Routine 6-weeks outpatient visit in patients treated surgically for upper extremity fractures: is it truly necessary?

BACKGROUND: Due to the increasing burden on the heatlhcare system the usefulness of the routinely planned 6-week outpatient visit and radiograph in patients treated surgically for the most common upper extremity fractures, including clavicle, proximal humerus, humeral shaft, olecranon, radial shaft, and distal radius, should be investigated. METHOD: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients treated surgically for the most common upper extremity fractures between 2019 and 2022 in a level 1 trauma center. The first outcome of interest was the incidence of abnormalities found on the radiograph taken at the 6-week outpatient visit. Abnormalities were defined as all differences between the intraoperative (or direct postoperative) and 6-week radiograph. In case an abnormality was detected, the hospital records were screened to determine its clinical consequence. The clinical consequences were categorized into requiring either additional diagnostics, additional interventions, change of standard postoperative immobilization, weightbearing, or allowed range of motion (ROM). The second outcome of interest was the incidence of deviations from the local standard postoperative treatment and follow-up protocol based on the 6-week outpatient visit as a whole. Deviations were also categorized into either requiring additional diagnostics, additional interventions, change of standard postoperative immobilization, weightbearing, or allowed ROM. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were included. Abnormalities on radiograph at 6 weeks postoperatively were found in only 10 (3.7%) patients, of which only 4 (1.5%) had clinical implications (in 3 patients extra imaging was required and in 1 patient it was necessary to deviate from standard weightbearing/ROM limitation regimen). The clinical/radiologic findings during the 6-week outpatient visit led to a deviation from standard in only 8 (3.0%) patients. Notably, the majority of these patients experienced symptoms suggestive of complications. CONCLUSION: The routine 6-week outpatient visit and radiograph, after surgery for common upper extremity fractures, rarely has clinical consequences. It should be questioned whether these routine visits are necessary and whether a more selective approach should be considered.

Treatment and outcome in combined scapula and rib fractures: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: The primary aim was to describe the population characteristics of patients with combined scapula and rib fractures and outcomes associated with different treatment strategies. METHODS: All adult (≥ 18 years) patients with concurrent ipsilateral scapula and rib fractures admitted to the study hospital between 1st January 2010 and 31st June 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 223 patients were admitted with concurrent ipsilateral rib and scapula fractures. A total of 160 patients (72%) were treated conservatively, 63 patients (28%) operatively. Among operatively treated patients, 32 (51%) underwent rib fixation (RF) only, 24 (38%) underwent scapula fixation (SF) only, and seven patients (11%) underwent combined fixation of scapula and ribs (SRF). In general, more severely injured patients were treated with more extensive surgery. RF patients had a median hospital length of stay of 16 days, the SF patients 11 days and SRF patients 18 days. There were no significant differences in complications (pneumonia, recurrent pneumothorax and revision surgery) between groups. CONCLUSION: Injury severity resulted in different treatment modalities. As a result, different patient characteristics between treatment groups were observed, which makes direct comparison between treatment modalities impossible. All treatment modalities seem feasible; however, the additional value of both rib and scapula fixation has yet to be proven in large multicentre studies.

Validation of the modified AO sternum classification system.

INTRODUCTION: The Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) foundation along with the Orthopaedic. Trauma Association (OTA) introduced a new classification for sternal fractures in 2018 aiming to provide greater uniformity and clinical utility for the surgical community. A previous validation study identified some critical issues such as the differentiation between type A and B fractures and localization of the fracture either in the manubrium or in the body. Due to the moderate agreement in inter- and intra-observer variability, some modifications were proposed in order to improve the performance of the classification. The aim of this study was to re-assess the inter- and intra-observer variability after adding modifications to the classification. Our hypothesis was that a significative improvement of inter- and intra-observer variability could be achieved. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty computed tomography (CT) scans of patients with sternal fractures were analyzed by six. Junior and six senior surgeons independently. Two assessments were performed with an interval of 6 weeks. The kappa (K) value was calculated in order to assess inter- and intra-observer variability. RESULTS: The overall mean kappa value for inter-observer variability improved from 0.364 to 0.468 (p < 0.001). Inter-observer variability mean for location was 0.573 (SD 0.221) and for type was 0.441 (SD: 0.181). Intra-observer variability showed a mean of 0.703 (SD: 0.153) with a statistic significant improvement when compared to the previous study (mean 0.414, SD: 0.256, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: By modifying the AO/OTA classification of sternal fractures, the inter- and intra-observer variability improved and now shows moderate to substantial agreement.

Compartment syndrome of the leg after thyroid hormone withdrawal; two cases and a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Acute compartment syndrome is a rare complication of severe hypothyroidism. If the symptoms are not recognized promptly and treatment initiated immediately, there is a high risk of permanent damage. Only few other cases of compartment syndrome due to hypothyroidism have been published and the exact pathophysiological mechanism remains unknown. CASE PRESENTATIONS: A 59 year old male developed acute compartment syndrome of his right lower leg after thyroid hormone withdrawal prior to radioiodine remnant ablation after total thyroidectomy for follicular thyroid cancer. He underwent emergency fasciotomy of all four compartments of the lower leg. The muscle tissue in the anterior and lateral compartment was necrotic and was therefore excised. The second patient was a 62 year old female with Hashimoto's thyroiditis, who developed acute compartment syndrome of both lower legs after thyroid hormone withdrawal due to non-compliance. Emergency fasciotomy of all four compartments of both legs was performed. The muscle tissue was viable in all compartments. CONCLUSION: Although compartment syndrome due to hypothyroidism is uncommon, it is a complication physicians should be aware of. The majority of reported cases are caused by an acute withdrawal of thyroid hormones and not by undetected hypothyroidism. No previous case of compartment syndrome caused by an iatrogenic hormone withdrawal in preparation for radioactive iodine has been published. However, as shown in this report, it may be beneficial to inform patients of this rare complication prior to hormone withdrawal in preparation for remnant ablation after thyroidectomy.

Does plate position influence the outcome in midshaft clavicular fractures? A multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE: To date, it remains unclear whether superior or anterior plating is the best option for treating midshaft clavicular fractures. The aim of this study was to compare both techniques with regard to the incidence of implant removal due to implant irritation, risk of complications, time to union, and function. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all midshaft clavicular fractures treated operatively between 2017 and 2020 in two hospitals in Switzerland were analyzed. The participating hospitals differed with regard to their standard practice; one offered superior plating only, while the other predominantly employed an anterior plate. The primary outcome was the incidence of implant removal for irritation. Secondary outcomes were time to union, complications, re-interventions, and range of motion during the follow-up period of at least 6 months. RESULTS: In total, 168 patients were included in the study of which 81 (48%) received anterior plating and 87 (52%) superior plating. The overall mean age was 45 years (SD 16). There was no significant difference between anterior and superior plating with regard to implant removal (58.5% versus 57.1%, p = 0.887), infection (5.7% versus 1.8%, p = 0.071), and time to union (median 48 weeks versus 52 weeks, p = 0.643). Data on range of motion were available in 71 patients. There was no significant difference in anteflexion (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) and abduction (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This retrospective cohort study did not find sufficient evidence to recommend one implant position over the other for midshaft clavicular fractures with regard to removal due to irritation. Time to union was similar and Infections were equally rare in both groups. Notably, a considerable number of patients in both groups had their implants removed due to irritation. Larger prospective studies are needed to determine how much plate position contributes to the occurrence of irritation and whether other patient or implant-related factors might play a role. Until this is clarified, implant position should be based on surgeons preference and experience.

Let's Agree to Disagree on Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Distal Radius Fractures in Older People: Protocol for a Prospective International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures are the most frequently encountered fractures in Western societies, typically affecting patients aged 50 years and older. Although this is a common injury, the best treatment for these fractures in older patients is still under debate. OBJECTIVE: This prospective study aims to compare the outcome of operatively and nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures in the older population. Only patients with distal radius fractures for which equipoise regarding the optimal treatment exists will be included. METHODS: This prospective international multicenter observational cohort study will be designed as a natural experiment. Natural experiments are observational studies in which treatment allocation is determined by factors outside the control of the investigators but also (largely) independent of patient characteristics. Patients aged 65 years and older with an acute distal radius fracture will be considered for inclusion. Treatment allocation (operative vs nonoperative) will be based on the local preferences of the treating hospital either in Switzerland or the Netherlands. Hence, the process governing treatment allocation resembles that of randomization. Patients will be identified after treatment has been initiated. Based on the radiographs and baseline information of the patient, an expert panel of 6 certified trauma surgeons from 2 regions will provide their treatment recommendation. Only patients for whom the experts disagree on treatment recommendations will ultimately be included in the study (ie, for whom there is a clinical equipoise). For these patients, both operative and nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures are viable, and treatment choice is predominantly determined by personal or local preference. The primary outcome will be the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes will include the Physical Activity Score for the Elderly, the EQ questionnaire, pain, the living situation, range of motion, complications, and radiological outcomes. By including outcomes such as living situation and the Physical Activity Score for the Elderly, which are not relevant for younger cohorts, valuable information to tailor treatment to the needs of the older population can be gained. According to the sample size collection, which was based on the minimal important clinical difference of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation, 92 patients will have to be included, with at least 46 patients in each treatment group. RESULTS: Enrollment began in July 2023 and is expected to continue until summer 2024. The final follow-up will be 2 years after the last patient is included. CONCLUSIONS: Although many trials on this topic have previously been published, there remains an ongoing debate regarding the optimal treatment for distal radius fractures in older patients. This observational study, which will use a fairly new methodological study design, will provide further information on treatment outcomes for older patients with distal radius fractures for which to date equipoise exists regarding the optimal treatment. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/52917.

Outcomes after fixation of rib fractures sustained during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A retrospective single center analysis.

Background: Historically rib fractures have been typically treated non-operatively. Recent studies showed promising results after osteosynthesis of rib fractures in trauma patients with flail segments or multiple rib fractures. However, there is a paucity of data on rib fixation after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This study evaluated the outcomes of patients who received rib fixation after CPR. Methods: Adult patients who received surgical fixation of rib fractures sustained during CPR between 2010 and 2020 were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective study. Outcome measures included complications, quality of life (EQ 5D 5L) and level of dyspnea. Results: Nineteen patients were included with a mean age of 66.8 years. The mean number of fractured ribs was ten, seven patients additionally had a sternum fracture. Pneumonia occurred in 15 patients (74%), of which 13 were diagnosed preoperatively and 2 post-operatively. Six patients developed a postoperative pneumothorax, none of which required revision surgery. One patient showed persistent flail chest after rib fixation and required additional fixation of a concomitant sternum fracture. One infection of the surgical site of sternal plate occurred, while no further surgery related complications were reported. Mean EQ-5D-5L was 0.908 and the average EQ VAS was 80. One patient reported persisting dyspnea. Conclusion: To date, this is the largest reported cohort of patients who received rib fixation for fractures sustained during CPR. No complications associated with rib fixation were reported whereas one infection after sternal fixation did occur. Current follow-up demonstrated a good long-term quality of life after fixation, warranting further studies on this topic. Deeper knowledge on this subject would be beneficial for a wide spectrum of physicians.

[Distal radius fracture-tactic and approach]. / Distale Radiusfrakturen ­ Taktik und Zugangswahl.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of surgical treatment is fracture healing with restored alignment, rotation, and joint surface. Stable fixation allows for functional postoperative aftercare. INDICATIONS: Displaced intra- and extra-articular fractures which either could not be adequately reduced or in which a secondary displacement is to expected due to instability criteria. The following factors are considered instability criteria: age > 60 years, female, initial dorsal displacement > 20°, dorsal comminution, radial shortening > 5 mm, palmar displacement. CONTRAINDICATIONS: The only absolute contraindication is if the patient is deemed unfit for surgery due to concerns regarding anesthesia. Old age is a relative contraindication, as it is currently debated whether older patients benefit from the operation. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: The surgical technique is guided by the fracture pattern. Palmar plating is most commonly performed. If the joint surface needs to be visualized, a dorsal approach (in combination with another approach or alone) or arthroscopically assisted fixation should be chosen. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: In general, a functional postoperative regime can be carried out after plate fixation with mobilization without weightbearing. Short-term splinting can provide pain relief. Concomitant ligamentous injuries and fixations, which are not stable enough for functional aftercare (such as k­wires) require a longer period of immobilization. RESULTS: Provided the fracture is reduced correctly, osteosynthesis improves functional outcome. The complication rate ranges between 9 and 15% with the most common complication being tendon irritation/rupture and plate removal. Whether surgical treatment holds the same benefits for patients > 65 years as for younger patients is currently under debate.

Quality of life and clinical outcomes of operatively treated patients with flail chest injuries: A multicentre prospective cohort study.

Introduction: Most studies about rib fractures focus on mortality and morbidity. Literature is scarce on long term and quality of life (QoL) outcomes. Therefore, we report QoL and long-term outcomes after rib fixation in flail chest patients. Methods: A prospective cohort study of clinical flail chest patients admitted to six level 1 trauma centres in the Netherlands and Switzerland between January 2018 and March 2021. Outcomes included in-hospital outcomes and long-term outcomes, such as QoL measurements 12 months after hospitalization using the EuroQoL five dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Results: Sixty-one operatively treated flail chest patients were included. Median hospital length of stay was 15 days and intensive care length of stay was 8 days. Sixteen (26%) patients developed pneumonia and two (3%) died. One year after hospitalization the mean EQ5D score was 0.78. Complication rates were low and included hemothorax (6%) pleural effusion (5%) and two revisions of the implant (3%). Implant related irritation was commonly reported by patients (n = 15, 25%). Conclusions: Rib fixation for flail chest injuries can be considered a safe procedure and with low mortality rates. Future studies should focus on quality of life rather than solely short-term outcomes.Trial registration: Registered in the Netherlands Trial Register NTR6833 on 13/11/2017 and the Swiss Ethics Committees Registration Number 2019-00668.

Nonoperative treatment of multiple rib fractures, the results to beat: International multicenter prospective cohort study among 845 patients.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment (i.e. nonoperative or operative) for patients with multiple rib fractures remains debated. Studies that compare treatments are rationalized by the alleged poor outcomes of nonoperative treatment. METHODS: The aim of this prospective international multicenter cohort study (between January 2018 and March 2021) with one-year follow-up, was to report contemporary outcomes of nonoperatively treated patients with multiple rib fractures. Including 845 patients with three or more rib fractures. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay (HLOS), (pulmonary) complications, and quality of life. RESULTS: Mean age was 57.7 ± 17.0 years, median Injury Severity Score was 17 (13-22) and the median number of rib fractures was 6 (4-8). In-hospital mortality rate was 1.5% (n = 13), 112 (13.3%) patients had pneumonia and four (0.5%) patients developed a symptomatic non-union. The median HLOS was 7 (4-13) days, and median intensive care unit length of stay was 2 (1-5) days. Mean EQ-5D-5L index value was 0.83 ± 0.18 one year after trauma. Polytrauma patients had a median HLOS of 10 (6-18) days, a pneumonia rate of 17.6% (n = 77) and mortality rate of 1.7% (n = 7). Elderly patients (≥65 years) had a median HLOS of 9 (5-15) days, a pneumonia rate of 19.7% (n = 57) and mortality rate of 4.1% (n = 12). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, nonoperative treatment of patients with multiple rib fractures shows low mortality and morbidity rate and good quality of life after one year. Future studies evaluating the benefit of operative stabilisation should use contemporary outcomes to establish the therapeutic margin of rib fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Therapeutic/Care Management.