Ankle fractures in the elderly have been increasing with an ageing but active population and bring with them specific challenges. Medical co-morbidities, a poor soft tissue envelope and a requirement for early mobilisation to prevent morbidity and mortality, all create potential pitfalls to successful treatment. As a result, different techniques have been employed to try and improve outcomes. Total contact casting, both standard and enhanced open reduction internal fixation, external fixation and most recently tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing have all been proposed as suitable treatment modalities. Over the past five years popular literature has begun to herald TTC nailing as an appropriate and contemporary solution to the complex problem of high-risk ankle fragility fractures. We sought to assess whether, within our patient cohort, the outcomes seen supported the statement that TTC has equal outcomes to more traditional open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) when used to treat the high-risk ankle fragility fracture. Results of ORIF versus TTC nailing without joint preparation for treatment of fragility ankle fractures were evaluated via retrospective cohort study of 64 patients with high-risk fragility ankle fractures without our trauma centre. We aimed to assess whether results within our unit were equal to those seen within other published studies. Patients were matched 1:1 based on gender, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and ASA score. Patient demographics, AO/OTA fracture classification, intra-operative and post-operative complications, discharge destination, union rates, FADI scores and patient mobility were recorded.Introduction
Materials & Methods
A significant burden of disease exists with respect to critical sized bone defects; outcomes are unpredictable and often poor. There is no absolute agreement on what constitutes a “critically-sized” bone defect however it is widely considered as one that would not heal spontaneously despite surgical stabilisation, thus requiring re-operation. The aetiology of such defects is varied. High-energy trauma with soft tissue loss and periosteal stripping, bone infection and tumour resection all require extensive debridement and the critical-sized defects generated require careful consideration and strategic management. Current management practice of these defects lacks consensus. Existing literature tells us that tibial defects 25mm or great have a poor natural history; however, there is no universally agreed management strategy and there remains a significant evidence gap. Drawing its origins from musculoskeletal oncology, the Capanna technique describes a hybrid mode of reconstruction. Mass allograft is combined with a vascularised fibula autograft, allowing the patient to benefit from the favourable characteristics of two popular reconstruction techniques. Allograft confers initial mechanical stability with autograft contributing osteogenic, inductive and conductive capacity to encourage union. Secondarily its inherent vascularity affords the construct the ability to withstand deleterious effects of stressors such as infection that may threaten union. The strengths of this hybrid construct we believe can be used within the context of critical-sized bone defects within tibial trauma to the same success as seen within tumour reconstruction. Utilising the Capanna technique in trauma requires modification to the original procedure. In tumour surgery pre-operative cross-sectional imaging is a pre-requisite. This allows surgeons to assess margins, plan resections and order allograft to match the defect. In trauma this is not possible. We therefore propose a two-stage approach to address critical-sized tibial defects in open fractures. After initial debridement, external fixation and soft tissue management via a combined orthoplastics approach, CT imaging is performed to assess the defect geometry, with a polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) spacer placed at index procedure to maintain soft tissue tension, alignment and deliver local antibiotics. Once comfortable that no further debridement is required and the risk of infection is appropriate then 3D printing technology can be used to mill custom jigs. Appropriate tibial allograft is ordered based on CT measurements. A pedicled fibula graft is raised through a lateral approach. The peroneal vessels are mobilised to the tibioperoneal trunk and passed medially into the bone void. The cadaveric bone is prepared using the custom jig on the back table and posterolateral troughs made to allow insertion of the fibula, permitting some hypertrophic expansion. A separate medial incision allows attachment of the custom jig to host tibia allowing for reciprocal cuts to match the allograft. The fibula is implanted into the allograft, ensuring nil tension on the pedicle and, after docking the graft, the hybrid construct is secured with multi-planar locking plates to provide rotational stability. The medial window allows plate placement safely away from the vascular pedicle.Introduction
Methodology
Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) of the femur following total hip arthroplasty represent a significant complication with a rising incidence. The commonest subtype is Vancouver B2 type, for which revision to a long uncemented tapered fluted stem is a widely accepted management. In this study we compare this procedure to the less commonly performed cement-in-cement revision. All patients undergoing surgical intervention for a Vancouver B2 femoral PPF in a cemented stem from 2008 – 2018 were identified. We collated patient age, gender, ASA score, BMI, operative time, blood transfusion requirement, change in haemoglobin (Hb) level, length of hospital stay and last Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Radiographic analysis was performed to assess time to fracture union and leg length discrepancy. Complications and survivorship of implant and patients were recorded. 43 uncemented and 29 cement-in-cement revisions were identified. There was no difference in patient demographics between groups. A significantly shorter operative time was found in the cement-in-cement group, but there was no difference in transfusion requirement, Hb change, or length of hospital stay. OHS was comparable between groups. A non-significant increase in overall complication rates was found in the revision uncemented group, with a significantly higher dislocation rate. Time of union was comparable and there were no non-unions in the cement-in-cement group. A greater degree of stem subsidence was found in the uncemented group. There was no difference in any revision surgery required in either group. Three patients in the uncemented group died in the perioperative period, compared to none in the cement-in-cement group. With appropriate patient selection, both cement-in-cement and long uncemented tapered stem revision represent appropriate treatment options for Vancouver B2 fractures.
