Varus displacement of intertrochanteric femur fractures on injury radiographs is associated with screw cutout.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine if varus displacement of intertrochanteric femur fractures on injury radiographs is associated with screw cutout after fixation. METHODS: A retrospective review performed at two urban level 1 trauma centers identified 334 patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures treated with either a cephalomedullary nail (CMN) or a sliding hip screw (SHS). Median patient age was 75 years, 69% were female and 46% had unstable fractures. Varus fracture displacement on injury radiographs, defined as the most proximal aspect of the femoral head being at or below the most proximal aspect of the greater trochanter, was present in 38% of patients. Screw cutout was recorded. RESULTS: Varus displacement was associated with unstable fracture patterns (62% vs. 37%, difference (D) 25%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 15-35%), female gender (77% vs. 64%, D 13%, CI 3-22%) and poor/adequate reductions (54% vs. 41%, D 13%, CI 2-23%). Cutout occurred in 9 (3%) patients, 8 of which had varus displacement. There was no detectable difference, with wide confidence intervals, between patients that did and did not experience cutout in terms of age, gender, unstable fractures, implants, tip-apex distance (TAD) or poor/adequate reductions. On univariate and multivariate analysis, varus displacement was the only variable associated with cutout. Patients with and without varus displacement had a cutout incidence of 6 and 0.5% (Odds ratio 13, CI 1.6-108). CONCLUSION: Intertrochanteric fractures presenting with varus displacement were more likely to experience cutout. This potential risk factor for cutout warrants further study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, retrospective cohort.

Complications after fibula intramedullary nail fixation of pilon versus ankle fractures.

BACKGROUND: Intramedullary nail (IMN) fixation of the fibula in malleolar ankle fractures has been shown to result in less wound complications then plate fixation. Therefore, IMN fibula fixation may also be associated with lower rates of wound complications when used for higher-risk pilon fractures. The purpose of this study was to compare complications of fibula IMN fixation in pilon versus malleolar ankle fractures. METHODS: A retrospective cohort comparison was performed at an urban level one trauma center involving fibula fractures in 47 patients with AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) type 43 fractures and 48 patients with AO/OTA type 44 fractures being treated with fibula IMN fixation. Complications, fibula-specific complications, revision surgeries, and implant removals were reviewed. RESULTS: There was no detectable difference in complications (27% vs. 23%, 95% confidence interval of the odds ratio (CIOR) 0.5 to 3.2), fibular-specific complications (6% vs. 10%, CIOR 0.1 to 3.5), revision surgeries (4% vs. 4%, CIOR 0.1 to 7.5), or symptomatic fibula implant removals (13% vs. 21%, CIOR 0.1 to 1.6) between pilon and ankle fracture groups, respectively. There was one (2%) fibular nonunion and one wound complication (2%) in each of the fracture groups. CONCLUSION: Fibula IMN fixation of pilon versus ankle fractures resulted in a similar number of complications. Comparative studies of fibula IMN and plate fixation are necessary to determine if the benefits of fibula IMN in ankle fractures extends to pilon fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort.

Theme Park Water Slides: A New Mechanism of Causing 61B2.3 Pelvic Ring Injuries: A Case Series.

CASE: We present a series of 3 pelvic ring injuries that occurred on 1 high-speed water slide at a theme park in Orlando, FL. This is the first time this injury has been reported at a water park in the United States. All patients underwent surgical management and had an excellent outcome. CONCLUSION: Pelvic ring injuries usually occur because of high-energy mechanisms, but unique mechanisms of injuries are possible. We aim to draw attention to this unique mechanism of injury because serious injury may occur to riders. Water parks should use the information presented in this study to develop and refine safety requirements for patrons.

Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is little information concerning periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. Therefore, we reviewed our experience with these fractures to determine the results of treatment, the risk factors for periprosthetic fracture, and the rates of reoperation. METHODS: Between 1976 and 2001, nineteen postoperative periprosthetic humeral fractures occurred among 3091 patients who had undergone shoulder arthroplasty at our institution. Sixteen patients had a complete series of radiographs and were included in this study. The average time from the arthroplasty to the fracture was forty-nine months. Seven patients had severe osteopenia. Twelve fractures occurred at the tip of the prosthesis; of these, six extended proximally (type-A fractures) and six did not (type-B fractures). Three fractures occurred distal to the implant and extended into the distal humeral metaphysis (type-C fractures). One fracture occurred in the proximal metadiaphyseal region because of osteolysis. RESULTS: Six fractures healed after an average of 180 days of nonoperative treatment. Five fractures were treated operatively after an average of 123 days of unsuccessful nonoperative treatment. The remaining five fractures had immediate operative treatment. All sixteen fractures healed. One patient required multiple operations over a period of three years before union was achieved. With the exclusion of this patient and one other patient who received a custom prosthesis, the average time between the first operative procedure and union was 278 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not clearly indicate the need for operative treatment of type-A fractures unless the humeral component is loose. A trial of nonoperative treatment may be considered for well-aligned type-B fractures that are associated with a well-fixed humeral component; however, operative intervention should be considered for type-B fractures that have not progressed toward union by three months. If the component is well fixed, open reduction and internal fixation may be performed. If the component is loose, revision with a long-stem component is recommended. For type-C fractures, a trial of nonoperative treatment is recommended.