Open talus fracture are notoriously difficult to manage and they are commonly associated with a high level of complications including non-union, avascular necrosis and infection. Currently, the management of such injuries is based upon BOAST 4 guidelines although there is no suggested definitive management, thus definitive management is based upon surgeon preference. The key principles of open talus fracture management which do not vary between surgeons, however, there is much debate over whether the talus should be preserved or removed after open talus fracture/dislocation and proceeded to tibiocalcaneal fusion. A review of electronic hospital records for open talus fractures from 2014-2021 returned foureen patients with fifteen open talus fractures. Seven cases were initially managed with ORIF, five cases were definitively managed with FUSION, while the others were managed with alternative methods. We collected patient's age, gender, surgical complications, surgical risk factors and post-treatment functional ability and pain and compliance with BOAST guidelines. The average follow-up of the cohort was four years and one month. EQ-5D-5L and FAAM-ADL/Sports score was used as a patient reported outcome measure. Data was analysed using the software PRISM. Comparison between FUSION and ORIF groups showed no statistically significant difference in EQ-5D-5L score (P = 0.13), FAAM-ADL (P = 0.20), FAAM-Sport (P = 0.34), infection rate (P = 0.55), surgical times (P = 0.91) and time to weight bearing (P = 0.39), despite a higher proportion of polytrauma and Hawkins III and IV fractures in the FUSION group. FUSION is typically used as second line to ORIF or failed ORIF. However, there are a lack of studies that directly compared outcome in open talus fracture patients definitively managed with FUSION or ORIF. Our results demonstrate for the first time, that FUSION may not be inferior to ORIF in terms of patient functional outcome, infection rate, and quality-of-life, in the management of patients with open talus fracture patients. Of note, as open talus fractures have increased risks of complications such as osteonecrosis and non-union, FUSION should be considered as a viable option to mitigate these potential complications in these patients

In our department, currently there is variation in the number of xrays that patients receive following ORIF of distal radius fractures. This audit investigated the use of xrays following ORIF of distal radius fractures. Patients were identified from daily trauma lists. Patients who had a primary ORIF or ORIF following failed conservative management were included in the study. PACS was used to identify the number of post-operative xrays performed. These were correlated with clinic letters to see if there was any change in management following xray review. Between July and November 2013, 102 patients were admitted with distal radius fracture. Of these, 35 (mean age:51 years) had an ORIF. Four were not followed-up in Scotland. Of the remaining 31 patients, eleven had one post-operative xray, seventeen had two and three had three xrays. Of the patients who had one xray, seven had the xray in the first three weeks, the rest at six weeks. Patients who had two xrays had an xray at two and 6 weeks. Of the three patients who had three xrays, two had comminuted fractures that required further CT investigation, one for a suspicion of an intra-articular screw, the other for possibility of non-union. The third patient had no apparent reason for requiring three xrays. Thus of the 31 patients in the study, 29 did not require any further investigations. The results show a variation in the frequency of post-operative xrays after fixation of distal radius fractures. In most cases the management plan was unchanged after plain xrays were undertaken. This suggests that a protocol driven approach to follow-up after fixation of distal radius fractures could reduce the burden on fracture clinic and radiology departments. We propose that unless indicated by intra-operative findings or post-operative concerns, patients should have xrays at the two week review appointment

Introduction

Intraarticular calcaneal fractures often need open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with plate osteosynthesis. The wound complication is one of the common problems encountered following this and affects the outcome adversely. Our study was done to assess how far postoperative slab/cast can avert wound complications.

Abstract. Objectives. The outcomes from patella fracture have remained dissatisfactory despite advances in treatment, especially from operative fixation1. Frequently, reoperation is required following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of the patella due to prominent hardware since the standard technique for patella ORIF is tension band wiring (TBW) which inevitably leaves a bulky knot and irritates soft tissue given the patella's superficial position2. We performed a systematic review to determine the optimal treatment of patella fractures in the poor host. Methods. Three databases (EMBASE/Medline, ProQuest and PubMed) and one register (Cochrane CENTRAL) were searched. 476 records were identified and duplicates removed. 88 records progressed to abstract screening and 73 were excluded. Following review of complete references, 8 studies were deemed eligible. Results. Complication rates were shown to be high in our systematic review. Over one-fifth of patients require re-operation, predominantly for removal of symptomatic for failed hardware. Average infection rate was 11.95% which is higher than rates reported in the literature for better hosts. Nevertheless, reported mortality was low at 0.8% and thromboembolic events only occurred in 2% of patients. Average range of movement achieved following operative fixation was approximately 124 degrees. Upon further literature review, novel non-operative treatment options have shown acceptable results in low-demand patients, including abandoning weight-bearing restrictions altogether and non-operatively treating patients with fracture gaps greater than 1cm. Regarding operative management, suture/cable TBW has been investigated as a viable option with good results in recent years since the materials used show comparable biomechanics to stainless steel. Additionally, ORIF with locking plates have shown favourable results and have enabled aggressive post-operative rehabilitation protocols. TBW with metallic implants has shown higher complication rates, especially for anterior knee pain, reoperation and poor functional outcomes. Conclusion. There is sparse literature regarding patella fracture in the poor host. Nevertheless, it is clear that ORIF produces better outcomes than conservative treatment but the optimal technique for patella ORIF remains unclear. TBW with metallic implants should not remain the standard technique for ORIF; low-profile plates of suture TBW are more attractive solutions. Non-operative treatment may be considered for low-demand individuals however any form of patellectomy should be avoided if possible. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Determine the infection risk of nonoperative versus operative repair of extraperitoneal bladder ruptures in patients with pelvic ring injuries. Pelvic ring injuries with extraperitoneal bladder ruptures were identified from a prospective trauma registry at two level 1 trauma centers from 2014 to 2020. Patients, injuries, treatments, and complications were reviewed. Using Fisher's exact test with significance at P value < 0.05, associations between injury treatment and outcomes were determined. Of the 1127 patients with pelvic ring injuries, 68 (6%) had a concomitant extraperitoneal bladder rupture. All patients received IV antibiotics for an average of 2.5 days. A suprapubic catheter was placed in 4 patients. Bladder repairs were performed in 55 (81%) patients, 28 of those simultaneous with ORIF anterior pelvic ring. The other 27 bladder repair patients underwent initial ex-lap with bladder repair and on average had pelvic fixation 2.2 days later. Nonoperative management of bladder rupture with prolonged Foley catheterization was used in 13 patients. Improved fracture reduction was noted in the ORIF cohort compared to the closed reduction external fixation cohort (P = 0.04). There were 5 (7%) deep infections. Deep infection was associated with nonoperative management of bladder rupture (P = 0.003) and use of a suprapubic catheter (P = 0.02). Not repairing the bladder increased odds of infection 17-fold compared to repair (OR 16.9, 95% CI 1.75 – 164, P = 0.01). Operative repair of extraperitoneal bladder ruptures substantially decreases risk of infection in patients with pelvic ring injuries. ORIF of anterior pelvic ring does not increase risk of infection and results in better reductions compared to closed reduction. Suprapubic catheters should be avoided if possible due to increased infection risk later. Treatment algorithms for pelvic ring injuries with extraperitoneal bladder ruptures should recommend early bladder repair and emphasize anterior pelvic ORIF

Abstract. Introduction. Intra-articular distal humerus OTA type C fractures are challenging to treat. When osteosynthesis is not feasible one can choose to do a primary arthroplasty of elbow or manage non-operatively. The indications for treatment of this fracture pattern are evolving. Objectives. We present our outcomes and complications when this cohort of patients was managed with either open reduction internal fixator (ORIF), elbow arthroplasty or non-operatively. Methods. Retrospective study to include OTA type C2 and C3 fracture distal humerus of 36 patients over the age of 50 years managed with all the three modalities. Patient's clinical notes and radiographs were reviewed. Results. Between 2016 and 2022, 21 patients underwent ORIF – group 1, 10 patients were treated with arthroplasty – group 2 and 5 were managed conservatively- group 3. The mean age of patients was 62 years in group 1, 70 years in group 2 and 76 years in group 3. The mean range of movement (ROM) arc achieved in the group 1 & 2 was 103 while group 3 was 68. At least follow up was 6 months. 5 patients in group 1 underwent metalwork removal and 2 patients in group 3 under arthroplasty. Conclusion. The outcomes of arthroplasty and ORIF are comparable, but reoperation rates and stiffness were higher in ORIF and conservative group. Surgeon choice and patient factors play important role in decision towards choosing treatment modality. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Standard fixation for intra-articular distal humerus fracture is open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). However, high energy fractures of the distal humerus are often accompanied with soft tissue injuries and or vascular injuries which limits the use of internal fixation. In our report, we describe a highly complex distal humerus fracture that showed promising healing via a ring external fixator. A 26-year-old man sustained a Gustillo Anderson Grade IIIB intra-articular distal humerus fracture of the non-dominant limb with bone loss at the lateral column. The injury was managed with aggressive wound debridement and cross elbow stabilization via a hinged ring external fixator. Post operative wound managed with foam dressing. Post-operatively, early controlled mobilization of elbow commenced. Fracture union achieved by 9 weeks and frame removed once fracture united. No surgical site infection or non-union observed throughout follow up. At 2 years follow up, flexion - extension of elbow is 20°- 100°, forearm supination 65°, forearm pronation 60° with no significant valgus or varus deformity. The extent of normal anatomic restoration in elbow fracture fixation determines the quality of elbow function with most common complication being elbow stiffness. Ring fixator is a non-invasive external device which provides firm stabilization of fracture while allowing for adequate soft tissue management. It provides continuous axial micro-movements in the frame which promotes callus formation while avoiding translation or angulation between the fragments. In appropriate frame design, they allow for early rehabilitation of joint where normal range of motion can be allowed in controlled manner immediately post-fixation. Functional outcome of elbow fracture from ring external fixation is comparable to ORIF due to better rehabilitation and lower complications. Ring external fixator in our patient achieved acceptable functional outcome and fracture alignment meanwhile the fracture was not complicated with common complications seen in ORIF. In conclusion, ring external fixator is as effective as ORIF in treating complex distal humeral fractures and should be considered for definitive fixation in such fractures

Abstract. Objective. To compare the clinical and radiological outcome between less invasive stabilization system (LISS, Synthes, Paoli, PA.) and open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) for the treatment of extraarticular proximal tibia fractures through the lateral approach. Background. Proximal tibial fractures present a difficult treatment challenge with historically high complication rates. ORIF has been in vogue for long time with good outcome. But these are associated with problems especially overlying skin conditions, delayed recovery and rehabilitation with limited functional outcome. LISS is an emerging procedure for the treatment of proximal tibial fractures. It preserves soft tissue and the periosteal circulation, which promotes fracture healing. Patients and methods. Thirty patients with closed proximal tibial fractures were included in this study. They were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group I (n=15) patients were treated by LISS and group II (n=15) by ORIF. Major characteristics of the two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, mode of injury, fracture location, and associated injuries. All patients were followed up at least 6 months. Results. In each group, 12 patients were united, 2 patients were non- united and one patient showed delayed union. The mean operative time in LISS patients was 79.3 min, while in ORIF patients; it was 122 min. All patients of LISS group were exposed to radiation, while only 40% of ORIF group were exposed. The mean time of union of LISS patients was 10.87weeks. While in ORIF patients, the mean time of union was 21.13 weeks. There was no significant difference between both groups regarding the postoperative complications. Functional outcome was satisfactory in both groups. Conclusion. LISS achieves comparable results with ORIF in extraarticular fractures of the proximal tibia. Although LISS potentially has the radiation hazard, it reduces the perioperative complications with a shortened operation time and minimal soft tissue dissection. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Introduction and Objective. Ankle fractures are common and affect young adults as well as the elderly. An unstable ankle fracture treatment typically involves surgical fixation, immobilisation, and modified weight-bearing for six weeks. Non-weight bearing (NWB) cast immobilisation periods were used to protect the soft tissue envelope and osteosynthesis. This can have implications on patient function and may reduce independence, mobility and return to work. Newer trends in earlier mobilisation compete with traditional NWB doctrine, and weak consensus exists as to the best postoperative strategy. The purpose of this trial is to investigate the safety and efficacy of immediate weight-bearing (IWB) and range of motion (ROM) exercise regimes following ORIF of unstable ankle fractures with a particular focus on functional outcomes and complication rates. Materials and Methods. A pragmatic randomised controlled multicentre trial, comparing IWB in a walking boot and ROM within 24 hours versus non-weight-bearing (NWB) and immobilisation in a cast for six weeks, following ORIF of all types of unstable adult ankle fractures (lateral malleolar, bimalleolar, trimalleolar with or without syndesmotic injury). The exclusion criteria are skeletal immaturity and tibial plafond fractures. The primary outcome measure is the functional Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS). Secondary outcomes include wound infection (deep and superficial), displacement of osteosynthesis, the full arc of ankle motion (plantar flexion and dorsal flection), RAND-36 Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) scoring, time to return to work and postoperative hospital length of stay. Results. We recruited 160 patients with an unstable ankle fracture. Participants’ ages ranged from 15 to 94 years (M = 45.5, SD = 17.2), with 54% identified as female. The mean time from injury to surgical fixation was 1.3 days (0 to 17 days). Patients in the immediate weight-bearing group had a 9.5-point higher mean OMAS at six weeks postoperatively (95% CI 1.48, 17.52) P = 0.021. The complications rate was similar in both groups. The rate of surgical site infection was 4.3%. One patient had DVT, and another patient had a pulmonary embolism; both were randomised to NWB. Length of hospital stay (LOS) was 1 ± 1.5 (0, 12) for the IWB group vs 1.5 ± 2.5 (0, 19) for the NWB group. Conclusions. There is a paucity of quality evidence supporting the postoperative management regimes used most commonly in clinical practice. To our knowledge, immediate weight-bearing (IWB) following ORIF of all types of unstable ankle fractures has not been investigated in a controlled prospective manner in recent decades. In this large multicentre, randomised controlled trial, we investigated immediate weight-bearing following ORIF of all ankle fracture patterns in the usual care condition using standard fixation methods. Our result suggests that IWB following ankle fracture fixation is safe and resulted in a better functional outcome. Once anatomical reduction and stable internal fixation is achieved, we recommend IWB in all types of ankle fractures in a compliant patient

Tourniquet is a commonly used tool in orthopaedic practice. Incidence of complications is low but if any develops, it is devastating. Transient nerve damage, ischemia or skin burns are the possible tourniquet related complications. There is big variation in practice regarding the limb occlusion pressure. 51 procedures in 50 patients were reviewed retrospectively in our district general hospital. We looked at quality of documentation guided by the BOAST standard (The Safe Use of Intraoperative Tourniquets, published in October 2021). Limb occlusion pressure and ischemic time were analysed. Intra-operative and post-operative notes were reviewed to assess quality of documentation and post-operative complications. Although limb occlusion pressure was above the recommended range in more than 75% of cases, there were no significant complications observed. Two cases only developed transient neuropraxia in common peroneal nerve and median nerve following tibial plateau ORIF and trapeziectomy simultaneously. Tibial ORIF fixation case had prolonged ischemic time (more than 120 minutes) and the limb occlusion pressure for the hand case was above the recommended range. Both have recovered within few days with no long-term consequences. Minimum documentation threshold was not met with regarding tourniquet site condition, method of skin isolation and padding, and exsanguination method. This relatively new standard with no previous similar guidance needs time until it is followed by the health care professionals especially when there is no high incidence of complications related to the use of the tourniquet. However, it is crucial to increase the theatre staff awareness of such standards. This will prevent devastating complications specifically in vulnerable patients. Adjustments to theatre checklist have been suggested to improved documentation. Additionally, local teaching sessions will be delivered to theatre personnel aiming at improving our compliance to this standard

Abstract. Objectives. The purpose of this trial is to investigate the safety and efficacy of immediate weight-bearing (IWB) and range of motion exercise regimes following ORIF of unstable ankle fractures with a particular focus on functional outcomes and complication rates. Methods. A pragmatic randomised controlled multicentre trial, comparing IWB in a walking boot and ROM within 24 hours versus NWB and immobilisation in a cast for six weeks, following ORIF of all types of unstable adult ankle fractures. The exclusion criteria are skeletal immaturity and tibial plafond fractures. The primary outcome measure is the functional Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS). Secondary outcomes include wound infection, displacement of osteosynthesis, the full arc of ankle motion, RAND-36 Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) scoring, time to return to work and postoperative hospital length of stay. Results. We recruited 160 patients with an unstable ankle fracture. Participants’ ages ranged from 15 to 94 years (M = 45.5, SD = 17.2), with 54% identified as female. The mean time from injury to surgical fixation was 1.3 days (0 to 17 days). Patients in the IWB group had a 9.5-point higher mean OMAS at six weeks postoperatively (95% CI 1.48, 17.52) P = 0.021 with a similar result at three months. The complications rate was similar in both groups. The rate of surgical site infection was 4.3%. One patient had DVT, and another patient had a PE, both were randomised to NWB. Length of hospital stay was 1 ± 1.5 (0, 12) for the IWB group vs 1.5 ± 2.5 (0, 19) for the NWB group. Conclusion. In this large multicentre RCT, we investigated WB following ORIF of all ankle fracture patterns in the usual care condition using standard fixation methods. Our result suggests that IWB following ankle fracture fixation is safe and resulted in a better functional outcome

Lisfranc injuries are uncommon and can be challenging to manage. There is considerable variation in opinion regarding the mode of operative treatment of these injuries, with some studies preferring primary arthrodesis over traditional open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). We aim to assess the clinical and radiological outcomes of the patients treated with ORIF in our unit. This is a retrospective study, in which all 27 consecutive patients treated with ORIF between June 2013 and October 2018 by one surgeon were included with an average follow-up of 2.4 years. All patients underwent ORIF with joint-sparing surgery by a dorsal bridging plate (DBP) for the second and third tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint, and the first TMT joint was fixed with trans-articular screws. Patients had clinical examination and radiological assessment, and completed American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaires. Our early results of 22 patients (5 lost to follow-up) showed that 16 (72%) patients were pain free, walking normally without aids, and wearing normal shoes and 68% were able to run or play sports. The mean AOFAS midfoot score was 78.1 (63–100) and the average FFI was 19.5 (0.6–34). Radiological assessment confirmed that only three patients had progression to posttraumatic arthritis at the TMT joints though only one of these was clinically symptomatic. Good clinical and radiological outcomes can be achieved by ORIF in Lisfranc injuries with joint-sparing surgery using DBP

Objectives. Pilon fractures represent one of the most surgically challenging fractures in orthopaedics. Different techniques exist for their management, with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and External fixation (Ex-Fix) the most widely used. Whilst there is a plethora of data regarding these strategies for Pilon fractures as a whole, very limited data exists solely on the management of open Pilon fractures. This study aimed to elucidate how surgical management options can influence postoperative complications, and if this can influence future management protocols. Materials and methods. We conducted a search in PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL for postoperative complications and functional outcomes in open pilon fractures in those treated with Ex-Fix vs ORIF (PROSPERO-CRD42020184213). The postoperative complications measured included non-union, mal-union, delayed union, bone grafting, amputation, osteoarthritis, deep infection and superficial infection. Functional outcomes in the form of the AOFAS score was also measured where possible. We were able to carry out a meta-analysis for both deep infections and non-unions. Results. The search yielded 309 results and a total of 18 studies consisting of 484 patients were included. All fractures included were open, and consisted of 64 Gustilo-Anderson Type I, 148 Type II, 103 Type IIIa, 90 Type IIIb and 9 Type IIIc. 60 Type III fractures could not be further separated and 12 were ungraded. Both ORIF and Ex-Fix were found to have statistically similar AOFAS scores (p=0.682). For all included studies, the Ex-Fix group had significantly higher rates of superficial infections (p=0.001), non-unions (p=0.001), osteoarthritis (p=0.001) and bone grafting (p=0.001). The meta-analysis found no significant difference in non-union (pooled OR=0.25, 95% CI: 0.03 to 2.24, p = 0.44) or deep infection rates (pooled OR=1.35, 95% CI: 0.11 to 16.69, p = 0.12) between the ORIF and Ex-fix groups. Conclusion. Based on our study, while Ex-Fix and ORIF have similar functional outcomes, Ex-Fix appears to have a significantly higher risk of postoperative complications which must be considered by surgeons when choosing surgical management options. Further research, ideally in a randomised control trial format, is required to definitively demonstrate ORIF superiority in the management of open pilon fractures

Abstract. Objectives. Currently, the golden standard for the management of ankle fractures is open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), a procedure which preserves joint anatomy and function. However, ORIF is associated with high risk of infection, especially in the elderly population, who tend to suffer from osteoporosis and vascular disease. Studies recommend hindfoot nailing (HFN) as a safe and efficient management alternative for this demographic. Unlike ORIF, HFN allows immediate weight-bearing, which has been linked to a lower rate of complications. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of hindfoot nailing in ankle fractures using a case series of 43 patients. Methods. This is a retrospective study with a sample size of 43 patients, that have a mean age of 77.3 years and several medical conditions. These patients experienced ankle fractures that were treated with HFN. Data collected included injury patterns, operative complications, rate of radiological union, comorbidities and changes in mobility and housing before and after surgery. Results. Before their fracture, 62.8% of patients mobilised using a walking stick or a wheeled frame. Following surgery, 52.4% experienced decreased level of mobility. 50% of patients achieved radiological union at the time of data analysis, whereas 52.4% of patients reported a post-operative complication, most commonly soft tissue or bone infection. Conclusions. Our study has a large sample size compared to previous research. The follow-up period varies depending on patient attendance to follow-up clinical appointments. Our patient cohort exhibits significantly lower rates of radiological union, higher incidence of complications and poor post-operative functional outcomes associated with HFN. These data contradict previous studies suggesting HFN for the surgical management of ankle fractures in the elderly and frail population and demonstrate that a more thorough evaluation of HFN is needed

Infections represent a devastating complication in orthopedic and traumatological surgery, with high rates of morbidity and mortality. An early intervention is essential, and it includes a radical surgical approach supported by targeted intravenous antimicrobial therapy. The availability of parenteral antibiotics at the site of infection is usually poor, so it is crucial to maximize local antibiotic concentration using local carriers. Our work aims to describe the uses of one of these systems, Stimulan®, for the management and prevention of infections at our Institution. Analysing the reported uses of Stimulan®, we identified two major groups: bone substitute and carrier material for local antibiotic therapy. The first group includes its application as a filler of dead spaces within bone or soft tissues resulting from traumatic events or previous surgery. The second group comprehends the use of Stimulan® for the treatment of osteomyelitis, post-traumatic septic events, periprosthetic joint infections, arthroplasty revision surgery, prevention in open fractures, surgery of the diabetic foot, oncological surgery and for all those patients susceptible to a high risk of infection. We used Stimulan® in several complex clinical situations: in PJIs, in DAPRI procedure and both during the first and the second stage of a 2-stage revision surgery; furthermore, we started to exploit this antibiotic carrier also in prophylaxis of surgical site infections, as it happens in open fractures, and when a surgical site remediation is required, like in osteomyelitis following ORIF. Stimulan® is an extremely versatile and polyhedric material, available in the form of beads or paste, and can be mixed to a very broad range of antibiotics to better adapt to different bacteria and their antibiograms, and to surgeon's needs. These properties make it a very useful adjuvant for the management of complex cases of infection, and for their prevention, as well

Introduction and Objective. Despite the low incidence of pilon fractures among lower limb injuries, their high-impact nature presents difficulties in surgical management and recovery. Current literature includes a wide range of different management strategies, however there is no universal treatment algorithm. We aim to determine clinical outcomes in patients with open and closed pilon fractures, managed using a treatment algorithm that was applied consistently over the span of this study. Materials and Methods. This retrospective study was conducted at a single institution, including 141 pilon fractures in 135 patients, from August 2014 to January 2021. AO/OTA classification was used to classify fractures. Among closed fractures, 12 had type 43A, 18 had type 43B, 61 had type 43C. Among open fractures, 11 had type 43A, 12 had type 43B, 27 had type 43C. Open fractures were further classified with Gustilo-Anderson (GA); type 1: n=8, type 2: n=10, type 3A: n=12, type 3B: n=20. Our treatment algorithm consisted of fine wire fixator (FWF) for severely comminuted closed fractures (AO/OTA type 43C3), or open fractures with severe soft tissue injury (GA type 3). Otherwise, open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) was performed. When required, minimally invasive osteosynthesis (MIO) was performed in combination with FWF to improve joint congruency. All open fractures, and closed fractures with severe soft tissue injury (skin contusion, fracture blister, severe oedema) were initially treated with temporary ankle-spanning external fixation. For all open fracture patients, surgical debridement, soft tissue cover with a free or pedicled flap were performed. For GA types 1 and 2, this was done with ORIF in the same operating session. Those with severe soft tissue injury (GA type 3) were treated with FWF four to six weeks after soft tissue management was completed. Primary outcome was AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot score at 3, 6 and 12-months post-treatment. Secondary outcomes include time to partial weight-bear (PWB) and full weight-bear (FWB), bone union time. All complications were recorded. Results. Mean AOFAS score 3, 6, and 12 months post-treatment for open and closed fracture patients were 44.12 and 53.99 (p=0.007), 62.38 and 67.68 (p=0.203), 78.44 and 84.06 (p=0.256), respectively. 119 of the 141 fractures healed without further intervention (84.4%). Average time to bone union was 51.46 and 36.48 weeks for open and closed fractures, respectively (p=0.019). Union took longer in closed fracture patients treated with FWF than ORIF (p=0.025). On average, open and closed fracture patients took 12.29 and 10.76 weeks to PWB (p=0.361); 24.04 and 20.31 weeks to FWB (p=0.235), respectively. Common complications for open fractures were non-union (24%), post-traumatic arthritis (16%); for closed fractures they were post-traumatic arthritis (25%), superficial infection (22%). Open fracture was a risk factor for non-union (p=0.042; OR=2.558, 95% CI 1.016–6.441), bone defect (p=0.001; OR=5.973, 95% CI 1.986–17.967), and superficial infection (p<0.001; OR=4.167, 95% CI 1.978–8.781). Conclusions. The use of a two-staged approach involving temporary external fixation followed by definitive fixation, provides a stable milieu for soft tissue recovery. FWF combined with MIO, where required for severely comminuted closed fractures, and FWF for open fractures with severe soft tissue injury, are safe methods achieving low complication rates and good functional recovery

Is Non-Weight-Bearing Necessary? (INWN) is a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing immediate protected weight-bearing (IWB) with non-weight-bearing cast immobilisation (NWB) following ankle fracture fixation (ORIF). This trial compares; functional outcomes, complication rates and performs an economic analysis to estimate cost-utility. IWB within 24hrs was compared to NWB, following ORIF of all types of unstable ankle fractures. Skeletally immature patients and tibial plafond fractures were excluded. Functional outcomes were assessed by the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) and RAND-36 Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) taken at regular follow-up intervals up to one year. A cost-utility analysis via decision tree modelling was performed to derive an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER). A standard gamble health state valuation model utilising SF-36 scores was used to calculate Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) for each arm. We recruited 160 patients (80 per arm), aged 15 to 94 years (M = 45.5), 54% female. Complication rates were similar in both groups. IWB demonstrated a consistently higher OMAS score, with significant values at 6 weeks (MD=10.4, p=0.005) and 3 months (MD 12.0, p=0.003). Standard gamble utility values demonstrated consistently higher values (a score of 1 equals perfect health) with IWB, significant at 3 months (Ẋ = 0.75 [IWB] / 0.69 [NWB], p=0.018). Cost-utility analysis demonstrated NWB is €798.02 more expensive and results in 0.04 fewer QALYs over 1 year. This results in an ICER of −€21,682.42/QALY. This negative ICER indicates cost savings of €21,682.42 for every QALY (25 patients = 1 QALY gain) gained implementing an IWB regime. IWB demonstrates a superior functional outcome, greater cost savings and similar complication rates, compared to NWB following ankle fracture fixation

Background. Distal radius fractures are among the most common fractures encountered in the clinical setting, with a reported incidence of 17%. Of these common fractures, it has been said 60% are intra-articular in nature. Intra-articular or unstable and comminuted fractures represent severe, high energy injuries. There is a considerable amount of controversy as to which fixation method is superior. Even the OA concludes; “comparing external fixation (EF) with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for the treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures described no consistent benefit of one treatment over another”. There are only a few randomised control trials that go beyond one year to cover the long-term follow up (over two years). There has yet to be a meta-analysis of the long-term outcomes of open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) versus external fixation. We aim to show from this meta-analysis if there is any significant difference in the outcomes of either fixation method in the long-term. Method. We pooled the data of all available randomised control trials that compare the long-term outcomes of ORIF against external fixation of distal radius fractures. We completed a systematic review of PubMed, embase, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library, from inception to December 2014. We then preformed our meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software. Results. We did not determine any significant difference in long-term outcomes when comparing ORIF with external fixation. However 6 of the 11 outcomes supported ORIF. Conclusion. There is no significant difference in the long-term outcomes between ORIF and external fixation. No meta analysis to date, short or long term, has been able to determine which is the superior, yet the future treatment of these fractures looks to be ORIF in the form of volar plating. We recommend before this becomes universal, further research must be carried out. Level of Evidence. Level 1. Disclosures. this was the first author's, Dr CJC Gouk, Masters dissertation at the University of Edinburgh. No financial support was received

Introduction and Objective. Joint malleolar fractures have been estimated around 9% of all fractures. They are characterized by different both early and late complications. Among the latter, arthrofibrosis and early secondary arthrosis represent the two most common ones. Moreover, these two complications could be considered related to each other. Their real cause is still under investigation, even if residual post-operative hematoma and acute post-traumatic synovitis appear to be the most accredited. Supporting this hypothesis, joint debridement and the evacuation of the post-operative hematoma could represent a possible solution. The aim of this prospective study is to evaluate the role of arthroscopic lavage and debridement during internal fixation in order to prevent late joint complications. Materials and Methods. Sixty consecutive patients who reported dislocated articular ankle fractures with surgical indication of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) have been included in this study. 27 patients underwent ORIF surgery associated with arthroscopic washout and debridement, while 33 patients, representing the control group, underwent just internal reduction and osteosynthesis. Patients with pure dislocations, non-articular fractures, polytrauma, previous local trauma, metabolic and connective pathologies were excluded. Follow-up was performed at 40 days (T1), 3 (T2) and 6 months (T3) after trauma for all patients. If necessary, some have been re-evaluated 12 months after the trauma. Efficacy of the treatment was evaluated through the VAS scale, Maryland scale, search for local complications such as dehiscence or infections, and finally radiographic evaluation. T-Student was estimated in order to individuate statistical significance. Results. VAS scale showed higher values for the case group than the control group with mean values of 2.7 and 4.2 at T1 and 2.1 and 3.8 at T2, respectively. At 6 months follow-up, the VAS values resulted similar with 2.6 for the case group and 2.8 for the control group. The same projections were found for the Maryland scale, with values of 61.5 and 40.7 at T1, 80.8 and 68.0 at T2 and 87.8 and 85.0 with no significant differences at T3 respectively. No significant differences were detected for complications or radiographic evaluation. Conclusions. Our study has shown significance differences in terms of pain and time for recovery only in the very short term follow up. Although our study, due to the specific limits, cannot be considered diriment, on the basis of the data, we could hypothesize that the aforementioned hypothesis may remain valid for the non-acute hematoma or that the cause of the arthrofibrosis should be sought somewhere else. However, evidence is low, and further research is needed

Distal radius fractures (DRF) are very common injuries. National recommendations (British Orthopaedic Association, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)) exist in the UK to guide the management of these injuries. These guidelines provide recommendations about several aspects of care including which type of injuries to treat non-operatively and surgically, timing of surgery and routine follow-up. In particular, current recommendations include considering immobilizing patients for 4 weeks in plaster for those managed conservatively, and operating on fractures within 72 hours for intra-articular injuries and 7 days for extra-articular fractures. With increased demands for services and an ageing population, prompt surgery for those presenting with distal radius fractures is not always possible. A key factor is the need for prompt surgery for hip fracture patients. This study is an audit of the current standard of care at a busy level 2 trauma unit against national guidelines for the management of DRFs. This retrospective audit includes all patients presenting to our emergency department from June to September 2018. Patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of a closed distal radius fracture and follow-up in our department were included in the study. Those with open fractures were excluded. Data was retrieved from clinical coding, electronic patient records, and IMPAX Client (Picture archiving and communication system). The following data was collected on patients treated conservatively and those managed surgically:- (1)Time to surgery for surgical management; (2)Period of immobilization for both conservative and operative groups. 45 patients (13 male, 32 female) with 49 distal radius fractures (2 patients had bilateral injuries) were included. Patients had mean age 63 years (range 19 to 92 years) 30 wrists were treated non-operatively and 19 wrists treated surgically (8 K-wires, 10 ORIF, 1 MUA). Mean time to surgery in the operative group was 8 days (range 1 – 21 days, median 7 days). Mean time to surgery for intra-articular fractures was 7 days (range 1 – 21) and 12 days for extra-articular fractures (range 4 – 20). Mean immobilization period in those treated in plaster is 6 weeks (range 4 – 13 weeks, median 5.6 weeks). At busy level 2 trauma units with limited theatre capacity and a high volume of hip fracture admissions, time to surgery for less urgent injuries such as wrist fractures is often delayed. National guidelines are useful in helping to guide management however their standards are often difficult to achieve in the context of increasing populations in urban areas and an ageing population