Aims. 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. Methods. 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. Results. There were 244 frames (230 patients) included in the analyses, of which 90 were Ilizarov type frames and 154 were hexapods. There were 149 frames which underwent single-stage reloading and 95 frames which underwent a two-stage reloading protocol. Mechanical failure occurred after frame removal in 13 frames (5%), which suffered refracture. There were no cases of change in alignment. There was no difference between refracture patients who underwent single-stage or two-stage reloading protocols (p = 0.772). In all, 14 patients had failure prevented through identification with the reloading protocol. Conclusion. Our reloading protocol is a simple and effective way to confirm the timing of frame removal and minimize the rate of mechanical failure. Similar failure rates occurred between patients undergoing single-stage and two-stage reloading protocols. If the surgeon is confident with clinical and radiological assessment, it may be possible to progress directly to stage two and decrease frame time and patient morbidity. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(5):359–366

Aims. Computer hexapod assisted orthopaedic surgery (CHAOS), is a method to achieve the intra-operative correction of long bone deformities using a hexapod external fixator before definitive internal fixation with minimally invasive stabilisation techniques. The aims of this study were to determine the reliability of this method in a consecutive case series of patients undergoing femoral deformity correction, with a minimum six-month follow-up, to assess the complications and to define the ideal group of patients for whom this treatment is appropriate. Patients and Methods. The medical records and radiographs of all patients who underwent CHAOS for femoral deformity at our institution between 2005 and 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. Records were available for all 55 consecutive procedures undertaken in 49 patients with a mean age of 35.6 years (10.9 to 75.3) at the time of surgery. Results. Patients were assessed at a mean interval of 44 months (6 to 90) following surgery. The indications were broad; the most common were vitamin D resistant rickets (n = 10), growth plate arrest (n = 6) and post-traumatic deformity (n = 20). Multi-planar correction was required in 33 cases. A single level osteotomy was performed in 43 cases. Locking plates were used to stabilise the osteotomy in 33 cases and intramedullary nails in the remainder. Complications included two nonunions, one death, one below-knee deep vein thrombosis, one deep infection and one revision procedure due to initial under-correction. There were no neurovascular injuries or incidence of compartment syndrome. Conclusion. This is the largest reported series of femoral deformity corrections using the CHAOS technique. This series demonstrates that precise intra-operative realignment is possible with a hexapod external fixator prior to definitive stabilisation with contemporary internal fixation. This combination allows reproducible correction of complex femoral deformity from a wide variety of diagnoses and age range with a low complication rate. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:283–8