Does Very High Surgeon or Hospital Volume Improve Outcomes for Hemiarthroplasty Following Femoral Neck Fractures?

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates whether very high-volume hip arthroplasty providers have lower complication rates than other relatively high-volume providers. METHODS: Hemiarthroplasty patients ≥60 years old were identified in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System 2001-2015 dataset. Low-volume hospitals (<50 hip arthroplasty cases/y) and surgeons (<10 cases/y) were excluded. The upper and lower quintiles were compared for the remaining "high-volume" hospitals (50-70 vs >245) and surgeons (10-15 vs ≥60) using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed treating volume as a continuous variable. RESULTS: In total, 48,809 patients were included. Very high-volume hospitals demonstrated slightly less pneumonia (6% vs 7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.88, P < .0001). Very high-volume surgeons experienced slightly higher rates of inpatient morality (3% vs 2%, HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06-1.60, P = .01), revision surgery (3% vs 3%, HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.02-1.52, P = .03), and implant failure (1% vs <1%, HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.10-2.96, P = .02). Sensitivity analyses did not significantly alter these findings but suggested that inpatient mortality may decline as surgeon volume approaches 30 cases/y before gradually increasing at higher volumes. CONCLUSION: A clinically meaningful volume-outcome relationship was not identified among very high-volume hemiarthroplasty surgeons or hospitals. Although prior evidence indicates that outcomes can be improved by avoiding very low-volume providers, these results suggest that complications would not be further reduced by directing all hemiarthroplasty patients to very high-volume surgeons or facilities. Future research investigating whether inpatient mortality changes with surgeon volume (particularly around 30 cases/y) in a different dataset would be valuable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III.

Intramedullary Nailing of Subtrochanteric Femur Fractures.

Intramedullary nailing of subtrochanteric femur fractures may be a challenge because of the deforming muscle forces on the proximal fragment; the inability to attain an ideal starting point or fracture reduction; and the high risk for nonunion, malunion, and hardware failure as a result of the great amount of stress present in the subtrochanteric region of the femur. Surgeons should understand the surgical technique for and the outcomes of intramedullary nailing of subtrochanteric femur fractures. A proper starting point, maintenance of reduction during reaming, and careful consideration of femoral length and rotation are the keys to achieving good radiographic and clinical results.

Are Medicare's "Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement" Bundled Payments Stratifying Risk Adequately?

BACKGROUND: Bundled payments are meant to reduce costs and improve quality of care. Without adequate risk adjustment, bundling may be inequitable to providers and restrict access for certain patients. This study examines patient factors that could improve risk stratification for the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) bundled-payment program. METHODS: Ninety-five thousand twenty-four patients meeting the CJR criteria were retrospectively reviewed using administrative Medicare data. Multivariable regression was used to identify associations between patient factors and traditional (fee-for-service) Medicare reimbursement over the bundle period. RESULTS: Average reimbursement was $18,786 ± $12,386. Older age, male gender, cases performed for hip fractures, and most comorbidities were associated with higher reimbursement (P < .05), except dementia (lower reimbursement; P < .01). Stratification incorporating these factors displayed greater accuracy than the current CJR risk adjustment methods (R2 = 0.23 vs 0.17). CONCLUSION: More robust risk stratification could provide more equitable reimbursement in the CJR program. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Large database analysis; Level III.

Ipsilateral proximal femur and shaft fractures treated with hip screws and a reamed retrograde intramedullary nail.

BACKGROUND: Although not common, proximal femoral fractures associated with ipsilateral shaft fractures present a difficult management problem. A variety of surgical options have been employed with varying results. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We investigated the use of hip screws and a reamed retrograde intramedullary (IM) nail for the treatment of this combined fracture pattern in terms of postoperative alignment (malunion), nonunion, and complications. METHODS: Between May 2002 and October 2011, a total of 95 proximal femoral fractures with associated shaft fractures were treated at three participating Level 1 trauma centers; all were treated with hip screw fixation (cannulated screws or sliding hip screws) and retrograde reamed IM nails. The medical records of these patients were reviewed retrospectively for alignment, malunion, nonunion, and complications. Followup was available on 92 of 95 (97%) of the patients treated with hip screws and a retrograde nail. Forty were treated with a sliding hip screw, and 52 were treated with cannulated screws. RESULTS: There were five proximal malunions in this series (5%). The union rate was 98% (90 of 92) for the femoral neck fractures and 91.3% (84 of 92) for the femoral shaft fractures after the initial surgery. There were two nonunions of comminuted femoral neck fractures after cannulated screw fixation. There was no difference in femoral neck union or alignment when comparing cannulated screws to a sliding hip screw. Four open comminuted femoral shaft fractures went on to nonunion and required secondary surgery to obtain union, and one patient developed symptomatic avascular necrosis. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of ipsilateral proximal femoral neck and shaft fractures with hip screw fixation and a reamed retrograde nail demonstrated a high likelihood of union for the femoral neck fractures and a low risk of malunion. Comminution and initial displacement of the proximal femoral fracture may still lead to a small incidence of malunion or nonunion, and open comminuted femoral shaft fractures still may progress to nonunion despite appropriate surgical management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Orthopaedic trauma mythbusters: intra-articular fractures.

Intra-articular fractures of the tibial plateau, pilon, and calcaneus often present a challenge for the treating orthopaedic surgeon. These injuries can have substantial comminution in the joint and the metaphyseal areas and are often accompanied by considerable soft-tissue trauma. In recent years, several questionable beliefs concerning these fractures have emerged and are best considered as myths. These myths include the beliefs that most patients with intra-articular fractures will have poor outcomes even with good surgical treatment, severe intra-articular fractures require a later reconstructive procedure regardless of the treatment, and the surgical treatment of comminuted intra-articular fractures has a high complication rate and may result in infection and limit the available options for limb salvage. A review of the literature regarding the treatment of common intra-articular fractures is helpful in determining if these myths concerning treatment options can be confirmed or disproved.

The use of liposomal bupivacaine in fracture surgery: a review.

Historically, opioids have played a major role in the treatment of postoperative pain in orthopedic surgery. A multitude of adverse events have been associated with opioid use and alternative approaches to pain relief are being investigated, with particular focus on multimodal pain management regimens. Liposomal bupivacaine (EXPAREL) is a component of some multimodal regimens. This formulation of bupivacaine encapsulates the local anesthetic into a multivesicular liposome to theoretically deliver a consistent amount of drug for up to 72 hours. Although the use of liposomal bupivacaine has been studied in many areas of orthopedics, there is little evidence evaluating its use in patients with fractures. This systematic review of the available data identified a total of eight studies evaluating the use of liposomal bupivacaine in patients with fractures. Overall, these studies demonstrated mixed results. Three studies found no difference in postoperative pain scores on postoperative days 1-4, while two studies found significantly lower pain scores on the day of surgery. Three of the studies evaluated the quantity of narcotic consumption postoperatively and failed to find a significant difference between control groups and groups treated with liposomal bupivacaine. Further, significant variability in comparison groups and study designs made interpretation of the available data difficult. Given this lack of clear evidence, there is a need for prospective, randomized clinical trials focused on fully evaluating the use of liposomal bupivacaine in fracture patients. At present, clinicians should maintain a healthy skepticism and rely on their own interpretation of the available data before widely implementing the use of liposomal bupivacaine.

Fixation of humerus shaft fractures in polytrauma patients does not improve short-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Surgical fixation of humeral shaft fractures is widely considered a relative indication for polytraumatized patients to improve mobility and expedite care. This study aimed to determine whether operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures improves short term outcomes in polytrauma (PT] patients. METHODS: Using the National Trauma Data Bank, PT patients with humeral shaft fractures were identified from 2010-2015. Three PT groups were analyzed: Group 1 - PT with nonoperative humeral shaft fracture, Group 2 - PT with humeral fixation on Day 1, and Group 3 - PT with humeral fixation on Day 2+. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare discharge timing and days on ventilator and in ICU between the three groups. RESULTS: There were 395 patients in Group 1, 1,346 in Group 2, and 1,318 in Group 3. There were no differences between the three groups when comparing Glasgow Coma Scale (p=0.3]; however, Injury Severity Score and Abbreviated Injury Scale were statistically different (p<0.001]. No differences were found in ICU or ventilator days between the three groups (p=0.2, p=0.5]. For Length of Stay, no difference was observed in Group 1 vs. Group 2 and Group 2 vs. Group 3. However, non-surgical patients were discharged 20% faster than those with Day 1 surgery (p=0.005]. Open fractures were treated one day earlier than closed fractures but discharged one day later (p<0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: This NTDB study demonstrates no differences in length of stay, days in the ICU or on the ventilator in patients with humeral shaft fractures treated non-operatively versus operative fixation. Overall, 44%-58% in all 3 groups had an ISS ≥ 14. Based on these results, we assert that fixation of the humeral shaft provides no short-term benefits in the multiply injured patient.

The Opioid Risk Tool Correlates With Increased Postsurgical Opioid Use Among Patients With Orthopedic Trauma.

The aim of this study was to determine whether the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), which has been validated in patients with chronic pain, relates to postoperative opioid consumption. The purpose was to investigate a tool that could help identify patients with orthopedic trauma at high risk for opioid abuse. Patients 18 to 80 years old presenting between May 2018 and August 2018 to UNC Hospitals with isolated orthopedic injuries that required surgical intervention were considered for inclusion. At 2 weeks postoperatively, the ORT was administered. At 6 weeks postoperatively, total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) was determined for each patient. Each patient was also categorized as either low risk (LR) or moderate to high risk (M-HR) based on the cumulative ORT score. Finally, opioid prescriptions provided after 6 weeks postoperatively was recorded. One hundred four patients met the inclusion criteria, and 42 completed the questionnaire. Thirty patients were categorized as LR and 12 patients as M-HR. Patients who were at M-HR consumed a significantly higher MME than LR patients (LR=406 [95% CI, 287-526]; M-HR=824 [95% CI, 591-1057]; P=.001). Linear regression analysis showed that for each additional risk factor, opioid consumption increased by 61 MME, and approximately 58% of the variation in opioid consumption could be explained by the ORT (beta=61, R2=0.58, P=.02). In this study, the ORT predicted which patients would have increased opioid consumption after orthopedic trauma surgery. Each additional risk factor correlated with increased opioid use. The ORT did not predict which patients would continue to receive opioid prescriptions after 6 weeks postoperatively. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(4):e219-e222.].

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.

Administration of Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis Within 12 Hours of Pelvic and Acetabular Surgery Has No Effect on Estimated Blood Loss, Perioperative Change in Hemoglobin, or Need for Transfusion.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if preoperative administration of venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis (PPx) before pelvic and acetabular fracture surgery affects estimated blood loss (EBL), perioperative change in hemoglobin (ΔHgb), or transfusion rates. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center, southeastern United States. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: All pelvic and acetabular surgeries performed between April 2014 and February 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: EBL, immediate and 24-hour postoperative ΔHgb, and intraoperative/postoperative transfusion. RESULTS: In all, 267 surgeries were included: 97 prechange and 170 postchange. Median injury severity score was 17 before versus 14 after the change. One surgeon retired and two started during the study, producing differences in acetabular approaches. Median surgical duration was longer postchange. Cohorts were otherwise similar. No differences were observed in EBL, ΔHgb, or transfusion rates. Rates of VTE and surgical site complications were unchanged. No VTE-related deaths occurred. In the as-treated analysis (63 patients given low-molecular-weight heparin <12 hours preoperatively vs. 190 patients not given PPx), no differences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of VTE PPx within 12 hours of pelvic and acetabular surgery had no effect on perioperative blood loss. This study is limited by changes in faculty, but it suggests that traumatologists need not advocate for holding VTE PPx before pelvic and acetabular trauma surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Serology and Comorbidities in Patients With Fracture Nonunion: A Multicenter Evaluation of 640 Patients.

INTRODUCTION: This multicenter cohort study investigated the association of serology and comorbid conditions with septic and aseptic nonunion. METHODS: From January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2017, consecutive individuals surgically treated for nonunion were identified from seven centers. Nonunion-type, comorbid conditions and serology were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 640 individuals were included. 57% were male with a mean age of 49 years. Nonunion sites included tibia (35.2%), femur (25.6%), humerus (20.3%), and other less frequent bones (18.9%). The type of nonunion included septic (17.7%) and aseptic (82.3%). Within aseptic, nonvascular (86.5%) and vascular (13.5%) nonunion were seen. Rates of smoking, alcohol abuse, and diabetes mellitus were higher in our nonunion cohort compared with population norms. Coronary artery disease and tobacco use were associated with septic nonunion (P < 0.05). Diphosphonates were associated with vascular nonunion (P < 0.05). Serologically, increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, parathyroid hormone, red cell distribution width, mean platelet volume (MPV), and platelets and decreased absolute lymphocyte count, hemoglobin, mean corpuscular hemoglobin, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration, and albumin were associated with septic nonunion while lower calcium was associated with nonvascular nonunion (P < 0.05). The presence of four or more of increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, or red cell distribution width; decreased albumin; and age younger than 65 years carried an 89% positive predictive value for infection. Hypovitaminosis D was seen less frequently than reported in the general population, whereas anemia was more common. However, aside from hematologic and inflammatory indices, no other serology was abnormal more than 25% of the time. DISCUSSION: Abnormal serology and comorbid conditions, including smoking, alcohol abuse, and diabetes mellitus, are seen in nonunion; however, serologic abnormalities may be less common than previously thought. Septic nonunion is associated with inflammation, younger age, and malnourishment. Based on the observed frequency of abnormality, routine laboratory work is not recommended for nonunion assessment; however, specific focused serology may help determine the presence of septic nonunion.

Proximal tibia fracture dislocations: Management and outcomes of a severe and under-recognized injury.

INTRODUCTION: Proximal tibia fracture dislocations (PTFDs) are a subset of plateau fractures with little in the literature since description by Hohl (1967) and classification by Moore (1981). We sought to evaluate reliability in diagnosis of fracture-dislocations by traumatologists and to compare their outcomes with bicondylar tibial plateau fractures (BTPFs). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at 14 level 1 trauma centers throughout North America. In all, 4771 proximal tibia fractures were reviewed by all sites and 278 possible PTFDs were identified using the Moore classification. These were reviewed by an adjudication board of three traumatologists to obtain consensus. Outcomes included inter-rater reliability of PTFD diagnosis, wound complications, malunion, range of motion (ROM), and knee pain limiting function. These were compared to BTPF data from a previous study. RESULTS: Of 278 submitted cases, 187 were deemed PTFDs representing 4% of all proximal tibia fractures reviewed and 67% of those submitted. Inter-rater agreement by the adjudication board was good (83%). Sixty-one PTFDs (33%) were unicondylar. Eleven (6%) had ligamentous repair and 72 (39%) had meniscal repair. Two required vascular repair. Infection was more common among PTFDs than BTPFs (14% vs 9%, p = 0.038). Malunion occurred in 25% of PTFDs. ROM was worse among PTFDs, although likely not clinically significant. Knee pain limited function at final follow-up in 24% of both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: PTFDs represent 4% of proximal tibia fractures. They are often unicondylar and may go unrecognized. Malunion is common, and PTFD outcomes may be worse than bicondylar fractures.

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.

Do Hospital or Surgeon Volume Affect Outcomes After Surgical Management of Tibial Shaft Fractures?

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether hospital and surgeon volume are associated with outcomes after operative fixation of tibial shaft fractures. METHODS: Adults (≥18 year old) who underwent operative fixation of diaphyseal tibial fractures were identified in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System data set from 2001 to 2015. Reoperation, nonunion, and other adverse event rates were compared across surgeon and hospital volume using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for clinical and demographic factors. Low-volume providers (lowest 20%) were compared with high-volume providers (highest 20%). Low volume constituted <5 cases/year for hospitals and 1 case/year for surgeons. High volume constituted ≥40 cases/year for hospitals and ≥8 cases/year for surgeons. RESULTS: Nine thousand one hundred forty-seven patients were included. Relative to high-volume surgeons, low-volume surgeons experienced slightly higher rates of pneumonia [2% vs. 1%, hazard ratio (HR) 2.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38-4.53, P = 0.003], and respiratory failure (5% vs. 3%, HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.30-2.71, P = 0.001). Compared with high-volume hospitals, low-volume hospitals experienced slightly lower rates of compartment syndrome (1% vs. 3%, HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24-0.85, P = 0.01) and fasciotomies (3% vs. 7%, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85, P = 0.005). The rates of all other reoperations and adverse events compared among hospitals and surgeons were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: We did not detect a clinically meaningful volume-outcome relationship for either surgeons or hospitals despite the use of a robust database with rigorous statistical methodology. Of note, these findings should not be applied to rare complex injuries such as those with extensive bone loss or articular extension, which are not well represented by this study population. Therefore, we conclude that typical tibial shaft fracture, including open or closed injuries, can be safely managed in the vast majority of orthopaedic settings and that this care does not necessarily require transfer to a specialty centers. Future research into orthopaedic volume-outcome relationships could be strengthened by the use of functional outcomes (which would likely require well-organized multicenter prospective registries). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

Avoiding complications in the treatment of humeral fractures.

Three of the most common complications that may occur after the treatment of humeral fractures are nonunion, loss of fixation, and nerve injury. Nonunion may occur in up to 15% of patients who have been treated surgically. Loss of fixation often is caused by poor quality bone in the osteopenic humeral head. Nerve injury can occur as a result of trauma or from treatment.

Prevention of complications after treatment of proximal femoral fractures.

Two factors are primarily responsible for complications after treatment of proximal femoral fractures. First, the strong deforming forces across the hip joint and proximal femur can make fracture reduction difficult. Second, the placement of the implant affects fracture healing and outcome more dramatically than in other areas of the body. In subtrochanteric fractures, the use of appropriate reduction and stabilization techniques can prevent varus malreduction and subsequent failure of the fixation device. In intertrochanteric fractures, lag screw cutout can be prevented by correct implant positioning. In femoral neck fractures, nonunion can be avoided by careful attention to reduction and hardware positioning.

Prevention of complications after treatment of femoral shaft and distal femoral fractures.

The need for surgical treatment of femoral shaft and distal femoral fractures is undisputed. The treatment options are varied, and often the choice is based on the surgeon's preference rather than orthopaedic science. The decision should be determined by the predicted functional outcome rather than by the type of implant to be used. The entry point for intramedullary femoral nailing is of no consequence, if the nailing is performed correctly and the patient has a good functional outcome. The primary goal of treatment for a supracondylar femoral fracture is to restore limb alignment while preventing angular deformity. Proper technique, not the choice of a nail or plate, is key to recovery.

Avoiding complications in the care of fractures of the tibia.

Tibial fractures are the most common long-bone fractures. Orthopaedic surgeons, regardless of their subspecialty, often must treat these injuries, which range from low-energy, minimally displaced fractures to limb-threatening injuries with neurologic and vascular damage and significant damage to the soft-tissue envelope. Tibial shaft fractures are often prone to complications, such as apex-anterior and valgus malalignments after nailing of the fractures in the proximal one third of the tibia, infection after open fractures, and aseptic nonunions. Understanding the common complications will aid in preventing them and will allow recognition and provide treatment strategies when such problems occur.