Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes following reverse obliquity (RO) intertrochanteric hip fractures based on the use of short cephalomedullary nails (CMNs) compared to long CMNs for fixation. METHODS:An IRB-approved prospectively collected hip fracture registry at an urban academic medical center was queried for all AO/OTA 31A3.1-3 reverse obliquity intertrochanteric (RO) fractures. One hundred and seventy patients with age > 55 years old and minimum 6-month follow-up were identified for analysis. Data was collected for patient demographics, injury details, intraoperative radiographic parameters, perioperative physiologic parameters, hospital quality measures, and outcomes including radiographic time to healing, need for reoperation, nonunion, and mortality. Comparative analyses were conducted between cohorts. Additional multivariable binary logistic and linear regression analyses were performed to evaluate for factors independently associated with short and long nail usage. RESULTS:The mean age of the entire cohort was 80.91±10.09 years: 103 patients had a long CMN implanted, and 67 patients had a short CMN implanted. There were no demographic differences or differences in radiographic time to healing, rates of mortality, readmission, nonunion, and need for reoperation. Univariable analysis revealed that short CMN had lower intraoperative blood loss (111.19±83.97 mL vs 176.72±161.45 mL, p = 0.002), decreased need for transfusion (37% vs. 55 %, p = 0.022), and shorter procedures (118.67±57.87 min vs. 148.95±77.83 min, p = 0.002. Multivariable analysis revealed that short nail usage was associated with decreased intraoperative blood loss, decreased need for transfusion, and shorter operative times. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Nail length does not affect healing or hospital quality outcomes in the treatment of RO hip fractures. The use of short CMNs for these fractures did correlate with lower intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and need for blood transfusion, with non-inferior outcomes and similar hospital quality measures when compared to long CMNs.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to ascertain outcome differences after fixation of unstable rotational ankle fractures allowed to weight-bear 2 weeks postoperatively compared with 6 weeks. DESIGN/METHODS:Prospective case-control study. SETTING/METHODS:Academic medical center; Level 1 trauma center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA/UNASSIGNED:Patients with unstable ankle fractures (OTA/AO:44A-C) undergoing open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) were enrolled. Patients requiring trans-syndesmotic fixation were excluded. Two surgeons allowed weight-bearing at 2 weeks postoperatively (early weight-bearing [EWB] cohort). Two other surgeons instructed standard non-weight-bearing until 6 weeks postoperatively (non-weight-bearing cohort). OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS/UNASSIGNED:The main outcome measures included the Olerud-Molander questionnaire, the SF-36 questionnaire, and visual analog scale at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively and complications, return to work, range of ankle motion, and reoperations at 12 months were compared between the 2 cohorts. RESULTS:One hundred seven patients were included. The 2 cohorts did not differ in demographics or preinjury scores ( P > 0.05). Six weeks postoperatively, EWB patients had improved functional outcomes as measured by the Olerud-Molander and SF-36 questionnaires. Early weight-bearing patients also had better visual analog scale scores (standardized mean difference -0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.27 to -0.70, P < 0.05) and a greater proportion returning to full capacity work at 6 weeks (odds ratio = 3.42, 95% CI, 1.08-13.07, P < 0.05). One year postoperatively, EWB patients had improved pain measured by SF-36 (standardized mean difference 6.25, 95% CI, 5.59-6.92, P < 0.01) and visual analog scale scores (standardized mean difference -0.05, 95% CI, -0.32 to 0.23, P < 0.01). There were no differences in complications or reoperation at 12 months ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:EWB patients had improved early function, final pain scores, and earlier return to work, without an increased complication rate compared with those kept non-weight-bearing for 6 weeks. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

This study's purpose is to determine if patients treated for hip fracture at highest risk for poor functional outcomes, shorter time to death, and death within 1-year can be predicted at the time of admission. We hypothesized that the Score for Trauma Triage in the Geriatric and Middle-Aged (STTGMA) tool can be used to predict risk of these variables. Between February 2019-July 2020, 544 patients ≥ 55-years-old were treated for hip fracture [AO/OTA 31A/B, 32A/C]. Each patient's demographics, functional status, and injury details were used to calculate their respective risk (STTGMA) score at time of admission. Patients were divided into risk quartiles by STTGMA score. Patients were contacted by phone to complete EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ5D-3L) questionnaires on functional status. Comparative analyses were conducted on outcomes and EQ5D-3L questionnaire results. 439 patients (80.7%) had at least 1-year follow-up. 82 patients (18.7%) died within 1-year after hospitalization. Mean STTGMA score was 1.67% ± 4.49%. The highest-risk cohort experienced a 42x (p < 0.01) and 2.5x (p = 0.01) increased rate of 1-year mortality compared to the minimal- and low-risk groups respectively. The highest-risk cohort had the shortest time to death (p = 0.015). The highest-risk cohort had the lowest EQ5D index (p < 0.01) and VAS scores (p < 0.01) along with the highest rate of 30 day readmission (p < 0.01) and the longest length of stay (p < 0.01). The STTGMA tool provides important prognostic information for middle-aged and geriatric hip fracture patients that can help modulate care levels. This information is useful when counseling patients, their families, and caregivers on expected outcomes.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The authors report no conflict of interest.To determine if short-term immobilization with a rigid long arm plaster elbow splint after surgery of the arm, elbow, or forearm results in superior outcomes compared with a soft dressing with early motion. DESIGN/METHODS:Prospective Randomized Control Trial. SETTING/METHODS:Academic Medical Center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA/UNASSIGNED:Patients undergoing operative treatment for a mid-diaphysis or distal humerus, elbow, or forearm fracture were consented and randomized according to the study protocol for postoperative application of a rigid elbow splint (10-14 days in a plaster Sugar Tong Splint for forearm fracture or a Long Arm plaster Splint for 10-14 for all others) or soft dressing and allowing immediate free range of elbow and wrist motion (range of motion [ROM]). OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS/UNASSIGNED:Self-reported pain (visual analog score or VAS), Healthscale (0-100, 100 denoting excellent health), and physical function (EuroQol 5 Dimension or EQ-5D) surveyed on postoperative days 1-5 and 14 were compared between groups. Patient-reported pain score (0-10, 10 denoting highest satisfaction) at week 6, time to fracture union, ultimate disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand score, and elbow ROM were also collected for analysis. Incidence of complications were assessed. RESULTS:Hundred patients (38 men to 62 women with a mean age of 55.7 years) were included. Over the first 5 days and again at postop day 14, the splint cohort reported a higher "Healthscale" from 0 to 100 than the nonsplint group on all study days ( P = 0.041). There was no difference in reported pain between the 2 study groups over the same interval ( P = 0.161 and 0.338 for least and worst pain, respectively), and both groups reported similar rates of treatment satisfaction ( P = 0.30). Physical function ( P = 0.67) and rates of wound problems ( P = 0.27) were similar. Additionally, the mean time to fracture healing was similar for the splint and control groups (4.6 ± 2.8 vs. 4.0 ± 2.2 months, P = 0.34). Ultimate elbow ROM was similar between the study groups ( P = 0.48, P = 0.49, P = 0.61, and P = 0.51 for elbow extension, flexion, pronation, and supination, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Free range of elbow motion without splinting produced similar results compared with elbow immobilization after surgical intervention for a fracture to the humerus, elbow, and forearm. There was no difference in patient-reported pain outcomes, wound problems, or elbow ROM. Immobilized patients reported slightly higher "healthscale" ratings than nonsplinted patients and, however, reported similar rates of satisfaction. Both treatment strategies are acceptable after upper extremity fracture surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Thigh compartment syndrome (TCS) is a rare surgical emergency associated with a high risk of morbidity with mortality rates as high as 47 %. There is sparse literature discussing the management as well as outcomes of these injuries. The purpose of this study is to review a consecutive series of patients presenting to a single urban Level 1 trauma center with TCS to identify injury characteristics, clinical presentation, and outcomes associated with this injury. METHODS:A trauma database was queried for all patients with a diagnosis of TCS at a single level 1 urban trauma center between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2021. Demographic and injury variables collected included age, sex, BMI, mechanism of injury, and creatine phosphokinase levels (CPK). Hospital quality measures including time from admission to surgery, length of both hospital and ICU stay, complications, and cost of care were collected. Descriptive statistics are reported as median [interquartile range] or N (percent). RESULTS:There were 14 patients identified with a diagnosis of TCS. All were men with an average age 33.5 [23.5 - 38] years and an average BMI of 26 [22.9-28.1]. The most common cause of injury was blunt trauma (71.4 %), and the remaining 28.6 % were gunshot wound injuries. Within the cohort, 6 (42.9 %) patients sustained a femoral shaft fracture, and 4 (28.6 %) patients sustained a vascular injury. The median initial CPK of patients within this cohort was 3405 [1232-5339] and reached a peak of 5271 [3013-13,266]. The median time from admission to diagnosis was 6.8 [0-236.9] hours. The median time from admission to the operating room was 8.2 [0.6-236.9] hours, and the median number of operating room visits was 3 [2 - 6]. Five patients (35.7 %) wounds were closed with split thickness skin grafting. There were 12 (85.7 %) patients who required ICU care. The median ICU length of stay was 7.5 days [4-15]. The median hospital length of stay was 16.5 days [13.25-38.0]. The median total charges for a patient with thigh compartment syndrome was $129,159.00 [$24,768.00 - $587,152.00]. The median direct variable cost for these patients was $86,106.00 For comparison, the median direct variable cost for patients with femur fractures without TCS at this institution was $8,497.28 [$1,903.52-$21,893.13]. No patients required readmission within 60 days. There were no mortalities. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:TCS is a rare and life-threatening injury associated with significant morbidity. Despite rapid diagnosis and fasciotomy, the majority of the patients have prolonged hospital courses, ICU lengths of stay, and significant costs of treatment. Providers can reference the outcomes reported in this study when caring for TCS patients.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Operative management is often required for fractures of the elbow, with treatment goals aiming to restore stability, reduction, and early range of motion. The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors for necessitating the application of an external fixator, and to compare range of motion and functional outcomes between patients who required an elbow external fixator to those who did not. HYPOTHESIS/UNASSIGNED:We hypothesize that patients who require an external fixator will have worse elbow range of motion and functional outcomes when compared to those who did not. PATIENTS AND METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This is a retrospective study of 391 patients who presented at a Level-I trauma center between March 2011 and January 2021 for operative management of a fracture/fracture-dislocation of the distal humerus (AO/OTA 13A-C) and/or proximal ulna and/or radius (AO/OTA 21A-C). A primary analysis was performed to determine risk factors for necessitating the application of an external fixator. A secondary analysis was performed comparing elbow range-of-motion and functional outcomes between cases and controls. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:391 patients were identified; 26 required external fixation (cases) and 365 did not (controls). Significant risk factors for necessitating placement of an external fixator included large BMI (OR = 1.087, 95 % CI = 1.007-1.173, p = 0.033), elbow dislocation (OR = 7.549, 95 % CI = 2.387-23.870, p = 0.001), open wound status (OR = 9.584, 95 % CI = 2.794-32.878, p < 0.001), and additional non-contiguous orthopaedic injury (OR = 9.225, 95 % CI = 2.219-38.360, p = 0.002). Elbow ROM was poorer in the external fixator group with regards to extension (-15°), flexion (+19.4°), and pronation (+14.3°) (p < 0.05). In addition, those who did not need external fixation had better functional scores (+20.4 points MEPI) (p < 0.05). DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:The use of external fixation about the elbow is associated with significantly worse initial injuries and results in poorer outcomes. These results can be used to inform the surgeon-patient discussion regarding treatment options and expected functional outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/UNASSIGNED:III.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Determine if any fracture characteristics or radiographic parameters were predictive of fixation failure [FF] within 1 year following cephalomedullary nailing for intertrochanteric fractures. METHODS:A consecutive series of intertrochanteric hip fracture patients (AO/OTA 31A) treated with a cephalomedullary nail were reviewed. Pre-fixation (neck-shaft angle [NSA], distance from ischial tuberosities to greater and lesser trochanters, integrity of lesser trochanter, and fracture angulation) and post-fixation (post-fixation NSA, posteromedial cortex continuity, lag screw position, tip to apex distance [TAD], and post-fixation angulation and translation) radiographic parameters were measured by blinded independent reviewers. The FF and non-FF groups were statistically compared. Logistic regression was performed to determine radiographic parameter correlates of FF. RESULTS:Of 1249 patients, 23 (1.8%) developed FF within 1 year. The FF patients were younger than their non-FF counterparts (77.2 years vs 81.0 years, p=0.048), however there were no other demographic differences. The FF cohort did not differ in frequency of TAD over 25 mm (4.3% vs 9.6%, p=0.624) and had decreased mean TAD (13.6mm vs 16.3mm, p=0.021) relative to the non-FF cohort. The FF cohort had a higher rate of a post-fixation coronal plane NSA more than 10° different from the contralateral side (delta NSA>10°, 34.8% vs 13.7%, p=0.011) with the majority fixed in relative varus. For every 1° increase in varus compared to the contralateral side the odds of FF increased 7% (OR=1.065, 95%CI[1.005-1.130], p=0.034) on univariate analysis. On univariate logistic regression, patients with an absolute post-fixation NSA of 10° or more of varus compared to contralateral were significantly more likely to have a FF (OR=3.139, 95%CI[1.067-8.332], p=0.026). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Despite an acceptable TAD, post-fixation NSA in relative varus as compared to the contralateral side was significantly associated with failure in intertrochanteric hip fractures fixed with a cephalomedullary nail. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Prognostic Level III.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the specific course and complication profile following the development of FRI in the upper extremity. METHODS:An IRB-approved retrospective review was conducted on a consecutive series of operatively managed patients within an academic medical center between 1/2010 and 6/2022. Included patients met the following criteria: (1) upper extremity fracture definitively treated with internal fixation (2) development of criteria for suggestive or confirmatory FRI (as per the FRI Consensus Group) and (3) age ≥ 18 years. Baseline demographics, medical history, injury information, infection characteristics, hospital quality measures, and outcomes were recorded. A 3:1 propensity-matched control cohort of patients without FRI was obtained using the same dataset. Univariable analysis was performed to compare the outcomes (rate of nonunion, time to bone healing, need for soft tissue coverage, patient reported joint stiffness at final follow-up) of the FRI vs Non-FRI cohorts. RESULTS:Of 2827 patients treated operatively for an upper extremity fracture, 43 (1.53%) met criteria for suggestive of confirmatory FRI. The successful propensity match (43 FRI, 129 Non-FRI) revealed no differences in demographics, baseline health status, or fracture location. FRI patients underwent more reoperations (p < 0.001), experienced an increased rate of removal of hardware (p < 0.001), and were admitted more frequently following index operation (p < 0.001). The FRI cohort had higher rates of fracture nonunion (p = 0.003), and a prolonged mean time to bone healing in months (8.37 ± 7.29 FRI vs. 4.14 ± 5.75 Non-FRI, p < 0.001). Additionally, the FRI cohort had a greater need for soft tissue coverage throughout their post-operative fracture treatment (p = 0.014). While there was no difference in eventual bone healing (p = 0.250), FRI patients experienced a higher incidence of affected joint stiffness at final follow-up (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients who develop an FRI of the upper extremity undergo more procedures and experience increased complications throughout their treatment, specifically increased joint stiffness. Despite this, ultimate outcome profiles are similar between patients who experience FRI and those who do not following operative repair of an upper extremity fracture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.

There has been a paradigm shift towards fixing the posterior malleolus in trimalleolar ankle fractures. This study evaluated whether a surgeon's preference to intraoperatively flip or not flip patients from prone to supine for medial malleolar fixation following repair of fibular and posterior malleoli impacted surgical outcomes. A retrospective patient cohort treated at a large urban academic center and level 1 trauma center was reviewed to identify all operative trimalleolar ankle fractures initially positioned prone. One hundred and forty-seven patients with mean 12-month follow up were included and divided based on positioning for medial malleolar fixation, prone or supine (following closure, flip and re-prep and drape). Data was collected on patient demographics, injury mechanism, perioperative variables, and complication rates. Postoperative reduction films were reviewed by orthopedic traumatologists to grade the accuracy of anatomic fracture reduction. Overall, 74 (50.3%) had the medial malleolus fixed prone, while 73 (49.7%) were flipped and fixed supine. No differences in demographics, injury details, and fracture type existed between the groups. The supine group had a higher rate of initial external fixation (p=0.047), longer operative time in minutes (p<0.001), and a higher use of plate and screw constructs for medial malleolar fixation (p=0.019). There were no differences in clinical and radiographic outcomes and complication rates. This study demonstrated that intraoperative change in positioning for improved medial malleolar visualization in trimalleolar ankle fractures results in longer operative times but similar radiographic and clinical results. The decision of operative position should be based on surgeon comfort.

BACKGROUND:The purpose of the present study was to evaluate differences in demographic features and clinical outcomes between patients who sustained a typical versus atypical subtrochanteric femoral fracture. METHODS:We reviewed the records for a cohort of consecutive patients who had undergone operative treatment of a subtrochanteric femoral fracture. Fractures were classified as either "typical" or "atypical" on the basis of the criteria of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR). All patients were treated with a similar surgical algorithm and postoperative protocol. Groups were compared on the basis of demographic features, injury characteristics, operative quality measures, postoperative complications and outcomes, and radiographic time to healing. Comparative analyses were performed to compare the typical and atypical cohorts. RESULTS:Of 220 subtrochanteric fractures, 165 (75.0%) were classified as typical and 55 (25.0%) were classified as atypical. The atypical cohort was predominately female and more likely to have bisphosphonate usage (odds ratio [OR], 7.975; [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.994-15.922]; p < 0.001) and fractures with lower-energy mechanisms (p < 0.001). Patients in the atypical cohort were more likely to be treated with a 10-mm cephalomedullary nail (CMN) (OR, 2.100 [95% CI, 1.119-3.939]; p = 0.020), whereas patients in the typical cohort were treated more frequently with an 11-mm CMN (OR, 0.337 [95% CI, 0.168-0.674]; p = 0.002). There were no differences between the groups in terms of other operative parameters; however, anatomic fracture reduction in neutral lateral alignment was achieved more frequently in the typical cohort (OR, 0.438 [95% CI, 0.220-0.875]; p = 0.018). There were no differences between the groups in terms of hospital quality measures, mortality rates, readmission rates, or complication rates (including implant failure [broken screw or nail] and fracture nonunion) (p = 1.00). Interestingly, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of time to radiographic healing (260.30 ± 187.97 days in the typical group, compared with 246.40 ± 116.33 days in the atypical group) (OR, 0.999 [95% CI, 0.997-1.002]; p = 0.606). CONCLUSIONS:Despite differences in terms of demographic and injury characteristics, patients who sustain a subtrochanteric femur fracture can expect similar outcome profiles regardless of fracture type. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.