Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1567 - 1572
1 Nov 2012
Berkes MB Little MTM Lazaro LE Sculco PK Cymerman RM Daigl M Helfet DL Lorich DG

It has previously been suggested that among unstable ankle fractures, the presence of a malleolar fracture is associated with a worse outcome than a corresponding ligamentous injury. However, previous studies have included heterogeneous groups of injury. The purpose of this study was to determine whether any specific pattern of bony and/or ligamentous injury among a series of supination-external rotation type IV (SER IV) ankle fractures treated with anatomical fixation was associated with a worse outcome.

We analysed a prospective cohort of 108 SER IV ankle fractures with a follow-up of one year. Pre-operative radiographs and MRIs were undertaken to characterise precisely the pattern of injury. Operative treatment included fixation of all malleolar fractures. Post-operative CT was used to assess reduction. The primary and secondary outcome measures were the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and the range of movement of the ankle.

There were no clinically relevant differences between the four possible SER IV fracture pattern groups with regard to the FAOS or range of movement. In this population of strictly defined SER IV ankle injuries, the presence of a malleolar fracture was not associated with a significantly worse clinical outcome than its ligamentous injury counterpart. Other factors inherent to the injury and treatment may play a more important role in predicting outcome.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 92-B, Issue SUPP_IV | Pages 493 - 493
1 Oct 2010
Audigé L Daigl-Cattaneo M Goldhahn J Goldhahn S Hanson B
Full Access

Background: The interpretation of safety data from clinical studies such as complication risks requires clear definition of targeted and documented complication events. In addition a standardized classification of complications is required to allow appropriate comparison of safety data between studies and treatment groups. This presentation highlights a proposal for a standardized management and classification of complication data to initiate and seek consensus among trauma surgeons active in clinical documentation and research.

Methods: Complication events are examined regarding their timing of occurrence as well as their potential causal inter-relationship for any given patient. While independent events are numbered sequentially, directly associated events (e.g. a fracture collapse and implant screw perforation into a joint) receives the same complication number. Complications are described and categorized according to a pre-defined list of anticipated complication types, or as un-anticipated complications. They are further classified as local or general; local complications occur at or directly around the injuries and are further classified as being “Implant/Surgical procedure”, “Bone/Fracture” or “Soft tissue/Wound” events. Information regarding their operative and/or non-operative treatment and their outcome is recorded. Further assessments are made regarding their seriousness, their relation to the implant used. Final classification of complication events is better determined after independent review by a panel of experienced clinicians.

Results: Our classification process was applied successfully to a series of clinical studies at our department. In a study of 185 distal radius fractures treated by LCP, at least one complication occurred in 21 patients, and in seven cases there was a combination of associated events (e.g. one CTS with tendon rupture). Complication risks ranging from 0% to 11.4% were noted depending on which complications and time frames were considered. There was no risk to obtain a LCP implant specific related complication, whereas the risk for a local complication within 6 months after surgery was 6% (95% CI: 3% – 11%).

Conclusions: This management and classification system proved valuable in the documentation and analysis of safety data from clinical studies. It facilitates communication and understanding of definitions between clinicians, as well as allows a prompt, standardised and accurate analysis and reporting of complication events and risks. We encourage other clinical researchers and professionals to participate in the further development and acceptance of a universal classification system for complications in traumatology and orthopaedics.