The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on Gustilo-Anderson (GA) type IIIB open tibial shaft (AO-42) injuries to determine the consistency of reporting in the literature. A search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed to identify relevant studies published from January 2000 to January 2021 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The study was registered using the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews. Patient/injury demographics, management and outcome reporting were recorded. There were 32 studies that met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1,947 patients (70.3% male, 29.7% female). There were 6 studies (18.8%) studies that reported on comorbidities and smoking, with mechanism of injury reported in 22 (68.8%). No studies reported on all operative criteria included, with only three studies (9.4%) reporting for time to antibiotics, 14 studies (43.8%) for time from injury to debridement and nine studies (28.1%) for time to definitive fixation. All studies reported on the rate of deep infection, with a high proportion documenting union rate (26/32, 81.3%). However, only two studies reported on mortality or on other post-operative complications (2/32, 6.3%). Only 12 studies (37.5%) provided any patient reported outcomes. This study has demonstrated a deficiency and a lack of standardized variable and outcome reporting in the orthopaedic literature for Gustilo-Anderson type IIIB open tibial shaft fractures. We propose a future international collaborative Delphi process is needed to standardize.
Using tibial shaft fracture participants from a large, multicentre randomized controlled trial, we investigated if patient and surgical factors were associated with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at one year post-surgery. The Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures (SPRINT) trial examined adults with an open or closed tibial shaft fracture who were treated with either reamed or unreamed intramedullary nails. HRQoL was assessed at hospital discharge (for pre-injury level) and at 12 months post-fracture using the Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA) Dysfunction, SMFA Bother, 36-Item Short Form 36 (SF-36) Physical, and SF-36 Mental Component scores. We used multiple linear regression analysis to determine if baseline and surgical factors, as well as post-intervention procedures within one year of fracture, were associated with these HRQoL outcomes. Significance was set at p < 0.01. We hypothesize that, irrespective of the four measures used, prognosis is guided by both modifiable and non-modifiable factors and that patients do not return to their pre-injury level of function, nor HRQoL.Aims
Methods
Conventional screws achieve sufficient insertion torque in healthy bone. In poor bone screw stripping can occur prior to sufficient torque generation. It was hypothesized that a screw with a larger major/minor diameter ratio would provide improved purchase in poor bone as compared to conventional screws. We evaluated the mechanical characteristics of such a screw using multiple poor bone quality models. Testing groups included: conventional screws, osteopenia screws used in bail-out manner (ie, larger major/minor diameter screws inserted into a hole stripped by a conventional screw), and osteopenia screws used in a preemptive manner (ie, no screw stripping occurrence). Stripping Torque: Screws were inserted through standard straight plates into a low density block of foam with a predrilled hole. Stripping torque was defined as maximum insertion torque reached by the screw before the screw began to spin freely in the foam.Introduction
Methods
We aimed to quantify the sample sizes and magnitude of treatment effects in a review of orthopaedic randomised trials with statistically significant findings. We conducted a comprehensive search (PubMed, Cochrane) for all randomised controlled trials between 1/1/95 to 12/31/04. For continuous outcome measures (ie functional scores), we calculated effect sizes (mean difference/standard deviation). Dichotomous variables (ie infection, nonunion) were summarised as absolute risk differences and relative risk reductions (RRR). Effect sizes >
0.80 and RRRs>
50% were defined as large effects. Our search yielded 433 RCTs, of which 76 RCTs with statistically significant findings on 184 outcomes (122 continuous/62 dichotomous outcomes) met study eligibility criteria. The mean effect size across studies with continuous outcome variables was 1.7 (95% confidence interval: 1.43–1.97). Almost one in three results, despite being reported as statistically significant did meet the definition of a large effect size (ES<
0.80). For dichotomous outcomes, the mean risk difference was 30% (95%confidence interval:24%–36%) and the mean relative risk reduction was 61%.
In a meta-analysis of fourteen trials (N=1901 patients) in patients with displaced hip fractures, we identified significant reductions in the risk of revision surgery with internal fixation compared to arthroplasty. A trend towards increased mortality with arthroplasty was identified. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of arthroplasty (hemi-arthroplasty, bipolar arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty) in comparison to internal fixation for displaced femoral neck fractures on rates of mortality and revision surgery Arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures, in comparison to internal fixation, significantly reduces the risk of revision surgery at the cost of greater infection rates, blood loss and operative time, and a possible increase in early mortality. Over 220,000 fractures of hip occur per year in North America representing an annual seven billion dollar cost to the health care system. Current evidence suggests internal fixation may reduce mortality risk at the consequence of increased revision rates. A large trial is needed to resolve this issue. We searched computerized databases (MEDLINE, COCHRANE and SCISEARCH) for published clinical studies from 1969–2002 and identified additional studies through hand searches of major orthopaedic journals, bibliographies of major orthopaedic texts and personal files. We found a non-significant trend toward an increase in the relative risk of dying with arthroplasty when compared to internal fixation (relative risk=1.27, 95% confidence interval, 0.84–1.92, p = 0.25; homogeneity p= 0.45). Arthroplasty appeared to increase the risk of dying when compared to pin and plate, but not in comparison to internal fixation using screws (relative risk= 1.75 vs 0.86, respectively, p<
0.05). Fourteen trials provided data on revision surgery (n=1901 patients). The relative risk of revision surgery with arthroplasty was 0.23 (95% confidence interval, 0.13–0.42, p = 0.0003, homogeneity p = <
0.01).
This prospective randomized multicenter study compares two methods of bone defect treatment in tibial plateau fractures: a bioresorbable calcium phosphate paste (Alpha-BSM) that hardens at body temperature to give structural support versus Autogenous iliac bone graft (AIBG). One hundred and eighteen patients were enrolled with a 2:1 randomization, Alpha-BSM to AIBG. There was a significant increased rate of non-graft related adverse affects and a higher rate of late articular subsidence (three to nine month period) in the AIBG group. A bioresorbable calcium phosphate material is recommended in preference to the gold standard of AIBG for bone defects in tibial plateau fractures. This prospective randomized multicenter study was undertaken to compare two methods of bone defect treatment: a bioresorbable calcium phosphate paste (Alpha-BSM –DePuy, Warsaw, IN) that hardens at body temperature to give structural support and is gradually resorbed by a cell-mediated bone regenerating mechanism versus Autogenous iliac bone graft (AIBG). One hundred and eighteen adult acute closed tibial plateau fractures, Schatzker grade two to six were enrolled prospectively from thirteen study sites in North America from 1999 to 2002. Randomization occurred at surgery with a FDA recommendation of a 2–1 ratio, Alpha BSM (seventy-eight fractures) to AIBG (forty fractures). Only internal fixation with standard plate and screw constructs was permitted. Follow-up included standard radiographs and functional studies at one year, with a radiologist providing independent radiographic review. The two groups exhibited no significant differences in randomization as to age, sex, race, fracture patterns or fracture healing. There was however, a significant increased rate of non-graft related adverse affects in the AIBG group. There was an unexpected significant finding of a higher rate of late articular subsidence in the three to nine month period in the AIBG group. Recommendations for the use of AIBG for bone defects in tibial plateau fractures should be discouraged in favor of bioresorbable calcium phosphate material with the properties of Alpha BSM. We believe further randomized studies using AIBG as a control group for bone defect support of articular fractures are unjustified. A bioresorbable calcium phosphate material is recommended in preference to the gold standard of AIBG for bone defects in tibial plateau fractures.
Risk information is understood differently when it is presented in absolute or relative terms; the latter overemphasizes the magnitude of risk. How surgeons communicate risk may influence patient choice. We evaluated whether presenting information about the benefits of surgery in absolute and relative terms affects an individual’s decision to accept or reject alternative surgical procedures in hip fracture management. Our findings show how framing risk in relative terms affects the perception of risk and influences patient choice. Surgeons must use care in utilizing relative risk reduction in the absence of actual risk data. Risk information is understood differently when it is presented in absolute or relative terms; the latter overemphasizes the magnitude of risk. How surgeons communicate risk may influence patient choice. To evaluate whether presenting information about the benefits of surgery in absolute and relative terms affects an individual’s decision to accept or reject alternative surgical procedures in hip fracture management. We administered a face-to-face survey to fifty patients attending the fracture clinic. We asked patients to consider a scenario and to decide which treatment alternative they preferred based upon risk presentation. We presented risk in five ways: absolute risk difference, relative risk reduction, relative risk, number needed to treat, and odds ratio. Patients were most likely to favor internal fixation when the mortality results comparing internal versus arthroplasty were presented as a relative risk reduction. Patients continued to favor internal fixation despite being presented with a significantly increased risk of revision surgery. Lower level of education and those patients who had not experienced a fracture were significantly associated with their perceptions about method of presentation. Our findings show how framing risk in relative terms affects the perception of risk and influences patient choice. Patients concerns about mortality, even if non-significant differences are presented, outweigh concerns about significant increases in revision surgery with internal fixation. Surgeons must use care in utilizing relative risk reduction in the absence of actual risk data given our findings that may over-estimate the relative benefits of one procedure over another.