Clinically Depressed Patients Having Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Show Improved but Inferior Rate of Achieving Minimum Clinically Important Difference for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Compared With Situationally Depressed or Nondepressed Patients.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the preoperative diagnosis of depression predicted worse postoperative outcomes, including physical therapy (PT) compliance, return-to-sport, and patient-reported outcomes using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS: A multisurgeon series of consecutive patients who had undergone ACL reconstruction with minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Chart review was conducted to determine depression diagnosis status, demographic data, rehabilitation PT compliance, return to sports, and patient-reported outcome data using PROMIS. Patients who met the PROMIS threshold for mild depression but did not carry a clinical diagnosis of depression were classified as "situationally depressed." RESULTS: Ninety-five of 115 consecutive patients (81%) met inclusion criteria with an average follow-up of 34 ± 1.9 months. Fourteen patients (15%) had a preoperative diagnosis of depression, whereas 21 (22%) were considered situationally depressed. Clinically depressed patients had a greater rate of PT noncompliance (33.2% ± 17.6% vs 21.9% ± 12.6%; P = .02) and a lower postoperative PROMIS Physical Function (50.8 ± 7.7 vs 57.8 ± 11.0; P = .03 compared with patients without depression. Situationally depressed patients had lower preoperative physical function (35.4 vs 42.5; P = .04) with no differences in postoperative outcomes scores compared to the non-depressed cohort.19/21 (90.5%) of situationally depressed patients had postoperative resolution of their depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Situationally depressed patients without a clinical diagnosis of depression can expect significant improvements in both pain and function, as well as a resolution of their depressed mood based on PROMIS scores as they progress through recovery after ACL reconstruction. Clinically depressed patients also experience significant improvements; however, their rate of achieving the minimum clinically important difference for PROMIS outcomes may be less than their nondepressed or situationally depressed counterparts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, prognostic comparative trial.

Primary Closure of External Fixator Pin Sites Is Safe After Orthopaedic Trauma Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if rates of pin site infection and surgical site infection among patients managed with primary closure after external fixator removal were similar to those allowed to heal secondarily. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Urban/Suburban Academic Level I Trauma Center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients who had received a lower extremity external fixator for provisional management before definitive fixation of lower extremity fractures were included with pin site wounds closed primarily or allowed to heal by secondary intention. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: The rate of pin tract infection and surgical site infection following primary closure of external fixator pin sites relative to patients whose pin sites were allowed to heal through secondary intention. RESULTS: In total, 256 patients were evaluated: 143 patients (406 pin sites) in the primary closure group and 113 patients (340 in sites) in the secondary closure group. The average age was 49 ± 16 years. Sixty-five percent of included patients were male. There was no difference in pin tract infections between cohorts (primary = 0.5%, secondary = 1.5%, P = 0.26). External fixator duration in the primary closure group was 11.5 ± 8.4 days and 13.0 ± 8.1 days in the secondary closure group (P = 0.15). There was a greater rate of surgical site infections in the secondary intention cohort (15.9% vs. 7.7%, P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in pin site infection rate after primary pin site closure relative to patients who were allowed to heal through secondary intention. Furthermore, there was a lower rate of surgical site infection after primary closure. These results challenge the dogma of secondary closure for ex fix pin sites, suggesting that debridement and primary closure is a safe option for management of external fixator pin sites and may impart benefit in decreasing infection risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Risk factors for loss of reduction following locked plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures in older adults.

PURPOSE: To identify characteristics associated with loss of reduction following open reduction and locked plate fixation (ORIF) of proximal humerus fractures in older adults and determine if loss of reduction affects patient reported outcomes (PROs), range of motion (ROM), and complication rates during the first postoperative year. METHODS: Patients >55 years old who underwent proximal humerus ORIF were reviewed. Patient and fracture characteristics were recorded. Fixation characteristics were measured on the initial postoperative AP radiograph including humeral head height (HHH) relative to the greater tuberosity (GT), head shaft angle (HSA), screw-calcar distance, and screw tip-joint surface distance. Loss of reduction was defined as GT displacement >5 mm or HSA displacement >10° on final follow up radiographs. Patient, fracture, and fixation characteristics were tested for association with loss of reduction. Outcomes including ROM, visual analog scale pain and PROMIS scores, and complication/reoperation rates during the first postoperative year were compared between those with or without loss of reduction. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients were identified, 23 (29.1%) of which had a loss of reduction. Calcar comminution (relative risk [RR]=2.5, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]=1.3-5.0, p<0.01), HHH <5 mm above GT (RR=2.0, CI=1.0-3.9, p = 0.048), and screw-calcar distance ≥12 mm (RR=2.1, CI=1.1-4.1, p = 0.03) were risk factors for loss of reduction. Upon multivariate analysis, calcar comminution was determined to be an independent risk factor for loss of reduction (RR=2.4, CI=1.2-4.7, p = 0.01). Loss of reduction led to higher complication (44% vs 13%, p<0.01) and reoperation rates (30% vs 7%, p<0.01), and decreased achievement of satisfactory ROM (>90° active forward flexion, 57% vs 82%, p = 0.02) compared to maintained reduction, but similar PROs. CONCLUSIONS: Calcar comminution, decreased HHH, and increased screw-calcar distance are risk factors for loss of reduction following ORIF of proximal humerus fractures. These morphologic and technical factors are important considerations for prolonged reduction maintenance.

Early Outcomes of Proximal Humerus Fractures in Adults Treated With Locked Plate Fixation Compared with Nonoperative Treatment: An Age-, Comorbidity-, and Fracture Morphology-Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs), range of motion (ROM), and complication rates for proximal humerus fractures managed nonoperatively or with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Academic level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred thirty-one patients older than 55 years were identified retrospectively. 122 patients were excluded. 309 patients with proximal humerus fractures met inclusion criteria (234 nonoperative and 75 ORIF). After matching, 192 patients (121 nonoperative and 71 ORIF) were included in the analysis. INTERVENTION: Nonoperative versus ORIF (locked plate) treatment of proximal humerus fracture. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Early Visual Analog Score (VAS), ROM, PROs, complications, and reoperation rates between groups. RESULTS: At 2 weeks, ORIF showed lower VAS scores, better passive ROM, and patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) scores ( P < 0.05) compared with nonoperative treatment. At 6 weeks, open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) had lower VAS scores, better passive ROM, and PROMIS scores ( P < 0.05) compared with nonoperative treatment. At 3 months, ORIF showed similar PROMIS scores ( P > 0.05) but lower VAS scores and better passive ROM ( P < 0.05) compared with nonoperative treatment. At 6 months, ORIF showed similar VAS scores, ROM, and PROMIS scores ( P > 0.05) compared with nonoperative treatment. There was no difference in secondary operation rates between groups ( P > 0.05). ORIF patients trended toward a higher secondary reoperation rate (15.5% vs. 5.0%) than nonoperative patients ( P = 0.053). CONCLUSIONS: In an age-, comorbidity-, and fracture morphology-matched analysis of proximal humerus fractures, ORIF led to decreased pain and improved passive ROM early in recovery curve compared with nonoperative treatment that normalized after 6 months between groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Superior Outcomes With Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty versus Nonoperative Management for Proximal Humerus Fractures: A Matched Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate early outcomes (within 1 year) for geriatric proximal humerus fractures managed nonoperatively or with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: Academic level 1 trauma center, level 2 trauma/geriatric fracture center. PATIENTS/INTERVENTION: Seventy-one patients with proximal humerus fractures that underwent nonoperative management or RSA, matched by age, comorbidity burden, and fracture morphology. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, and complications rates within 1 year of treatment. RESULTS: RSA patients demonstrated greater active forward flexion (aFF) and external rotation compared with nonoperative patients throughout the first 6 months after treatment ( P < 0.05 for all). RSA patients achieved satisfactory ROM (>90 degrees aFF) at higher rates than nonoperative patients (96.2% vs. 62.2%, P < 0.01). RSA led to significantly lower shoulder pain and PROMIS pain interference scores throughout the first year post-treatment ( P < 0.05). PROMIS physical function scores were also higher in the RSA group at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year compared with the nonoperative group ( P < 0.05 for all). Similar complication rates were experienced in both groups (nonoperative = 8.9%, RSA = 7.7%; P = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: In an age, comorbidity and fracture morphology matched analysis, treatment of proximal humerus fractures with RSA is associated with greater shoulder ROM throughout the first 6 months of treatment, decreased pain, and improved physical function compared with nonoperative management, without significant differences in short-term complications. These results suggest that RSA may be superior to nonoperative management during the early recovery period for proximal humerus fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Reduction of Posterior Malleolus Fractures With Open Fixation Compared to Percutaneous Treatment.

Background: Operative decision making between approaches to posterior malleolus reduction remains a challenge. The purpose of this study is to compare the quality of reduction between percutaneous and open reduction of posterior malleolus fractures and to identify factors associated with malreduction. Methods: Operatively managed ankle fractures that included posterior malleolus fixation were reviewed. Fracture characteristics were determined on preoperative CT scans. Initial postoperative radiographs were used to measure reduction of the posterior malleolus articular surface and graded as satisfactory (<2 mm step-off) or malreduced (≥2 mm step-off). Final postoperative PROMIS scores and 1-year complications were compared between percutaneous and open cohorts. A multivariate stepwise regression model was used to evaluate predictors for malreduction. Results: A total of 120 patients were included. Open reduction was performed in 91 (75.8%) compared with 29 (24.2%) who underwent percutaneous reduction. Malreduction (≥2-mm articular step-off) occurred in 11.7% of patients. Malreduction rates were significantly higher with percutaneous fixation than open fixation (24.1% vs 7.7%, P = .02). Multiple fragments and those with ≥5 mm of displacement demonstrated higher malreduction rates with percutaneous fixation (P < .05 for both), whereas single fragments and those with <5 mm of displacement experienced similar malreduction rates with percutaneous or open fixation. Initial displacement ≥5 mm (relative risk [RR] = 3.8, 95% CI = 1.2-11.5, P = .02) and percutaneous treatment (RR = 4.1, 95% CI = 1.6-10.5, P < .01) were identified as independent risk factors for malreduction. There were no significant differences in 1-year complication rates or final PROMIS scores between groups. Conclusion: Open reduction of the posterior malleolus may lead to improved fracture reduction compared to percutaneous reduction without significant increase in complications. Open fixation improves reduction among fractures with multiple fragments or ≥5 mm of displacement, whereas fractures with a single fragment or <5 mm of displacement achieve similar reductions regardless of approach. Initial displacement ≥5 mm and percutaneous reduction are independent risk factors for malreduction. Level of evidence: Level III, therapeutic.

Outcomes for type C proximal humerus fractures in the adult population: comparison of nonoperative treatment, locked plate fixation, and reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Background: This study compares patient-reported outcomes and range of motion (ROM) between adults with an AO Foundation/Orthopaedic Trauma Association type C proximal humerus fracture managed nonoperatively, with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients >60 years of age treated with nonoperative management, ORIF, or RSA for AO Foundation/Orthopaedic Trauma Association type 11C proximal humerus fractures from 2015 to 2018. Visual analog scale pain scores, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores, ROM values, and complication and reoperation rates were compared using analysis of variance for continuous variables and chi square analysis for categorical variables. Results: A total of 88 patients were included: 41 nonoperative, 23 ORIF, and 24 RSA. At the 2-week follow-up, ORIF and RSA had lower visual analog scale scores and lower PROMIS pain interference scores (P < .05) than nonoperative treatment. At the 6-week follow-up, ORIF and RSA had lower visual analog scale, PROMIS pain interference, and PF scores and better ROM (P < .05) than nonoperative treatment. At the 3-month follow-up, ORIF and RSA had better ROM and PROMIS pain interference and PF scores (P < .05) than nonoperative treatment. At the 6-month follow-up, ORIF and RSA had better ROM and PROMIS PF scores (P < .05) than nonoperative treatment. There was a significantly higher complication rate in the ORIF group than in the non-operative and RSA groups (P < .05). Conclusion: The management of AO Foundation/Orthopaedic Trauma Association type 11C proximal humerus fractures in older adults with RSA or ORIF led to early decreased pain and improved physical function and ROM compared to nonoperative management at the expense of a higher complication rate in the ORIF group.