Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To (1) determine if any injury characteristics or radiographic parameters of tibial shaft fractures (TSFs) could predict posterior malleolar fracture (PMF) size, and (2) identify characteristics of PMFs that were fixed versus those that were not in a cohort of ipsilateral TSFs that underwent intramedullary nailing. METHODS:A cross-sectional radiographic study was performed at a single academic institution. Demographic and radiographic parameters of TSFs were recorded, including fracture obliquity angle (FOA) and distance from distal extent of fracture to plafond (DFP). Using CT, the PMFs were evaluated for Haraguchi classification, size measurements, and preoperative displacement. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of PMF Harachuchi classification, size parameters, and preoperative displacement. Univariate differences between PMF that were fixed and not fixed were identified. RESULTS:47 (50%) PMF underwent surgical fixation with 47 treated conservatively. There were no demographic differences between groups. Multivariate linear regression demonstrated increasing DFP and high energy injury mechanism as independent variables correlated with plafond surface area involvement, PMF height and width on sagittal CT cuts. Increasing DFP alone was correlated with PMF width on axial CT cuts and extent > 50% into incisura. Haraguchi type II fractures were associated with high energy injury mechanism (OR = 4.2 [95% CI = 1.3-14.5]; p = 0.02). Odds of Haraguchi type 3 fractures increased 9% per increased year of age (OR = 1.09 [95% CI = 1.04-1.16]; p = 0.006) and decreased 13% per 1% increase in relative DFP (OR = 0.87 [95% CI = 0.75-0.98]; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS:An increasing DFP of TSFs and high energy injury mechanism were independent predictors of PMF size, and high energy injury mechanism was also correlated with Haraguchi type II fracture patterns. Increasing age and decreasing DFP of TSFs predict Haraguchi type III PMF patterns. These radiographic parameters should prompt surgeons to plan for fixation in scenarios in which CT scan is not available. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Diagnostic Level III.

BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to (1) assess the effect of preoperative echocardiogram on time to surgery and (2) assess the outcomes of patients with a previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS:Demographic, clinical, quality and cost data were obtained and a validated risk predictive tool (STTGMA) was calculated for each of a consecutive series of hip fracture patients. Comparative analyses of patients who had an echocardiogram prior to surgery or a PCI prior to hospitalization were performed. RESULTS:Between 2014 and 2020, 2625 patients presented to our institution with a hip fracture. From this cohort 471 patients underwent a preoperative transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE), 30 who had a history of a PCI, and an additional 26 who had a history of PCI but did not undergo a preoperative TTE. Those undergoing a preoperative TTE had similar time (days) to surgery (1.73 vs 1.77, p = 0.86) and 30-day mortality (4% vs 7%, p = 0.545) regardless of PCI history. PCI patients who underwent a preoperative TTE experienced increased rates of 1-year mortality (27% vs 10%, p = 0.007) and major complications (23% vs 12%, p = 0.08) compared to those without a PCI history. PCI patients undergoing a preoperative TTE had a similar time (days) to surgery (1.77 vs 1.48, .p = 0.397) compared to PCI patients without a preoperative TTE. Patients who underwent a preoperative TTE had higher rates of 90-day readmission (31.0% vs 8.0%, p = 0.047) and 1-year mortality (26.7% vs 3.8%, p = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS:Having a preoperative TTE does not affect surgical wait times in hip fracture patients regardless of PCI history, but it may not improve mortality outcomes or reduce postoperative complications in patients with a history of a PCI.

BACKGROUND:Many initiatives by medical and public health communities at the national, state, and institutional level have been centered around understanding and analyzing critical determinants of population health with the goal of equitable and nondisparate care. In orthopaedic traumatology, several studies have demonstrated that race and socioeconomic status are associated with differences in care delivery and outcomes of patients with hip fractures. However, studies assessing the effectiveness of methods to address disparities in care delivery, quality metrics, and complications after hip fracture surgery are lacking. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES/OBJECTIVE:(1) Are hospital quality measures (such as delay to surgery, major inpatient complications, intensive care unit admission, and discharge disposition) and outcomes (such as mortality during inpatient stay, within 30 days or within 1 year) similar between White and non-White patients at a single institution in the setting of a standardized hip fracture pathway? (2) What factors correlate with aforementioned hospital quality measures and outcomes under the standardized care pathway? METHODS:In this retrospective, comparative study, we evaluated the records of 1824 patients 55 years of age or older with hip fractures from a low-energy mechanism who were treated at one of four hospitals in our urban academic healthcare system, which includes an orthopaedic tertiary care hospital, from the initiation of a standardized care pathway in October 2014 to March 2020. The standardized 4-day hip fracture pathway is comprised of medicine comanagement of all patients and delineated tasks for doctors, nursing, social work, care managers, and physical and occupational therapy from admission to expected discharge on postoperative day 4. Of the 1824 patients, 98% (1787 of 1824) of patients who had their race recorded in the electronic medical record chart (either by communicating it to a medical provider or by selecting their race from options including White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian in a patient portal of the electronic medical record) were potentially eligible. A total of 14% (249 of 1787) of patients were excluded because they did not have an in-state address. Of the included patients, 5% (70 of 1538) were lost to follow-up at 30 days and 22% (336 of 1538) were lost to follow-up at 1 year. Two groups were established by including all patients selecting White as primary race into the White cohort and all other patients in the non-White cohort. There were 1111 White patients who were 72% (801) female with mean age 82 ± 10 years and 427 non-White patients who were 64% (271) female with mean age 80 ± 11 years. Univariate chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests of demographics were used to compare White and non-White patients and find factors to control for potentially relevant confounding variables. Multivariable regression analyses were used to control for important baseline between-group differences to (1) determine the correlation of White and non-White race on mortality, inpatient complications, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and discharge disposition and (2) assess the correlation of gender, socioeconomic status, insurance payor, and the Score for Trauma Triage in the Geriatric and Middle Aged (STTGMA) trauma risk score with these quality measures and outcomes. RESULTS:After controlling for gender, insurer, socioeconomic status and STTGMA trauma risk score, we found that non-White patients had similar or improved care in terms of mortality and rates of delayed surgery, ICU admission, major complications, and discharge location in the setting of the standardized care pathway. Non-White race was not associated with inpatient (odds ratio 1.1 [95% CI 0.40 to 2.73]; p > 0.99), 30-day (OR 1.0 [95% CI 0.48 to 1.83]; p > 0.99) or 1-year mortality (OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.57 to 1.33]; p > 0.99). Non-White race was not associated with delay to surgery beyond 2 days (OR = 1.1 [95% CI 0.79 to 1.38]; p > 0.99). Non-White race was associated with less frequent ICU admissions (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42 to 0.85]; p = 0.03) and fewer major complications (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.35 to 0.83]; p = 0.047). Non-White race was not associated with discharge to skilled nursing facility (OR 1.0 [95% CI 0.78 to 1.30]; p > 0.99), acute rehabilitation facility (OR 1.0 [95% CI 0.66 to 1.41]; p > 0.99), or home (OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.68 to 1.29]; p > 0.99). Controlled factors other than White versus non-White race were associated with mortality, discharge location, ICU admission, and major complication rate. Notably, the STTGMA trauma risk score was correlated with all endpoints. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In the context of a hip fracture care pathway that reduces variability from time of presentation through discharge, no differences in mortality, time to surgery, complications, and discharge disposition rates were observed beween White and non-White patients after controlling for baseline differences including trauma risk score. The pathway detailed in this study is one iteration that the authors encourage surgeons to customize and trial at their institutions, with the goal of providing equitable care to patients with hip fractures and reducing healthcare disparities. Future investigations should aim to elucidate the impact of standardized trauma care pathways through the use of the STTGMA trauma risk score as a controlled confounder or randomized trials in comparing standardized to individualized, surgeon-specific care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, therapeutic study.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Humeral shaft fractures make up 1-3% of all fractures and are most often treated nonoperatively; rates of union have been suggested to be greater than 85%. It has been postulated that proximal third fractures are more susceptible to nonunion development; however, current evidence is conflicting and presented in small cohorts. It is our hypothesis that anatomic site of fracture and fracture pattern are not associated with development of nonunion. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:In a retrospective cohort study, 147 consecutive patients treated nonoperatively for a humeral shaft fracture were assessed for development of nonunion during their treatment course. Their charts were reviewed for demographic and radiographic parameters such as age, sex, current tobacco use, diabetic comorbidity, fracture location, fracture pattern, AO/OTA classification, and need for intervention for nonunion. RESULTS:One hundred and forty-seven patients with 147 nonoperatively treated humeral shaft fractures were eligible for this study and included: 39 distal, 65 middle, and 43 proximal third fractures. One hundred and twenty-six patients healed their fractures by a mean 16 ± 6.4 weeks. Of the 21 patients who developed a nonunion, two were of the distal third, 10 of the middle third, and nine were of the proximal third. In a binomial logistic regression analysis, there were no differences in age, sex, tobacco use, diabetic comorbidity, fracture pattern, anatomic location, and OTA fracture classification between patients in the union and nonunion cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:Fracture pattern and anatomic location of nonoperatively treated humeral shaft fractures were not related to development of fracture nonunion.

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of tibial plateau fracture dislocations (FD) with tibial plateau fractures alone. This study was an analysis of a series of tibial plateau fractures, in which FD was defined as a fracture of the tibial plateau with an associated loss of congruent joint reduction and stability of the knee, and classified by the Moore system. Patient data collected included demographics, injury information, and functional outcomes (short musculoskeletal function assessment [SMFA] score and Pain by the visual analog scale). Clinical outcomes at follow-up were recorded including knee range of motion, knee stability and development of complications. There were a total of 325 tibial plateau fracture patients treated operatively, of which 22.2% were identified as FD (n = 72). At injury presentation there was no difference with regard to nerve injury or compartment syndrome (both p > 0.05). FD patients had a higher incidence of arterial injury and acute ligament repair (both p < 0.005). At a mean follow-up of 17.5 months, FD patients were similar with regard to pain, total SMFA scores, and return to sports than their non-FD counterparts (p = 0.884, p = 0.531, p = 0.802). FD patients were found to have decreased knee flexion compared with non-FD patients by 5 degrees (mean: 120 and 125 degrees) (p < 0.05). FD patients also had a higher incidence of late knee instability and subsequent surgery for ligament reconstruction (p < 0.005 & p < 0.05). However, there was no difference in neurological function between groups at follow-up (p = 0.102). Despite the higher incidence of ligamentous instability and decreased range of motion, FD patients appear to have similar long-term functional outcomes compared with non-FD of the tibial plateau. While FD patients initially presented with a higher incidence of arterial injury, neurovascular outcomes at final follow-up were similar to those without a dislocation.

BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study is to determine if a standardized protocol for radial nerve handling during humeral shaft repair reduces the incidence of iatrogenic nerve palsy post operatively. METHODS:Seventy-three patients were identified who underwent acute or reconstructive humeral shaft repair with radial nerve exploration as part of the primary procedure for either humeral shaft fracture or nonunion. All patients exhibited intact radial nerve function pre-operatively. A retrospective chart review and analysis identified patients who developed a secondary radial nerve palsy post-operatively. In each case, the radial nerve was identified and mobilized for protection, regardless of whether the implant necessitated the extensile exposure. RESULTS:Fractures were classified according to AO/OTA guidelines and included 23 Type 12A, 11 Type 12B, and 3 Type 12C. Eight patients had periprosthetic fractures and 28 fractures could not be classified. All patients in the cohort were fixed with locking plates. Surgery was indicated for 36 patients with humeral nonunions and 37 patients with acute humeral shaft fractures. Of the 73 patients, 2 (2.7%) developed radial nerve palsy following surgery, one from the posterior approach and one from the anterolateral approach. Both patients exhibited complete recovery of radial nerve function by 6-month follow-up. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were found in any demographic or surgical details between those with and without radial nerve injury. CONCLUSIONS:Nerve exploration identification and protection leads to a low incidence of transient radial nerve palsy compared to the rate reported in the current literature (2.7% compared to 6-24%). Thus, radial nerve exploration and mobilization should be considered when approaching the humeral shaft for acute fracture and nonunion repairs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to demonstrate a novel technology used to measure improvements in quality and value of care for treatment of hip fracture patients. METHODS:A novel value-based triaging methodology uses a risk prediction (risk M) and inpatient cost prediction (risk C) algorithm and has been demonstrated to accurately predict high-risk:high-cost episodes of care. Two hundred twenty-nine hip fracture patients from 2014 to 2016 were used to establish baseline length of stay (LOS) and total inpatient cost for each (16) risk:cost quadrants. Two hundred sixty-five patients between 2017 and 2019 with hip fractures were input into the algorithm, and historical LOS and cost for each patient were calculated. Historical values were compared with actual values to determine whether the value of the inpatient episode of care differed from the 2014 to 16 cohort. RESULTS:When evaluated without risk or cost stratification, the mean actual LOS and cost of the baseline cohort compared with the 2017 to 2019 cohort were 8.0 vs 7.5 days (P = 0.43) and $25,446 vs $29,849 (P = 0.15), respectively. This analysis demonstrates that there was only a small change in value of care provided to patients based on LOS/cost over the studied period; however, risk:cost analysis using the novel methodology demonstrated that for select risk:cost quadrants, value of care measured by LOS/cost improved, whereas for others it decreased and for others there was no change. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Risk-cost-adjusted analysis of inpatient episodes of care rendered by a value-based triaging methodology provides a robust method of assessing improvements and/or decreases in value-based care when compared with a historical cohort. This methodology provides the tools to both track hospital interventions designed to improve quality and decrease cost as well as determine whether these interventions are effective in improving value.

Introduction: The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of radial head/ neck injury in association with proximal ulna fractures. Methods: Between 2006 and 2020, 107 patients presented to our academic medical center for treatment of a proximal ulna fracture and were enrolled into an IRB-approved database. Radiographs, injury details, and surgical interventions were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified as having an isolated proximal ulna fracture (PU), a PU fracture with an associated radial head dislocation (M"“D), or a Monteggia fracture with an associated radial head fracture (M"“V). Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed at follow-up to determine what differences exist between fracture patterns. Statistics were generated using Chi-squared tests for categorical variables and one-way ANOVA tests for numerical variables. Results: While all patients ultimately healed, time to radiographic healing in the PU cohort was shorter at 3.57 ± 1.7 months when compared to the M"“V cohort (5.67 ± 3.8 months) (p < 0.05). At follow-up, patients in the M"“V cohort had poorer elbow pronation and supination when compared to the PU and M"“D cohorts (p < 0.05). Patients within the PU cohort had fewer complications than those in the M"“D and M"“V cohorts (p < 0.05). No differences were found between the three cohorts in regard to rates of reoperation, non-union, wound infection, and nerve compression (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The Monteggia fracture with a concomitant radial head/neck fracture is a more disabling injury pattern when compared to an isolated proximal ulna fracture and Monteggia fracture without an associated radial head/neck fracture.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To (1) determine the ability of the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) to identify the probability of contralateral hip fractures within 2 years of index fracture and (2) identify independent risk factors for a subsequent hip fracture. DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective. SETTING/METHODS:Urban, academic medical center. PATIENTS/METHODS:This study included a consecutive series of patients treated for unilateral hip fractures between September 2015 and July 2019. RESULTS:Eight hundred thirty-two consecutive patients were included in the analysis with a mean age of 81.2 ± 9.9 years. Thirty-one (3.7%) patients sustained a contralateral hip fracture within 2 years with these patients sustaining the second fracture at a mean 294.1 days ± 197.7 days. The average FRAX score for the entire cohort was 11.9 ± 7.4, and the area under receiving operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for FRAX score was 0.682 (95% CI, 0.596-0.767). Patients in the high-risk FRAX group had a >7% risk of contralateral hip fracture within 2 years. Independent risk factors for contralateral hip fracture risk included patient age 80 years or older and decreasing BMI. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates the strong ability of the FRAX score to triage patients at risk of subsequent contralateral hip fracture within 2 years. In this high-risk FRAX group, patients age older than 80 years and who have decreasing BMI after their index fracture have a 12.5% increased risk of fracture within 2 years which is 4× higher than the current World Health Organization 10-year 3% hip fracture risk standard used to initiate pharmacologic treatment. Therefore, high-risk patients identified using this methodology should be targeted more aggressively with preventative measures including social, medical, and potentially surgical interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.