Aims

The primary aim of this study is to quantify and compare outcomes following a dorsally displaced fracture of the distal radius in elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) who are managed conservatively versus with surgical fixation (open reduction and internal fixation). Secondary aims are to assess and compare upper limb-specific function, health-related quality of life, wrist pain, complications, grip strength, range of motion, radiological parameters, healthcare resource use, and cost-effectiveness between the groups.

Acetabular fractures present a challenge. Anatomical reduction can be achieved by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). However, in elderly patients with complex fracture patterns and osteoporotic bone stock, “fix and replace” has become an option in the management of these injuries. This involves ORIF of the acetabulum to enable insertion of a press fit cup and subsequent cemented femoral stem at the index surgery. A Retrospective analysis of all operatively managed acetabular fractures by a regional Pelvic and Acetabular Trauma service (01/01/2018-30/05/2023) STATA used for analysis. 34 patients undergoing “fix and replace” surgery. Of the 133 patients managed with ORIF, 21 subsequently required Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Mean follow up was 2.7 years versus 5.1. There was no statistical significance between the two groups with regards to BMI or sex. Mean age in the “fix and replace” group was 68 compared to 48 in the ORIF and subsequent THA group. This reached statistical significance between the two groups (p=0.001).ASA and Charlson Comorbidity Index (3 and 3 in “fix and replace” and 2 and 1.2 in ORIF to THA group) and Charlson Comorbidity Index both were statistically significantly different (p=0.006 and p=0.027, respectively). High energy mechanism of injury accounted for 56% of the “fix and replace” group compared to 48% in the ORIF to THA. 74% of “fix and replace” were associated fractures compared to 53% of ORIF to THA. Wait to surgery was 3 days for “fix and replace” while 186 days was the mean wait time from listing to THA for the ORIF to THA group. Complication rate was 41% versus 43% in the two groups. 14% in the ORIF to THA group developed PJI versus 6% in “fix and replace”. Fix and replace allows early mobilisation in frailer, elderly patients. Our results show fewer returns to theatre and less PJI in patients having arthroplasty as part of “fix and replace” than subsequent to Open reduction internal fixation

The October 2024 Foot & Ankle Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Hemiarthroplasty for hallux rigidus; Fixed or mobile-bearing ankle arthroplasty? A meta-analysis; Bone grafting for periprosthetic bone cysts following total ankle arthroplasty; Diabetic foot ulcer after first-ray amputation; Early motion after ankle surgery: the path to faster recovery?; Are podiatrists and orthopaedic surgeons approaching zone 2 fifth metatarsal fractures in the same way?.

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of complex radial head fractures at mid-term follow-up, and determine whether open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or radial head arthroplasty (RHA) should be recommended for surgical treatment. Methods. Patients who underwent surgery for complex radial head fractures (Mason type III, ≥ three fragments) were divided into two groups (ORIF and RHA) and propensity score matching was used to individually match patients based on patient characteristics. Ultimately, 84 patients were included in this study. After a mean follow-up of 4.1 years (2.0 to 9.5), patients were invited for clinical and radiological assessment. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire score were evaluated. Results. Patients treated with ORIF showed significantly better postoperative range of motion for flexion and extension (121.1° (SD 16.4°) vs 108.1° (SD 25.8°); p = 0.018). Postoperative functional scores also showed significantly better results in the ORIF group (MEPS 90.1 (SD 13.6) vs 78 (SD 20.5); p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the complication rate (RHA 23.8% (n = 10) vs ORIF 26.2% (n = 11)). Implant-related complications occurred in six cases (14.3%) in the RHA group and in five cases (11.9%) in the ORIF group. Conclusion. Irrespective of the patient’s age, sex, type of injury, or number of fracture fragments, ORIF of the radial head should be attempted initially, if a stable reconstruction can be achieved, as it seems to provide a superior postoperative outcome for the patient compared to primary RHA. If reconstruction is not feasible, RHA is still a viable alternative. In the surgical treatment of complex radial head fractures, reconstruction shows superior postoperative outcomes compared to RHA. Good postoperative results can be achieved even after failed reconstruction and conversion to secondary RHA. Therefore, we encourage surgeons to favour reconstruction of complex radial head fractures, regardless of injury type or number of fragments, as long as a stable fixation can be achieved. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1158–1164

Aims

Pneumatic tourniquets are often used during the surgical treatment of unstable traumatic ankle fractures. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of reoperation after open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fractures with and without the use of pneumatic tourniquets.

Aims. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of two different postoperative management approaches following surgical fixation of ankle fractures: traditional cast immobilization versus the Early Motion and Directed Exercise (EMADE) programme. Methods. A total of 157 patients aged 18 years or older who underwent successful open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Weber B (AO44B) ankle fractures were recruited to this randomized controlled trial. At two weeks post-surgical fixation, participants were randomized to either light-weight cast-immobilization or the EMADE programme, consisting of progressive home exercises and weekly advice and education. Both groups were restricted to non-weightbearing until six weeks post-surgery. The primary outcome was assessed using the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) questionnaire at 12 weeks post-surgery, with secondary measures at two, six, 24, and 52 weeks. Exploratory cost-effectiveness analyses were also performed. Results. Overall, 130 participants returned their 12-week OMAS questionnaires. The mean OMAS was significantly higher in the EMADE group compared with the immobilized group (62.0 (SD 20.9) vs 48.8 (SD 22.5)), with a clinically meaningful mean difference of 13.2 (95% CI 5.66 to 20.73; p < 0.001). These differences were maintained at week 24, with convergence by week 52. No intervention-related adverse events, including instability, were reported. Conclusion. The EMADE programme demonstrated an accelerated recovery compared to traditional six-week cast immobilization for those who have undergone ORIF surgery to stabilize Weber B (AO44B) ankle fractures. The study found the EMADE intervention to be safe. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):949–956

The August 2024 Wrist & Hand Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Methotrexate shows potential in reducing pain for hand osteoarthritis with synovitis; Circumferential casting versus plaster splinting in adult distal radius fractures: the CAST study findings; Surgery shows superior long-term success for Dupuytren contracture compared to needle fasciotomy and collagenase injection; Evolving trends in surgical management of wrist arthritis: a decade-long national analysis; Mid-term outcomes of three commonly used surgical reconstructions for scapholunate instability; SLAC and SNAC: what is the evidence for treatment?; Steroids for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis?; When is it safe to return to driving after distal radius fracture fixation? A prospective study.

Aims

Proximal humeral fractures are the third most common fracture among the elderly. Complications associated with fixation include screw perforation, varus collapse, and avascular necrosis of the humeral head. To address these challenges, various augmentation techniques to increase medial column support have been developed. There are currently no recent studies that definitively establish the superiority of augmented fixation over non-augmented implants in the surgical treatment of proximal humeral fractures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent locking-plate fixation with cement augmentation or bone-graft augmentation versus those who underwent locking-plate fixation without augmentation for proximal humeral fractures.

Background. Studies have compared open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with fibular nail fixation (FNF) and shown reduced wound complications with minimal difference to PROMS in the short term. Our aim is to compare long-term outcomes for unstable ankle fractures at 10 year follow up. Methods. Patients from a previously conducted RCT were contacted at a minimum of 10 years post intervention at a single study centre. Case notes were reviewed, and patient reported outcome measures acquired at 10 years. Results. Ninety-nine patients were included (48 FNF and 51 ORIF). After 10 years 75% (33/44) of patients in the FNF group required no further follow up versus 81% (39/48) in the ORIF group. Radiographically at 2 years post-injury, there was no statistically significant difference between groups for development of osteoarthritis (p=0.851). There was one tibio-talar fusion in each group secondary to osteoarthritis, but no statistically significant difference in overall re-operation rate (p=0.518). Fifty-one percent (n=50) of patients have so far returned patient reported outcome measures at a minimum of 10 years (Fibular nail n=23, plate fixation n=27). No significant difference was found between groups for the mean scores of Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (FNF 84.78 vs ORIF 84.07; p=0.883), the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) (FNF 89.54 vs ORIF 96.47; p=0.112), Euroqol-5D Index (FNF 0.88 vs ORIF 0.87; p=0.701) and Euroqol-5D Visual Analogue Score (FNF 77.30 vs ORIF 77.52; p=0.859). Conclusion. The current study illustrates that both methods of treatment result in a satisfactory long-term outcome with no difference in late complications or PROM scores at up to 10 years in patients under 65 years old, although the study is currently under powered

Aims

The purpose of this study was to compare reoperation and revision rates of double plating (DP), single plating using a lateral locking plate (SP), or distal femoral arthroplasty (DFA) for the treatment of periprosthetic distal femur fractures (PDFFs).

Introduction. Following publication of the Ankle Injury Management (AIM) trial in 2016 which compared the management of ankle fractures with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus closed contact casting (CCC), we looked at how the results of this study have been adopted into practice in a trauma unit in the United Kingdom. Methods. Institutional approval granted to identify eligible patients from a trauma database. 143 patients over 60 years with an unstable ankle fracture between 2017 and 2019 (1 year following publication of the AIM trial) were included. Open fractures, and patients with insulin-dependent diabetes or peripheral vessel disease were excluded (as per AIM criteria). Radiographs were reviewed for malunion and non-union. Clinical notes were reviewed for adverse events. Minimum follow up was 24 months. Results. Of the 143 patients, 42 patients (29.4%) received a moulded cast with a return to theatre rate of 21.4%, malunion rate of 30.1%, and infection or wound problem rate of 4.8%. When the exact phrase “close contact cast” was specified in 21 patients (14.7%), there was a 19.0% return to theatre rate, 28.6% malunion rate, and a 4.8% infection or wound problem rate. 101 patients (70.6%) had ORIF with a return to theatre rate of 10.9%, malunion rate of 5.0%, and infection or wound problem rate of 13.9%. Discussion. Our results show a high rate of complication with cast management of unstable ankle fractures in this older population. This was improved where CCC was specified, but remains higher even than those published in the AIM trial. Whilst there is certainly a role for CCC in carefully selected patients, we would advise caution in the widespread adoption of a close contact casting technique

The June 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Machine learning did not outperform conventional competing risk modelling to predict revision arthroplasty; Unravelling the risks: incidence and reoperation rates for femoral fractures post-total hip arthroplasty; Spinal versus general anaesthesia for hip arthroscopy: a COVID-19 pandemic- and opioid epidemic-driven study; Development and validation of a deep-learning model to predict total hip arthroplasty on radiographs; Ambulatory centres lead in same-day hip and knee arthroplasty success; Exploring the impact of smokeless tobacco on total hip arthroplasty outcomes: a deeper dive into postoperative complications.

The June 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Reverse versus anatomical total shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis? A UK national picture; Acute rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (ARTISAN): pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial; acid for rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Metal or ceramic humeral head total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of data from the National Joint Registry; Platelet-rich plasma has better results for long-term functional improvement and pain relief for lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Quantitative fatty infiltration and 3D muscle volume after nonoperative treatment of symptomatic rotator cuff tears: a prospective MRI study of 79 patients; Locking plates for non-osteoporotic proximal humeral fractures in the long term; A systematic review of the treatment of primary acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis.

Aims. Isolated fractures of the ulnar diaphysis are uncommon, occurring at a rate of 0.02 to 0.04 per 1,000 cases. Despite their infrequency, these fractures commonly give rise to complications, such as nonunion, limited forearm pronation and supination, restricted elbow range of motion, radioulnar synostosis, and prolonged pain. Treatment options for this injury remain a topic of debate, with limited research available and no consensus on the optimal approach. Therefore, this trial aims to compare clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes of two treatment methods: open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus nonoperative treatment in patients with isolated ulnar diaphyseal fractures. Methods. This will be a multicentre, open-label, parallel randomized clinical trial (under National Clinical Trial number NCT01123447), accompanied by a parallel prospective cohort group for patients who meet the inclusion criteria, but decline randomization. Eligible patients will be randomized to one of the two treatment groups: 1) nonoperative treatment with closed reduction and below-elbow casting; or 2) surgical treatment with ORIF utilizing a limited contact dynamic compression plate and screw construct. The primary outcome measured will be the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire score at 12 months post-injury. Additionally, functional outcomes will be assessed using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and pain visual analogue scale, allowing for a comparison of outcomes between groups. Secondary outcome measures will encompass clinical outcomes such as range of motion and grip strength, radiological parameters including time to union, as well as economic outcomes assessed from enrolment to 12 months post-injury. Ethics and dissemination. This trial has been approved by the lead site Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (CHREB; REB14-2004) and local ethics boards at each participating site. Findings from the trial will be disseminated through presentations at regional, national, and international scientific conferences and public forums. The primary results and secondary findings will be submitted for peer-reviewed publication. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(5):411–418

Introduction. The condition of the soft tissues surrounding an ankle fracture influences timing and treatment of injuries. Conventional treatment used an open approach to facilitate anatomical reduction and rigid internal fixation. Intramedullary devices for fibular fractures provide a safe alternative in patients in which the condition of the soft tissue envelope or the patient's co-morbidities may benefit from a less invasive approach. We compared outcomes for patients treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with those undergoing treatment with fibular nails (FN). Methods. 13 consecutive patients treated with fibular nails (FN) were compared with 13 age-matched patients that underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). All patients were followed to union. Study outcomes were time from admission to surgery, length of stay, wound failure, implant failure, revision surgery, OMAS and SF-36. Results. There was no difference in age or sex distribution between groups. There was no difference in OMAS at 1 year (83 ± 9 in FN group; 80± 21 in ORIF group) and SF-36 (94 ± 11 and 90 ± 20). There were 2 implant failures in the ORIF group and none in the FN group. There was one wound failure in the ORIF group and none in the FN group. Patients treated with FN had a shorter time to surgery (1 day ± 24 hours vs 3 days ± 24 hours) and shorter length of stay (1 day ± 24 hours vs 4 days ± 96 hours). Conclusion. FN is a safe method to treat patients with displaced distal fibular fractures that may have a poor soft tissue envelope and risk factors for wound healing. FN reduces the time to surgery and overall length of stay compared with similar patients treated with conventional ORIF

The increased torque required to dislocate dual mobility (DM) components may increase peri-prosthetic femoral fracture (PPF) risk. Current literature often relies on revision as an endpoint and may underestimate PPF. This study aims to review PPF rate, risks and treatment following primary DM implantation. Prospective cohort study of 549 patients following primary DM total hip arthroplasty (THA) between 2013 and 2021. Collected data included demographics, indication for surgery, cortical index and PPF. 549 patients were identified with primary DM THA. Mean age was 73 years (26–96). 446 (81.2%) patients had their index surgery following hip fracture. 18 patients (3.27%) sustained a PPF. Cumulative PPF rate was 1.5% at 1-year, 2.2% at 5-years and 3.27% overall. PPF was higher in patients undergoing surgery following hip fracture (4%) vs. other indications (1%). OR 4.04 (95% CI:0.53, 30.72), p=0.219. Mean cortical index was lower in patients with PPF 0.4 (95% CI:0.36, 0.45) compared to those without 0.46 (95% CI:0.45, 0.46) p=0.029. Treatment for PPF included 10 (55.6%) open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), 7 (38.9%) revision THA and 1 conservatively managed. PPF rate following DM use is higher in our cohort than published rates. Our rates are comparable to some papers when subgroup analysis of older patients and cemented taper slip stems are considered. PPF risk with DM may be increased in patients undergoing surgery after hip fracture or with a lower cortical index preoperatively. Over half of PPF were managed with ORIF and may mask PPF risk studies that report using revision as an endpoint

Aims

Periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures (PFFs) are a major complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Health status after PFF is not specifically investigated. The aim of this study is to evaluate the health status pattern over two years after sustaining a PFF.

Aims. The underlying natural history of suspected scaphoid fractures (SSFs) is unclear and assumed poor. There is an urgent requirement to develop the literature around SSFs to quantify the actual prevalence of intervention following SSF. Defining the risk of intervention following SSF may influence the need for widespread surveillance and screening of SSF injuries, and could influence medicolegal actions around missed scaphoid fractures. Methods. Data on SSF were retrospectively gathered from virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) across a large Scottish Health Board over a four-year period, from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2021. The Bluespier Electronic Patient Record System identified any surgical procedure being undertaken in relation to a scaphoid injury over the same time period. Isolating patients who underwent surgical intervention for SSF was performed by cross-referencing the unique patient Community Health Index number for patients who underwent these scaphoid procedures with those seen at VFCs for SSF over this four-year period. Results. In total, 1,739 patients were identified as having had a SSF. Five patients (0.28%) underwent early open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). One patient (0.06%) developed a nonunion and underwent ORIF with bone grafting. All six patients undergoing surgery were male (p = 0.005). The overall rate of intervention following a SSF was 0.35%. The early intervention rate in those undergoing primary MRI was one (0.36%), compared with three in those without (0.27%) (p > 0.576). Conclusion. Surgical intervention was rare following a SSF and was not required in females. A primary MRI policy did not appear to be associated with any change in primary or secondary intervention. These data are the first and largest in recent literature to quantify the prevalence of surgical intervention following a SSF, and may be used to guide surveillance and screening pathways as well as define medicolegal risk involved in missing a true fracture in SSFs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):312–316

Aims

Ankle fractures are common injuries and the third most common fragility fracture. In all, 40% of ankle fractures in the frail are open and represent a complex clinical scenario, with morbidity and mortality rates similar to hip fracture patients. They have a higher risk of complications, such as wound infections, malunion, hospital-acquired infections, pressure sores, veno-thromboembolic events, and significant sarcopaenia from prolonged bed rest.

Aims

Ankle fracture is one of the most common musculoskeletal injuries sustained in the UK. Many patients experience pain and physical impairment, with the consequences of the fracture and its management lasting for several months or even years. The broad aim of ankle fracture treatment is to maintain the alignment of the joint while the fracture heals, and to reduce the risks of problems, such as stiffness. More severe injuries to the ankle are routinely treated surgically. However, even with advances in surgery, there remains a risk of complications; for patients experiencing these, the associated loss of function and quality of life (Qol) is considerable. Non-surgical treatment is an alternative to surgery and involves applying a cast carefully shaped to the patient’s ankle to correct and maintain alignment of the joint with the key benefit being a reduction in the frequency of common complications of surgery. The main potential risk of non-surgical treatment is a loss of alignment with a consequent reduction in ankle function. This study aims to determine whether ankle function, four months after treatment, in patients with unstable ankle fractures treated with close contact casting is not worse than in those treated with surgical intervention, which is the current standard of care.