned to work at 1-year follow-up, with those experiencing an AE having a significantly lower rate of RTW. Lost productivity was nearly double for those experiencing an AE. There was a significant difference in the mean outside health care costs between groups. The total mean indirect cost was $2385 with an AE, representing 92% of mean annual income and an increase of $1195 compared with no AE. There were significantly more patients with an AE who endorsed difficulty affording household expenses postinjury and who borrowed money to pay for their medical expenses. Conclusions: This study identified serious economic burden after tibial fractures, with significant differences in total indirect cost between those with and without an AE. Level of Evidence: II.

Diagnostic Performance of a telephone questionnaire for fracture-related infections (FRIs) in open tibia fracture patients in Tanzania.

INTRODUCTION: Fracture-related infections (FRIs) are a major cause of trauma-associated morbidity worldwide. In 2018, an expert group supported by the AO Foundation, European Bone and Joint Infection Society developed a consensus definition of FRI. Still, there is limited knowledge on the applicability of this definition in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Given the unique barriers that cause low follow-up rates for orthopaedic trauma patients in LMICs, this study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a telephone questionnaire in identifying patients with FRIs after open tibia fracture fixation in Tanzania. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients from a randomized controlled trial investigating the infection prevention benefit of locally applied gentamycin for open tibial fractures were included. Patients completed FRI based telephone questionnaires 7-10 days prior to scheduled follow-ups at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year. The questionnaire included two "confirmatory" criteria questions for FRI (i.e., open wound and purulent drainage) and three "suggestive" criteria questions (i.e., wound drainage, fever, and warmth). Contingency tests were performed to identify the sensitivity and specificity between answers and adjudicated FRI diagnoses at the corresponding in-person follow-up. Data was analysed using STATA version 15.0 and MedCalc's online diagnostic test calculator. RESULTS: There were a total of 234 complete questionnaires and 85 unique patients included. The sensitivity and specificity of having any positive answer in the questionnaire was highest at 6 months (100 % and 92.5 %, respectively). For all time-points pooled, sensitivity was 71.4 % and specificity was 93.0 %. Drainage had the highest sensitivity (71.4 %) while fever had the highest specificity (99.6 %). For confirmatory criteria, sensitivity was 14.3 % and specificity was 96.0 %. Contrastingly, the sensitivity for suggestive criteria was higher (71.4 %), with a similar specificity (93.8 %). CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that telephone questionnaires have adequate diagnostic performance when assessing FRIs. The presence of drainage identified the majority of patients with FRI, and specificities were high across confirmatory and suggestive criteria. Our study is one of the first to evaluate telephone questionnaires as a diagnostic tool for FRIs in patients with open tibia fractures in a LMIC hospital and validates the FRI consensus definition criteria.

The global burden of fracture-related infection: can we do better?

Fracture-related infection is a major complication related to musculoskeletal injuries that not only has important clinical consequences, but also a substantial socioeconomic impact. Although fracture-related infection is one of the oldest disease entities known to mankind, it has only recently been defined and, therefore, its global burden is still largely unknown. In this Personal View, we describe the origin of the term fracture-related infection, present the available data on its global impact, and discuss important aspects regarding its prevention and management that could lead to improved outcomes in both high-resource and low-resource settings. We also highlight the need for health-care systems to be adequately compensated for the high cost of human resources (trained staff) and well-equipped facilities required to adequately care for these complex patients. Our aim is to increase awareness among clinicians and policy makers that fracture-related infection is a disease entity that deserves prioritisation in terms of research, with the goal to standardise treatment and improve patient outcomes on a global scale.

Best Practices for Developing International Academic Partnerships in Orthopaedics.

ABSTRACT: Traumatic and nontraumatic orthopaedic conditions are major contributors to global morbidity and account for the majority of life-years lived with disability worldwide. Additionally, the burden of musculoskeletal injuries has increased substantially over the past 3 decades. Unfortunately, in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), access to orthopaedic care is limited, leading to a disproportionate burden of disease. The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery has emphasized the urgent need for unified international commitment and research collaboration to achieve universal access to safe and affordable surgical care. However, conducting high-quality orthopaedic research in LMICs remains challenging as a result of disparities in training, access to resources, infrastructure, and equipment availability. Partnerships between high-income countries (HICs) and LMICs have emerged in recent decades as an effective approach to combatting some of these challenges. These partnerships aim to bridge the gaps by facilitating collaborative research and knowledge exchange. The establishment of successful partnerships requires a collaborative and reciprocal approach that starts with a clear understanding of mutual research aims and the availability of resources. Despite the potential benefits, various factors can make establishing such partnerships difficult. However, these partnerships can have a substantial impact in delivering quality orthopaedic education and research training, thus improving access to care in resource-limited environments. This paper represents the collaborative effort of multiple international academic orthopaedic surgeons with extensive experience in HIC-LMIC partnerships. Our aims were to outline the best practices for conducting orthopaedic research within these relationships and to provide guidance for future successful collaborations.

A pilot, masked, randomized controlled trial to evaluate local gentamicin versus saline in open tibial fractures (pGO-Tibia).

Background: Open tibial fractures have a high risk of infection that can lead to severe morbidity. Antibiotics administered locally at the site of the open wound are a potentially effective preventive measure, but there are limited data evaluating aminoglycoside antibiotics. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of a clinical trial to test the efficacy of local gentamicin in reducing the risk of fracture-related infection after open tibial fracture. Methods: This study is a single-center, pilot, masked, randomized controlled trial conducted at the Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute. Participants were randomized intraoperatively after wound closure to receive gentamicin solution or normal saline solution injected at the fracture site. Follow-ups were completed at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year postoperatively. The primary feasibility outcomes were the rate of enrollment and retention. The primary clinical outcome was the occurrence of fracture-related infection. Results: Of 199 patients screened, 100 eligible patients were successfully enrolled and randomized over 9 months (11.1 patients/month). Complete data were recorded at baseline and follow-up for >95% of cases. The rate of follow-up at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year were 70%, 68%, 69%, 61%, and 80%, respectively. There was no difference in adverse events or any of the measured primary and secondary outcomes. Conclusion: This pilot study is among the first to evaluate locally administered gentamicin in open tibial fractures. Results indicate a rigorous clinical trial with acceptable rates of enrollment and follow-up to address this topic is possible in this setting.

Delays in Debridement of Open Femoral and Tibial Fractures Increase Risk of Infection.

BACKGROUND: Infection remains a costly, devastating complication following the treatment of open fractures. The appropriate timing of debridement is controversial, and available evidence has been conflicting. METHODS: This study is a retrospective analysis of the SIGN (Surgical Implant Generation Network) Surgical Database (SSDB), a prospective registry of fracture cases in predominantly low-resource settings. Skeletally mature patients (≥16 years of age) who returned for follow-up at any time point after intramedullary nailing of an open femoral or tibial fracture were included. Patients were excluded if they had delays in debridement exceeding 7 days after the injury. Utilizing a model adjusting for potential confounders, including patient demographic characteristics, injury characteristics, country income level, and hospital type and resources, local logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the probability of infection with increasing time to debridement in 6-hour increments. RESULTS: In this study, 27.3% of patients met the eligibility criteria and returned for follow-up, with a total of 10,651 fractures from 61 countries included. Overall, the probability of infection increased by 0.17% for every 6-hour delay in debridement. On subgroup analysis, the probability of infection increased by 0.23% every 6 hours for Gustilo-Anderson type-III injuries compared with 0.13% for Gustilo-Anderson type-I or II injuries. The infection risk increased every 6 hours by 0.18% for tibial fractures compared with 0.13% for femoral fractures. CONCLUSIONS: There was a linear and cumulative increased risk of infection with delays in debridement for open femoral and tibial fractures. Such injuries should be debrided promptly and expeditiously. The size and international nature of this cohort make these findings uniquely generalizable to nearly all environments where such injuries are treated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Management of aseptic nonunions and severe bone defects: let us get this thing healed!

Effective nonunion and bone defect management requires consideration of multiple potential contributing factors including biomechanics, biology, metabolic, and patient factors. This article reviews these factors as well as several potential nonunion or bone defect treatments including bone grafts, bone graft substitutes, the induced membrane technique, and distraction osteogenesis. A summary of these concepts and guidelines for an overall approach to management are also provided.

Deciphering data: How should clinical trials change your clinical practice?

INTRODUCTION: The careful consideration of how to apply findings from the scientific literature is important to every physician's clinical practice. This can pose a difficult task, particularly with the increasing speed of technological advances and complexity involved in modern clinical trials. This review introduces a new method, the WHOM criteria (Who, How, Outcomes, Minimizing bias), from which orthopedic surgeons and other physicians can efficiently evaluate novel medical literature for inclusion into their clinical practice. WHOM CRITERIA: The WHOM framework consists of four steps. The first step, Who, involves confirming whether a sample population studied is similar to one's patient under treatment, in order to ensure the results can be reasonably applied. Second, the How, comprises evaluating the intervention performed and ensuring that it could be reasonably replicated. The third step requires thoroughly evaluating the outcomes used in the study so as to ensure they are clinically meaningful to both the treating physician and the patient. Finally, there must be a careful evaluation of potential sources of bias and the ways in which errors and bias were minimized in all phases of the study. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based practice should drive clinical decision making whenever the necessary literature is available. This requires the careful evaluation of new literature on a regular basis so that physicians can render safe and effective health care in partnership with their patients. The WHOM criteria are described in order to aid clinicians in navigating published research and change practice when appropriate.

GO-Tibia: a masked, randomized control trial evaluating gentamicin versus saline in open tibia fractures.

BACKGROUND: The rate of open tibia fractures is rapidly increasing across the globe due to a recent rise in road traffic accidents, predominantly in low- and low-middle-income countries. These injuries are orthopedic emergencies associated with infection rates as high as 40% despite the use of systemic antibiotics and surgical debridement. The use of local antibiotics has shown some promise in reducing the burden of infection in these injuries due to increasing local tissue availability; however, no trial has yet been appropriately powered to evaluate for definitive evidence and the majority of current studies have taken place in a high-resource countries where resources and the bio-burden may be different. METHODS: This is a prospective randomized, masked, placebo-controlled superiority trial designed to evaluate the efficacy of locally administered gentamicin versus placebo in the prevention of fracture-related infection in adults (age > 18 years) with primarily closeable Gustillo-Anderson class I, II, and IIIA open tibia fractures. Eight hundred ninety patients will be randomized to receive an injection of either gentamicin (treatment group) or saline (control group) at the site of their primarily closed open fracture. The primary outcome will be the occurrence of a fracture-related infection occurring during the course of the 12-month follow-up. DISCUSSION: This study will definitively assess the effectiveness of local gentamicin for the prevention of fracture-related infections in adults with open tibia fractures in Tanzania. The results of this study have the potential to demonstrate a low-cost, widely available intervention for the reduction of infection in open tibia fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05157126. Registered on December 14, 2021.

Simple design and analysis strategies for solving problems in observational orthopaedic clinical research.

Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard to establishing causal relationships in clinical research. However, these studies are expensive and time consuming to conduct. This article aims to provide orthopaedic surgeons and clinical researchers with methodology to optimize inference and minimize bias in observational studies that are often much more feasible to undertake. To mitigate the risk of bias arising from their nonexperimental design, researchers must first understand the ways in which measured covariates can influence treatment, outcomes, and missingness of follow-up data. With knowledge of these relationships, researchers can then build causal diagrams to best understand how to control sources of bias. Some common techniques for controlling for bias include matching, regression, stratification, and propensity score analysis. Selection bias may result from loss to follow-up and missing data. Strategies such as multiple imputation and time-to-event analysis can be useful for handling missingness. For longitudinal data, repeated measures allow observational studies to best summarize the impact of the intervention over time. Clinical researchers familiar with fundamental concepts of causal inference and techniques reviewed in this article will have the power to improve the quality of inferences made from clinical research in orthopaedic trauma surgery.

Transfemoral amputation and prosthesis provision in Tanzania: Patient and provider perspectives.

Background: The burden of disability because of traumatic limb amputation, particularly transfemoral amputation (TFA) is disproportionately carried by low- and middle-income countries. The need for improved access to prosthesis services in these settings is well-documented, but perspectives on the burden imposed by TFA and the challenges associated with subsequent prosthesis provision vary among patients, caregivers and healthcare providers. Objectives: To examine the burden of TFA and barriers to prosthesis provision as perceived by patient, caregiver and healthcare professional, at a single tertiary referral hospital in Tanzania. Method: Data were collected from five patients with TFA and four caregivers recruited via convenience sampling, in addition to 11 purposively sampled healthcare providers. All participants participated in in-depth interviews regarding their perceptions of amputation, prostheses and underlying barriers to improving care for persons with TFA in Tanzania. A coding schema and thematic framework were established from interviews using inductive thematic analysis. Results: All participants noted financial and psychosocial burdens of amputation, and perceived prostheses as an opportunity for return to normality and independence. Patients worried about prosthesis longevity. Healthcare providers noted significant obstacles to prosthesis provision, including infrastructural and environmental barriers, limited access to prosthetic services, mismatched patient expectations and inadequate coordination of care. Conclusion: This qualitative analysis identifies factors influencing prosthesis-related care for patients with TFA in Tanzania which are lacking in the literature. Persons with TFA and their caregivers experience numerous hardships exacerbated by limited financial, social and institutional support. Contribution: This qualitative analysis informs future directions for research into improving prosthesis-related care for patients with TFA in Tanzania.

Complex Orthopaedic Trauma Is Shifting Away From Level I to Non-Level I Trauma Centers: An Analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank.

INTRODUCTION: An increasing number of fellowship-trained orthopaedic trauma surgeons are working in non-Level I centers. This study aimed to examine trends of management of complex orthopaedic trauma in Level I centers versus non-Level I centers and its potential effect on patient outcomes. METHODS: Data from the National Trauma Data Bank from 2008 to 2017 were analyzed. Non-Level I to Level I center ratios for complex fractures and complication rates, median hours to procedure for time-sensitive fractures, and uninsured/underinsured rates of Level I and non-Level I centers were recorded. RESULTS: Three hundred one thousand patients were included. A statistically significant downward trend was identified in the percent of all complex orthopaedic trauma at Level I centers and per-hospital likelihood of seeing a complex orthopaedic fracture in a Level I versus non-Level I hospital. Per-hospital complication rates were consistently lower in non-Level I hospitals after controlling for injury severity and payer mix. Time-sensitive fractures were treated earlier in non-Level I centers. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates a reduction of complex trauma treatment in Level I centers that did not translate to adverse effects on patient outcomes. Policymakers should notice this trend to ensure the continued quality of orthopaedic trauma training and maintenance of expertise in complex fracture management.

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.

Orthopaedic trauma observerships in North America for international surgeons: the visitors' perspective.

International observerships are one of many efforts aimed at addressing disparities in orthopaedic trauma care globally. However, their impact on visiting surgeons and their home countries, as well as the challenges faced by participating surgeons, are not well-documented. Methods: A survey was distributed to overseas surgeons who participated in an orthopaedic trauma observership from 2009 to 2020. Surgeons were identified through North American institutions previously recognized by the authors as having hosted international observerships. Information gathered included participant demographics, details of and perceived impact of the observership, and barriers faced before, during, and after the program. Responses from 148 international surgeons (ISs) from 49 countries were analyzed. Results: Sixty percent of observerships were at academic programs, 57% lasted 1-3 months, and 60% were self-funded. Participants identified cost and housing as primary barriers. After completing their observership, lack of funding, equipment and support staff, and excessive workload prevented participants from implementing changes at their clinical practice. Most observers believed that they gained relevant clinical (89%) and surgical knowledge (67%) and developed a professional network of North American hosts (63%). The most common suggested changes to the observership were greater hands-on experience in the operating room and structured goal setting relevant to the visiting surgeon. Conclusions: Visiting surgeons find North American orthopaedic trauma observerships helpful in improving their surgical and clinical skills. However, financial constraints and resource limitations at their clinical practice and limited operative experience during the observership present barriers to maximizing this clinical experience. To enhance the relevance of clinical observerships for ISs and impact global orthopaedic trauma care, the unique needs and challenges facing ISs must be addressed. Level of Evidence: IV-Cross-Sectional Study.

Evidence for Local Antibiotics in the Prevention of Infection in Orthopaedic Trauma.

Prevention of fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a substantial challenge in orthopaedic trauma care. There is evolving evidence to support the use of local antibiotics for both the prevention and treatment of musculoskeletal infection. Local antibiotics can achieve higher local tissue concentrations with a lower risk of systemic complications compared to intravenously administered antibiotics. These antibiotics may be administered in powder or liquid form without carrier, or if sustained release is desired, using a carrier. Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), ceramics, and hydrogels are examples of antibiotic carriers. Unlike PMMA, ceramics and hydrogels have the advantage of not requiring a second surgery for removal. The VANCO trial supported the use of powdered vancomycin in high-risk fracture cases for the reduction of Gram-positive infections; although, data is limited. Future studies will evaluate the use of aminoglycoside antibiotics to address Gram-negative infection prevention. While theoretical concerns exist with the use of local antibiotics, available studies suggest local antibiotics are safe with a low-risk of adverse effects.

Is the timing of fixation associated with fracture-related infection among tibial plateau fracture patients with compartment syndrome? A multicenter retrospective cohort study of 729 patients.

BACKGROUND: Tibial plateau fractures with an ipsilateral compartment syndrome are a clinical challenge with limited guidance regarding the best time to perform open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) relative to fasciotomy wound closure. This study aimed to determine if the risk of fracture-related infection (FRI) differs based on the timing of tibial plateau ORIF relative to closure of ipsilateral fasciotomy wounds. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study identified patients with tibial plateau fractures and an ipsilateral compartment syndrome treated with 4-compartment fasciotomy at 22 US trauma centers from 2009 to 2019. The primary outcome measure was FRI requiring operative debridement after ORIF. The ORIF timing relative to fasciotomy closure was categorized as ORIF before, at the same time as, or after fasciotomy closure. Bayesian hierarchical regression models with a neutral prior were used to determine the association between timing of ORIF and infection. The posterior probability of treatment benefit for ORIF was also determined for the three timings of ORIF relative to fasciotomy closure. RESULTS: Of the 729 patients who underwent ORIF of their tibial plateau fracture, 143 (19.6%) subsequently developed a FRI requiring operative treatment. Patients sustaining infections were: 21.0% of those with ORIF before (43 of 205), 15.9% at the same time as (37 of 232), and 21.6% after fasciotomy wound closure (63 of 292). ORIF at the same time as fasciotomy closure demonstrated a 91% probability of being superior to before closure (RR, 0.75; 95% CrI, 0.38 to 1.10). ORIF after fasciotomy closure had a lower likelihood (45%) of a superior outcome than before closure (RR, 1.02; 95% CrI; 0.64 to 1.39). CONCLUSION: Data from this multicenter cohort confirms previous reports of a high FRI risk in patients with a tibial plateau fracture and ipsilateral compartment syndrome. Our results suggest that ORIF at the time of fasciotomy closure has the highest probability of treatment benefit, but that infection was common with all three timings of ORIF in this difficult clinical situation.

Outcomes of Intramedullary Nailing and External Fixation of Open Tibial Fractures: Three to Five-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: While surgeons in low and middle-income countries have increasing experience with intramedullary nailing (IMN), external fixation (EF) continues to be commonly used for the management of open tibial fractures. We examined outcomes with extended follow-up of the participants enrolled in a clinical trial comparing these treatments. METHODS: Adults who were ≥18 years old with acute AO/OTA type-42 open tibial shaft fractures were randomly assigned to statically locked, hand-reamed IMN or uniplanar EF. These participants were reevaluated 3 to 5 years after treatment. The primary outcome was death or reoperation for the treatment of deep infection, nonunion, or malalignment. Unresolved complications such as persistent fracture-related infection, nonunion, or malalignment were collected and analyzed. Secondary outcomes included the EuroQol-5 Dimension-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire, the Function IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) score, radiographic alignment, and the modified Radiographic Union Scale for Tibial fractures (mRUST). RESULTS: Of the originally enrolled 240 participants,126 (67 managed with IMN and 59 managed with EF) died or returned for follow-up at a mean of 4.0 years (range, 2.9 to 5.2 years). Thirty-two composite primary events occurred, with rates of 23.9% and 27.1% in the IMN and EF groups, respectively. Six of these events (3 in the IMN group and 3 in the EF group) were newly detected after the original 1-year follow-up. Unresolved complications in the form of chronic fracture-related infection or nonunion were present at long-term follow-up in 25% of the participants who sustained a primary event. The EQ-5D-3L index scores were similar between the 2 groups and only returned to preinjury levels after 1 year among patients without complications or those whose complications resolved. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study extended follow-up for a clinical trial assessing IMN versus EF for the treatment of open tibial fractures in sub-Saharan Africa. At a mean of 4 years after injury, fracture-related infection and nonunion became chronic conditions in nearly a quarter of the participants who experienced these complications, regardless of reintervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.