Aims. Treatment guidelines for atypical femoral fractures associated with bisphosphonates have not been established. We conducted a systematic review of the treatment of atypical femoral fractures first, to evaluate the outcomes of surgical fixation of complete atypical fractures and secondly, to assess whether prophylactic surgery is necessary for incomplete atypical fractures. Materials and Methods. Case reports and series were identified from the PubMed database and were included if they described the treatment of atypical femoral fractures. In total, 77 publications met our inclusion criteria and 733 patients with 834 atypical complete or incomplete femoral fractures were identified. Results. For complete fractures, internal fixation was predominantly achieved by intramedullary nailing. The mean time to healing post-operatively was 7.3 months (2 to 31). Revision surgery for nonunion or implant failure was needed in 77 fractures (12.6%). A greater percentage of fractures treated with plate fixation (31.3%) required revision surgery than those treated with intramedullary nailing (12.9%) (p < 0.01). Non-operative treatment of incomplete fractures failed and surgery was eventually needed in nearly half of the patients (47%), whereas prophylactic surgery was successful and achieved a 97% rate of healing. Conclusion. Intramedullary nailing is the first-line treatment for a complete fracture, although the risk of delayed healing and revision surgery seems to be higher than with a typical femoral fracture. Non-operative treatment does not appear to be a reliable way of treating an incomplete fracture: prophylactic intramedullary nailing should be considered if the patient is in intractable pain. Radiographs of the opposite side should be obtained routinely looking for an asymptomatic fracture. Bisphosphonates must be discontinued but ongoing metabolic management in the form of calcium and/or vitamin D supplements is advisable. Teriparatide therapy can be considered as an alternative treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:295–302

Rupture of the tendo Achillis is a common injury with a rising incidence. Traditionally the key question following this injury has been whether or not to operate. However a contemporary Cochrane review highlighted that the method of rehabilitation may also have an important contribution to the outcome. Since this review, various early weight-bearing rehabilitation protocols have been described. Currently evidence points to the use of early functional rehabilitation, regardless of operative or non-operative management. However, there is no consensus on which exact functional rehabilitation protocol should be used. Future research should be directed towards improving our understanding of how the different rehabilitative components interact in the tendo Achillis as it heals

The posterior malleolus component of a fracture of the ankle is important, yet often overlooked. Pre-operative CT scans to identify and classify the pattern of the fracture are not used enough. Posterior malleolus fractures are not difficult to fix. After reduction and fixation of the posterior malleolus, the articular surface of the tibia is restored; the fibula is out to length; the syndesmosis is more stable and the patient can rehabilitate faster. There is therefore considerable merit in fixing most posterior malleolus fractures. An early post-operative CT scan to ensure that accurate reduction has been achieved should also be considered.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1413–19.

In this paper, we critically appraise the recent publication of the United Kingdom Heel Fracture Trial, which concluded that when patients with an absolute indication for surgery were excluded, there was no advantage of surgical over non-surgical treatment in the management of calcaneal fractures.

We believe that selection bias in that study did not permit the authors to reach a firm conclusion that surgery was not justified for most intra-articular calcaneal fractures.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:880–2.

The Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society was started in an endeavour to answer the difficult problem of obtaining enough patients to perform top-quality research into fractures. By maintaining a high standard, including randomised study design, inclusivity, open discussion among surgeons and excellent long-term follow-up, this group has become a leader in the orthopaedic research community. This annotation describes the short history, important components and spirit necessary to build a research community or team which will function well despite the difficult research environment facing individual surgeons.

This brief annotation summarises the particular contributions made by the annual Edinburgh International Trauma Symposium in various areas of research into aspects of orthopaedic trauma and the management of acutely injured patients, during the 25 years since its establishment.

Procedures performed at the incorrect anatomical site are commonly perceived as being relatively rare. However, they can be a devastating event for patients and doctors. Evidence from the United Kingdom and North America suggests that wrong-site, wrong-procedure and wrong-patient events occur more commonly than we think. Furthermore, their incidence may be increasing as NHS Trusts increase the volume and complexity of procedures undertaken in order to cope with increasing demands on the system. In previous studies from North America orthopaedic surgery has been found to be the worst-offending specialty.

In this paper we review the existing literature on wrong-site surgery and analyse data from the National Patient Safety Agency and NHS Litigation Authority on 292 cases of wrong-site surgery in England and Wales. Orthopaedic surgery accounted for 87 (29.8%) of these cases. In the year 2006 to 2007, the rate of wrong-site surgery in England and Wales was highest in orthopaedic surgery, in which the estimated rate was 1:105 712 cases.