Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To describe one center's experience with nonunion of one or both bones of the forearm and report on the functional recovery of patients treated for a single- or 2-bone forearm nonunion. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of 23 patients who presented to our institution over an 11-year period and underwent surgical repair of a forearm nonunion (radius, ulna, or both bones). The main outcome measurements included time to union, visual analog scale pain scores, range of motion, Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment scores, and postoperative complications. RESULTS:Of the 23 patients, 21 (91.3%) healed their nonunion after a single surgical procedure. All patients ultimately healed their nonunion; 7 patients were healed at 3-month follow-up, 11 healed at 6-month follow-up, and 5 healed at 12-month follow-up. Mean visual analog scale pain scores improved considerably from presentation to latest follow-up. The mean range of motion at the latest follow-up was as follows: elbow 130.9° flexion-extension arc, forearm 78.5° pronation/77.8° supination, and wrist 76.1° palmar flexion/74.3° dorsiflexion. Mean Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment arm and hand index scores improved significantly from baseline to the latest follow-up. Mean Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment function, activity, and bothersome indices demonstrated improvement, though this was not statistically significant. Two patients required further surgery to achieve osseous union. One patient sustained an iatrogenic posterior interosseous nerve palsy, which resolved spontaneously. CONCLUSIONS:Repair of forearm nonunion with compression plating and bone grafting provides reliable clinical and functional outcomes. Patients treated surgically for nonunion of one or both of the forearm bones can expect to heal with the potential for considerable improvements in pain and function postoperatively. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic IV.

Purpose/UNASSIGNED:To identify patient characteristics associated with adverse events in Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) surgical repair cases. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A high risk (HR) cohort group of ATR patients were compared to healthy controls in the ACSNSQIP database with multivariate regression analysis. Results/UNASSIGNED:Overall, 2% (n = 23) of the group sustained an AE postoperatively, most commonly superficial SSI (0.9%, n = 10). Multivariate analysis did not reveal any patient characteristics to be significantly associated with the occurrence of an AE or superficial SSI. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Obesity, diabetes and a history of smoking did not predispose patients to significantly more AEs in the 30 day postoperative period following ATR repair in this study.

BACKGROUND:The number of periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures is expected to increase with the increasing prevalence of hip arthroplasties. While native hip fractures have a well-known association with mortality, there are currently limited data on this outcome among the subset of patients with periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures. METHODS:Using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System, we identified patients from 60 to 99 years old who were admitted to a hospital in the state with a periprosthetic proximal femoral fracture (n = 1,655) or a native hip (femoral neck or intertrochanteric) fracture (n = 97,231) between 2006 and 2014. Within the periprosthetic fracture cohort, the indication for the existing implant was not available in the data set. We used mixed-effects regression models to compare mortality at 1 and 6 months and 1 year for periprosthetic compared with native hip fractures. RESULTS:The risk of mortality for patients who sustained a periprosthetic proximal femoral fracture was no different from that for patients who sustained a native hip fracture at 1 month after injury (3.2% versus 4.6%; odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.19; p = 0.446), but was lower at 6 months (3.8% versus 6.5%; OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.95; p = 0.020) and 1 year (9.7% versus 15.9%; OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.85; p < 0.001). Among periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures, factors associated with a significantly increased risk of mortality at 1 year included advanced age, male sex, and higher Deyo comorbidity scores. CONCLUSIONS:In the acute phase, any type of hip fracture appears to confer a similar risk of death. Over the long term, however, periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures are associated with lower mortality rates than native hip fractures, even after accounting for age and comorbidities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Purpose/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study was to compare hospital quality outcomes in patients over the age of 60 undergoing fixation of hip fracture based on their anticoagulation status. Materials and Methods/UNASSIGNED:Patients aged 60 and older with isolated hip fracture injuries treated operatively at 1 academic medical center between October 2014 and September 2016 were analyzed. Patients on the following medications were included in the anticoagulation cohort: warfarin, clopidogrel, aspirin 325 mg, rivaroxaban, apixaban, dabigatran, and dipyridamole/aspirin. We compared outcome measures including time to surgery, length of stay (LOS), transfusion rate, blood loss, procedure time, complication rate, need for intensive care unit (ICU)/step-down unit (SDU) care, discharge disposition, and cost of admission. Outcomes were controlled for age, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and anesthesia type. Results/UNASSIGNED:= .026). Lastly, there was no difference in cost of care. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:This study highlights that anticoagulation status alone does not independently put patients at increased risk with respect to LOS, surgical outcomes, and cost of hospitalization.

Treatment of traumatic bone defects is dictated by a multitude of clinical factors including the defect size, patient comorbidities, soft tissue condition, and the possibility of infection present in the defect. With a variety of treatment strategies described, it is critical to choose the approach that will maximize outcomes in addressing this difficult problem. When addressing small-scale defects, bone grafting is the primary treatment. For large-scale defects, there are two major options to consider: induced membrane technique and distraction osteogenesis. Choosing between these two techniques should be based on the associated soft tissue injury, the local vascularity, and the possibility of residual infection. This review will focus on the current management principles and strategies in the treatment of bone defects after orthopedic trauma and the existing literature to support each of these treatment options.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To understand the personality factors associated with orthopedic surgery resident performance. DESIGN/METHODS:A prospective, cross-sectional survey of orthopedic surgery faculty that assessed their perceptions of the personality traits most highly associated with resident performance. Residents also completed a survey to determine their specific personality characteristics. A subset of faculty members rated the performance of those residents within their respective program on 5 dimensions. Multiple regression models tested the relationship between the set of resident personality measures and each aspect of performance; relative weights analyses were then performed to quantify the contribution of the individual personality measures to the total variance explained in each performance domain. Independent samples t-tests were conducted to examine differences between the personality characteristics of residents and those faculty identified as relevant to successful resident performance. SETTING/METHODS:throughout the United States. The level of clinical care provided by participating institutions varied. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Data from 175 faculty members and 266 residents across 12 programs were analyzed. RESULTS:The personality features of residents were related to faculty evaluations of resident performance (for all, p < 0.01); the full set of personality measures accounted for 4%-11% of the variance in ratings of resident performance. Particularly, the characteristics of agreeableness, neuroticism, and learning approach were found to be most important for explaining resident performance. Additionally, there were significant differences between the personality features that faculty members identified as important for resident performance and the personality features that residents possessed. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Personality assessments can predict orthopedic surgery resident performance. However, results suggest the traits that faculty members value or reward among residents could be different from the traits associated with improved resident performance.

Arm wrestling places significant torque on the humeral shaft. A spiral distal humeral shaft fracture is an unusual but significant injury that can result. Of 93 patients who presented between 2009 and 2017 with closed humeral shaft fractures that were managed nonoperatively, 9 sustained the fractures while arm wrestling. Outcomes were compared with those of all other patients with nonoperatively managed humeral shaft fractures sustained through other mechanisms. The Student's t test was used to compare cohorts. All patients had spiral fractures that occurred in the distal one-third of the humerus. All patients went on to achieve radiographic union after a mean of 13.6 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.5-15.6). At fracture healing, mean angulation of the humerus seen on the anteroposterior and lateral views was 15.1° (95% CI, 12.0°-18.2°) and 8.9° (95% CI, 3.7°-14.1°), respectively. Mean elbow flexion-extension arc was 141.1° (95% CI, 134.4°-147.8°), with mean forward shoulder elevation of 168.8° (95% CI, 153.3°-184.2°). On comparison of the patients with humeral shaft fractures sustained through arm wrestling with the patients with humeral shaft fractures sustained through other mechanisms, except for earlier time to healing for the former (P=.05), no significant differences were observed. This represents the first analysis of radiographic and clinical outcomes following these types of fractures. Those who sustain these fractures secondary to the high-torque moment of arm wrestling are not different from those who sustain these fractures secondary to other mechanisms, except for an earlier time to union. This study indicates that nonoperative management of all humeral shaft fractures results in radiographic union with favorable clinical outcomes. [Orthopedics. 201x; xx(x):xx-xx.].

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To assess clinical and hospital quality outcomes of patients receiving the previously reported Reduced Effective Dose Using Computed Tomography In Orthopaedic iNjury (REDUCTION) imaging protocol. DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective Chart review SETTING:: Level I Trauma Center and affiliated Tertiary Care Hospital CenterPatients/Participants: fifty patients who received this protocol for acute traumatic fracture evaluation and met inclusion criteria were compared to a cohort of fifty patients matched for age and fracture type who previously received conventional CT scanning for acute traumatic fracture evaluation. INTERVENTION/METHODS:Reduced Effective Dose Using Computed Tomography In Orthopaedic Injury (REDUCTION) protocol for diagnostic fracture evaluation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Estimated effective radiation doses were calculated and compared using Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) information from all included studies. Patient outcomes between groups were compared with time to fracture union as the primary outcome. Secondary outcome measures included: presence of complication defined as infection, malunion, nonunion, failure of non-operative treatment, painful implants, and implant failure. Other secondary quality outcomes that were recorded included readmission within 30 days and hospital length of stay. Functional quality measures included joint range of motion. Statistical analyses were conducted to identify significant differences between cohorts (significance designated as p<0.05). RESULTS:Patient characteristics between cohorts were not significantly different with respect to age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, injury mechanism or injury location. Fractures of the elbow, hip, knee, and foot/ankle were evaluated. Mean clinical follow-up was 9.5 ± 4.9 months for the REDUCTION cohort and 12.4 ± 5.3 months for conventional CT cohort. Mean estimated effective dose for all REDUCTION scans was 0.15 milliSieverts (mSv) as compared to 1.50 mSv for the conventional CT cohort (p=0.037). Pre-operative diagnosis was confirmed intra-operatively in 49/50 cases in the REDUCTION cohort compared to 48/50 cases in the conventional CT cohort (p=0.79). Outcomes including time to union, range of motion, complications, readmission, treatment failure, reoperation, and length of stay were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS:The REDUCTION protocol represents an ultra low dose CT scan developed for minimizing radiation exposure to patients presenting with traumatic fractures. This protocol resulted in a ten-fold reduction in radiation exposure. No difference in clinical or hospital quality outcomes was detected between patients who received this protocol as compared to those receiving automated dose CT scans. The REDUCTION protocol is a safe and effective method of performing CT scans for extremity fractures with significantly reduced radiation risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Retrospective Case-Control Study, Level III Evidence.

Purpose To determine if 3-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of proximal femur microarchitecture can allow discrimination of subjects with and without fragility fracture who do not have osteoporotic proximal femur bone mineral density (BMD). Materials and Methods Sixty postmenopausal women (30 with and 30 without fragility fracture) who had BMD T scores of greater than -2.5 in the hip were recruited. All subjects underwent dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry to assess BMD and 3-T MR imaging of the same hip to assess bone microarchitecture. World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) scores were also computed. We used the Mann-Whitney test, receiver operating characteristics analyses, and Spearman correlation estimates to assess differences between groups, discriminatory ability with parameters, and correlations among BMD, microarchitecture, and FRAX scores. Results Patients with versus without fracture showed a lower trabecular plate-to-rod ratio (median, 2.41 vs 4.53, respectively), lower trabecular plate width (0.556 mm vs 0.630 mm, respectively), and lower trabecular thickness (0.114 mm vs 0.126 mm) within the femoral neck, and higher trabecular rod disruption (43.5 vs 19.0, respectively), higher trabecular separation (0.378 mm vs 0.323 mm, respectively), and lower trabecular number (0.158 vs 0.192, respectively), lower trabecular connectivity (0.015 vs 0.027, respectively) and lower trabecular plate-to-rod ratio (6.38 vs 8.09, respectively) in the greater trochanter (P < .05 for all). Trabecular plate-to-rod ratio, plate width, and thickness within the femoral neck (areas under the curve [AUCs], 0.654-0.683) and trabecular rod disruption, number, connectivity, plate-to-rod ratio, and separation within the greater trochanter (AUCs, 0.662-0.694) allowed discrimination of patients with fracture from control subjects. Femoral neck, total hip, and spine BMD did not differ between and did not allow discrimination between groups. FRAX scores including and not including BMD allowed discrimination between groups (AUCs, 0.681-0.773). Two-factor models (one MR imaging microarchitectural parameter plus a FRAX score without BMD) allowed discrimination between groups (AUCs, 0.702-0.806). There were no linear correlations between BMD and microarchitectural parameters (Spearman ρ, -0.198 to 0.196). Conclusion 3-T MR imaging of proximal femur microarchitecture allows discrimination between subjects with and without fragility fracture who have BMD T scores of greater than -2.5 and may provide different information about bone quality than that provided by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.^©RSNA, 2018.

BACKGROUND:Post-traumatic elbow contracture is a debilitating complication after elbow trauma. The purpose of this study was to characterize the affected patient population, operative management, and outcomes after operative elbow contracture release for treatment of post-traumatic elbow contracture. METHODS:A retrospective record review was conducted to identify all patients who underwent post-traumatic elbow contracture release performed by 1 of 3 surgeons at one academic medical center. Patient demographics, injuries, operative details, outcomes, and complications were recorded. RESULTS:The study included 103 patients who met inclusion criteria. At the time of contracture release, patients were a mean age of 45.2 ± 15.6 years. Contracture release resulted in a significant mean increase to elbow extension/flexion arc of motion of 52° ± 18° (P < .0005). Not including recurrence of contracture, a subsequent complication occurred in 10 patients (10%). Radiographic recurrence of heterotopic ossification (HO) occurred in 14 patients (14%) after release. Ten patients (11%) elected to undergo a secondary operation to gain more motion. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Soft tissue and bony elbow contracture release is effective. Patients with post-traumatic elbow contracture can make significant gains to their arc of motion after contracture release surgery and can expect to recover a functional elbow arc of motion. Patients with severe preoperative contracture may benefit from concomitant ulnar nerve decompression. HO prophylaxis did not affect the rate of HO recurrence or ultimate elbow range of motion. However, patients must be counseled that contracture may reoccur, and some patients may require or elect to have more than one procedure to achieve functional motion.