Aims. To compare results of institutional preferences with regard to treatment of soft tissues in the setting of open tibial shaft fractures. Methods. We present a retrospective review of open tibial shaft fractures at two high-volume level 1 trauma centres with differing practices with regard to the acute management of soft tissues. Site 1 attempts acute primary closure, while site 2 prefers delayed closure/coverage. Comparisons include percentage of primary closure, number of surgical procedures until definitive closure, percentage requiring soft tissue coverage, and percentage of 90-day wound complication. Results. Overall, there were 219 patients at site 1 and 282 patients at site 2. Differences in rates of acute wound closure were seen (168 (78%) at site 1 vs 101 (36%) at site 2). A mean of 1.5 procedures for definitive closure was seen at site 1 compared to 3.4 at site 2. No differences were seen in complication, nonunion, or amputation rates. Similar results were seen in a sub-analysis of type III injuries. Conclusion. Comparing outcomes of open tibial shaft fractures at two institutions with different rates initial wound management, no differences were seen in 90-day wound complications, nonunion rates, or need for amputation. Attempted acute closure resulted in a lower number of planned secondary procedures when compared with planned delayed closure. Providers should consider either acute closure or delayed coverage based on the injury characteristics, surgeon preference and institutional resources without concern that the decision at the time of index surgery will lead to an increased risk of complication. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-8:481–487

Background. To improve patient pathways we have, in selected patients, begun to acutely apply circular (rather than temporary monolateral) fixators with simultaneous or subsequent soft tissue closure. We present early results. Methods. Adult patients treated using an Ilizarov frame prior to soft tissue management were identified from our Ilizarov database. This data was supplemented by medical record review. Results. 26 cases were identified (22 open fractures (11 IIIA, 11 IIIB), 1 compartment syndrome and 3 infected salvage). All IIIA injuries were closed acutely alongside frame application. In IIIB fractures, 3 were closed following acute shortening, 1 required a local flap and 7 free tissue transfer. Soft tissue reconstruction was simultaneous to frame application in 5 patients, the remainder within 72 hours. In salvage cases, 2 required free and one a local muscle flap, all after frame application. There were no soft tissue cover failures. One patient underwent evacuation of a flap haematoma, there were no other unexpected returns to theatre for soft tissue problems. No patients required adjustment of frame components to allow soft tissue access. Conclusion. This approach appears to simplify treatment, reducing length of stay. We are collecting a matched patient series treated by traditional pathways for comparison

Background. Modular endoprostheses today represent a standard treatment option in the management of musculoskeletal tumors of the lower extremities. Long-term results of these reconstructions, however, are often limited by the course of the underlying disease. We therefore report our experiences in cancer patients with megaprostheses of the lower limb after a minimum of 15 years. Materials and Methods. 62 patients, 34 men and 28 women, with a mean age of 26 years (median, 20; range, 6–83) were included in this investigation with a mean follow-up of 230 months (median, 228; range, 180–342). Endoprosthetic reconstructions of the proximal femur (11), the distal femur (28), the total femur (2) or the proximal tibia (21) were indicated for osteosarcoma (43), chondrosarcoma (5), malignant fibrous histiocytoma (3) or other tumors (11). All patients have received either a KMFTR (22) or a HMRS (40) modular prosthesis; 23 patients had a muscle flap, 14 had a fibular transposition osteotomy and 4 have received an artificial LARS ligament for soft-tissue reconstruction. Results. 7 patients (11.3%) died throughout the follow-up period, but none succumbed to primary disease. One patient (1.6%) developed a local recurrence after 31 months that was resected. Overall, 56 patients (90.3%) underwent revision of their prosthesis; 50 (80.7%) had multiple revisions up to a maximum of 12 operations (mean, 3 per patient). The median overall prosthetic survival to first revision was 40 months; the corresponding 5-, 10- and 15-year survival rates were 35.5%, 14.5% and 12.9%, respectively. 3 patients (5.4%) had an infection, 8 (14.3%) had a soft-tissue related failure, 30 (53.6%) had a mechanical or structural failure and 15 (26.8%) had an aseptic loosening. The 15-year survival rates of these respective endpoints were 87.1% for infection, 79.0% for soft-tissue related failure, 32.3% for mechanical or structural failure and 56.5% for aseptic loosening. 59 patients (95.2%) have retained their prosthesis; 2 patients (3.2%) underwent secondary amputation due to an irresolvable complication, another one (1.6%) for a second malignancy. Conclusion. Modular prosthetic reconstructions of the lower extremities have a high revision rate in the long-term, primarily due to mechanical failures. Given that patients survive their malignant disease the rate of secondary implant removal, however, tends to be low, providing satisfactory function and body integrity. Further advances in implant design, soft tissue management and infection prophylaxis are required to reduce revision rates