Aims. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with primary arthrodesis (PA) in the treatment of Lisfranc injuries, regarding patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and risk of secondary surgery. The aim was to conclusively determine the best available treatment based on the most complete and recent evidence available. Methods. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus. Additionally, ongoing trial registers and reference lists of included articles were screened. Risk of bias (RoB) and level of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. The random and fixed-effect models were used for the statistical analysis. Results. A total of 20 studies were selected for this review, of which 12 were comparative studies fit for meta-analysis, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This resulted in a total analyzed population of 392 patients treated with ORIF and 249 patients treated with PA. The mean differences between the two groups in American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS), VAS, and SF-36 scores were -7.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) -13.31 to -1.51), 0.77 (95% CI -0.85 to 2.39), and -1.20 (95% CI -3.86 to 1.46), respectively. Conclusion. This is the first study to find a statistically significant difference in PROMs, as measured by the AOFAS score, in favour of PA for the treatment of Lisfranc injuries. However, this difference may not be clinically relevant, and therefore drawing a definitive conclusion requires confirmation by a large prospective high-quality RCT. Such a study should also assess cost-effectiveness, as cost considerations might be decisive in decision-making. Level of Evidence: I. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):842–849

Aims. To systematically review the efficacy of split tendon transfer surgery on gait-related outcomes for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP) and spastic equinovarus foot deformity. Methods. Five databases (CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science) were systematically screened for studies investigating split tibialis anterior or split tibialis posterior tendon transfer for spastic equinovarus foot deformity, with gait-related outcomes (published pre-September 2022). Study quality and evidence were assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies, the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Results. Overall, 17 studies (566 feet) were included: 13 studies used clinical grading criteria to report a postoperative ‘success’ of 87% (75% to 100%), 14 reported on orthotic use with 88% reduced postoperative use, and one study reported on ankle kinematics improvements. Ten studies reported post-surgical complications at a rate of 11/390 feet (2.8%), but 84 feet (14.8%) had recurrent varus (68 feet, 12%) or occurrence of valgus (16 feet, 2.8%). Only one study included a patient-reported outcome measure (pain). Conclusion. Split tendon transfers are an effective treatment for children and youth with CP and spastic equinovarus foot deformities. Clinical data presented can be used for future study designs; a more standardized functional and patient-focused approach to evaluating outcomes of surgical intervention of gait may be warranted. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(5):283–298

Aims

Machine-learning (ML) prediction models in orthopaedic trauma hold great promise in assisting clinicians in various tasks, such as personalized risk stratification. However, an overview of current applications and critical appraisal to peer-reviewed guidelines is lacking. The objectives of this study are to 1) provide an overview of current ML prediction models in orthopaedic trauma; 2) evaluate the completeness of reporting following the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement; and 3) assess the risk of bias following the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) tool.

Background

Due to the overwhelming demand for trauma services, resulting from increasing emergency department attendances over the past decade, virtual fracture clinics (VFCs) have become the fashion to keep up with the demand and help comply with the BOA Standards for Trauma and Orthopaedics (BOAST) guidelines. In this article, we perform a systematic review asking, “How useful are VFCs?”, and what injuries and conditions can be treated safely and effectively, to help decrease patient face to face consultations. Our primary outcomes were patient satisfaction, clinical efficiency and cost analysis, and clinical outcomes.