Schatzker V & VI tibial plateau fractures are serious life-changing injuries often resulting in significant complications including post-traumatic arthritis. Reported incidence of secondary TKA following ORIF of all tibial plateau fractures is 7.3% and 13% for Schatzker V & VI tibial. This study reports a 15-year single centre experience of CEF of Schatzker V & VI fractures including PROMs and incidence of secondary TKA. This study was approved by the local Institutional board. All patients from 2007 – 2022 with Schatzker V or VI fractures treated with CEF were identified from a departmental limb reconstruction registry and included in this retrospective study. Patients’ demographics were collected from electronic institutional patient system. Further data was collected for secondary intervention, adverse events, and alignment at discharge. All deceased patients at the time of the study were excluded. Each participant completed a questionnaire about secondary intervention, EQ-5D-3L and Oxford Knee Score (OKS).Introduction
Materials & Methods
Intra articular distal tibia fractures can lead to post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Joint distraction has shown promise in elective cases. However, its application in acute fractures remains unexplored. This pilot study aims to fill this knowledge gap by investigating the benefits of joint distraction in acute fractures. We undertook a restrospective cohort study comprising patients with intra-articular distal tibia and pilon fractures treated with a circular ring fixator (CRF) at a single center. Prospective data collection included radiological assessments, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROM), necessity for additional procedures, and Kellgren and Lawrence grade (KL) for osteoarthritis (OA). 137 patients were included in the study, 30 in the distraction group and 107 in the non-distraction group. There was no significant difference between the groups.Introduction
Materials & Methods
The timing of when to remove a circular frame is crucial; early removal results in refracture or deformity, while late removal increases the patient morbidity and delay in return to work. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a staged reloading protocol. We report the incidence of mechanical failure following both single-stage and two stage reloading protocols and analyze the associated risk factors. We identified consecutive patients from our departmental database. Both trauma and elective cases were included, of all ages, frame types, and pathologies who underwent circular frame treatment. Our protocol is either a single-stage or two-stage process implemented by defunctioning the frame, in order to progressively increase the weightbearing load through the bone, and promote full loading prior to frame removal. Before progression, through the process we monitor patients for any increase in pain and assess radiographs for deformity or refracture.Aims
Methods
Superficial pin site infection is a common problem associated with external fixation, which has been extensively reported. However, the incidence and risk factors with regards to deep infection is rarely reported in the literature. In this study, we investigate and explore the incidence and risk factors of deep infection following circular frame surgery. For the purpose of this study, deep infection was defined as: persistent discharge or collection for which surgical intervention was recommended. Retrospective review of all patients whom underwent frame surgery between 1st of April 2015 to 1st April 2019 in our unit with a minimum of 1 year follow up following frame removal. We recorded patient demographics, patient risk factors, trauma or elective procedure, number of days the frame was in situ, location of infection and fracture pattern.Introduction
Materials and Methods
A pilon fracture is a severe ankle joint injury caused by high-energy trauma, typically affecting men of working age. Although relatively uncommon (5% to 7% of all tibial fractures), this injury causes among the worst functional and health outcomes of any skeletal injury, with a high risk of serious complications and long-term disability, and with devastating consequences on patients’ quality of life and financial prospects. Robust evidence to guide treatment is currently lacking. This study aims to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two surgical interventions that are most commonly used to treat pilon fractures. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 334 adult patients diagnosed with a closed type C pilon fracture will be conducted. Internal locking plate fixation will be compared with external frame fixation. The primary outcome and endpoint will be the Disability Rating Index (a patient self-reported assessment of physical disability) at 12 months. This will also be measured at baseline, three, six, and 24 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes include the Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), the five-level EuroQol five-dimenison score (EQ-5D-5L), complications (including bone healing), resource use, work impact, and patient treatment preference. The acceptability of the treatments and study design to patients and health care professionals will be explored through qualitative methods.Aims
Methods
Fracture and deformity after frame removal is a known risk in 9–14.5% of patients after circular frame treatment. The aims of this study were to assess the effectiveness of our staged protocol for frame removal and risk factors for the protocol failure. We identified 299 consecutive patients who underwent circular frame fixation for fracture or deformity correction in our unit from our prospective database. All 247 patients who followed the staged frame removal protocol were included in this study. We reviewed the electronic clinical record and radiographs of each patient to record demographics, risk factors for treatment failure and outcome following frame removal. We defined failure of the protocol as a re-fracture or change in bony alignment within 12 weeks of frame removal. Results underwent statistical analysis using Chi square analysis.Introduction
Methods and materials
We present here the results of a prospective follow-up study of radiological and functional outcome in 43 patients treated using the Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) for definitive management of tibial fractures. Over a five-year period data was collected from all patients completing treatment of a tibial fracture with the TSF. Residual deformity on x-ray and functional outcomes using the EQ-5D health status questionnaire, Iowa Knee and Ankle-Evaluation Rating System scores and Olerud & Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) were recorded one year following completion of frame treatment.Abstract
Patients & Methods
The optimal treatment of high-energy tibia fractures remains controversial. The role of external fixators has been shown to be crucial. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of using either Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) or Ilizarov frames in treatment of high-energy tibia fractures in a tertiary trauma referral centre. Retrospective review of consecutive series identified two treatment groups; Group 1(TSF) and Group 2 (Ilizarov). Time in frame (healing time) was defined as time from insertion to removal of frame. All patients with incomplete data secondary to loss to follow-up or death were eliminated.Introduction
Methodology
Complex tibial fractures are difficult to treat. The costs associated with hospitalization can be substantial, yet it is unknown how these vary depending upon the type of implant used. There have been multiple studies on economics of tibial fractures but none of these studies actually focussed on costing of illizarov and taylor spatial frames. We discuss the cost analysis of 200 tibial fractures treated with illizarov or taylor spatial frames. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost of treatment of complex tibial fractures with reimbursement given to the hospital in treating such injuries. We evaluated the economical data of 200 patients with complex tibial fractures treated with illizarov frame or taylor spatial frame from May 2005 to May 2010. Demographic data, fracture classification and method of surgical treatment along with the length of hospital stay were recorded in detail. The total cost calculated was then compared to the range of reimbursement price based on HRG (human Resource Group) coding. The implant cost was determined from the buying cost of institution.Background
Methods
The present study was conducted to evaluate the cost of physiotherapy both for inpatient and outpatient services. Significant physiotherapy resources are required to rehabilitate patients with an Ilizarov or Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF). Within Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust Physiotherapy department the average number of outpatient treatment sessions per routine patient is 6. In comparison, the average number of treatment sessions required for a patient with an ilizarov (or TSF) is 24 for a trauma patient and 33 for a patient undergoing an elective procedure. Seventy three (73) patients received physiotherapy treatment with an Ilizarov frame or a Taylor spatial frame between April 2008 and April 2010. Physiotherapy input was recorded (in minutes) for the patients identified. This included treatment received as an inpatient as well as an outpatient (if the patient received their treatment within Hull and East Yorkshire NHS trust). Data collection was divided into either trauma or elective procedure for analytical purposes. The average cost of physiotherapy treatment to Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust for an inpatient with an ilizarov frame is £121.82 per case (trauma) and £133.15 per case (elective). The average cost of physiotherapy treatment to Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust for an outpatient for a trauma case was calculated as £404.65 and £521.41for an average elective case. This is in comparison to a routine patient costing the service £60.29 (when treated by a Band 7 physiotherapist). The present study gives valuable data for future business planning and assistance with the setting of local or national tariffs for the treatment of this patient group.
