Faculty Bibliography

Olecranon osteotomy allows for improved visualization of the distal humeral articular surface. This study compared the clinical outcomes of 2 methods of olecranon repair following olecranon osteotomy as part of distal humerus fracture repair. This was a retrospective review of distal humerus fractures treated via a transolecranon approach during a 9-year period. In each case, the olecranon osteotomy was fixed with either tension band wiring (TBW) or plate fixation (PF). Patient demographics, injury information, and surgical management were recorded. Measured outcomes included elbow motion, time to osteotomy union, and postoperative complications. Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) scores were obtained for all patients. Forty-eight patients were included. All patients had intra-articular AO type 13-C2 or 13-C3 distal humerus fractures and underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with olecranon osteotomy. Mean documented follow-up was 20.5 months. Twenty-seven patients had fixation of the olecranon osteotomy with TBW, and 21 with PF. Clinically, there were no differences in osteotomy time to union, elbow motion, or MEPI score at final follow-up. However, patients fixed with TBW had greater elbow extension at both 6-month and final follow-up. Complication rates did not differ. Patients undergoing TBW or PF for repair of an olecranon osteotomy following ORIF of intra-articular distal humerus fractures have similar outcomes. Patients undergoing osteotomy PF may experience less terminal elbow extension when compared with those fixed with TBW. Given their similar clinical outcomes, either modality may be considered when selecting a construct for olecranon osteotomy repair as part of comminuted distal humerus fracture repair. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(x):xx-xx.].

OBJECTIVES:(1) To demonstrate how a risk assessment tool modified to account for the COVID-19 virus during the current global pandemic is able to provide risk assessment for low-energy geriatric hip fracture patients. (2) To provide a treatment algorithm for care of COVID-19 positive/suspected hip fractures patients that accounts for their increased risk of morbidity and mortality. SETTING:One academic medical center including 4 Level 1 trauma centers, 1 university-based tertiary care referral hospital, and 1 orthopaedic specialty hospital. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS:One thousand two hundred seventy-eight patients treated for hip fractures between October 2014 and April 2020, including 136 patients treated during the COVID-19 pandemic between February 1, 2020 and April 15, 2020. INTERVENTION:The Score for Trauma Triage in the Geriatric and Middle-Aged ORIGINAL (STTGMAORIGINAL) score was modified by adding COVID-19 virus as a risk factor for mortality to create the STTGMACOVID score. Patients were stratified into quartiles to demonstrate differences in risk distribution between the scores. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:Inpatient and 30-day mortality, major, and minor complications. RESULTS:Both STTGMA score and COVID-19 positive/suspected status are independent predictors of inpatient mortality, confirming their use in risk assessment models for geriatric hip fracture patients. Compared with STTGMAORIGINAL, where COVID-19 patients are haphazardly distributed among the risk groups and COVID-19 inpatient and 30 days mortalities comprise 50% deaths in the minimal-risk and low-risk cohorts, the STTGMACOVID tool is able to triage 100% of COVID-19 patients and 100% of COVID-19 inpatient and 30 days mortalities into the highest risk quartile, where it was demonstrated that these patients have a 55% rate of pneumonia, a 35% rate of acute respiratory distress syndrome, a 22% rate of inpatient mortality, and a 35% rate of 30 days mortality. COVID-19 patients who are symptomatic on presentation to the emergency department and undergo surgical fixation have a 30% inpatient mortality rate compared with 12.5% for patients who are initially asymptomatic but later develop symptoms. CONCLUSION:The STTGMA tool can be modified for specific disease processes, in this case to account for the COVID-19 virus and provide a robust risk stratification tool that accounts for a heretofore unknown risk factor. COVID-19 positive/suspected status portends a poor outcome in this susceptible trauma population and should be included in risk assessment models. These patients should be considered a high risk for perioperative morbidity and mortality. Patients with COVID-19 symptoms on presentation should have surgery deferred until symptoms improve or resolve and should be reassessed for surgical treatment versus definitive nonoperative treatment with palliative care and/or hospice care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of Levels of Evidence.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To examine one health system's response to the essential care of its hip fracture population during the COVID-19 pandemic and report on its effect on patient outcomes. DESIGN/METHODS:Prospective cohort study SETTING:: Seven musculoskeletal care centers with New York City and Long Island. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:138 recent and 115 historical hip fracture patients. INTERVENTION/METHODS:Patients with hip fractures occurring between February 1, 2020 and April 15, 2020 or between February 1, 2019 and April 15, 2019 were prospectively enrolled in an orthopedic trauma registry and chart reviewed for demographic and hospital quality measures. Patients with recent hip fractures were identified as COVID positive (C+), COVID suspected (Cs) or COVID negative (C-). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Hospital quality measures, inpatient complications and mortality rates. RESULTS:Seventeen (12.2%) patients were confirmed C+ by testing and another 14 (10.1%) were suspected (Cs) of having had the virus but were never tested. The C+ cohort, when compared to Cs and C- cohorts, had: an increased mortality rate (35.3% vs 7.1% vs 0.9%), increased length of hospital stay, a greater major complication rate and a greater incidence of ventilator need postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS:COVID-19 had a devastating effect on the care of hip fracture patients during the pandemic. Although practice patterns generally remained unchanged, treating physicians need to understand the increased morbidity and mortality in hip fracture patients complicated by COVID-19. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of Levels of Evidence.

Osteocutaneous reconstruction can be challenging because of concomitant injuries and limited donor sites. There is a paucity of data on limb salvage outcomes following combined soft-tissue reconstruction and bone transport or Masquelet procedures. The authors reviewed a consecutive series of open tibia fracture patients undergoing soft-tissue reconstruction with either distraction osteogenesis or Masquelet technique. Endpoints were perioperative flap complications and bone union. Fourteen patients with Gustilo type IIIB open tibia fractures were included. Half of the group received muscle flaps and the remaining half received fasciocutaneous flaps. Ten patients (71.4 percent) underwent distraction osteogenesis and the remaining patients underwent Masquelet technique. Average bone gap length was 65.7 ± 31.3 mm (range, 20 to 120 mm). In the bone transport group, the average external fixation duration was 245 days (range, 47 to 686 days). In the Masquelet group, the average duration of the first stage of this two-stage procedure (i.e., time from cement spacer placement to bone grafting) was 95 days (range, 42 to 181 days). Bone union rate, as determined by radiographic evidence, was 85.7 percent. There was one complete flap failure (7.1 percent). One patient underwent below-knee amputation after failing bone transport and developing chronic osteomyelitis and subsequent infected nonunion. Our case series demonstrates that nonosteocutaneous flap methods of limb reconstruction are a viable option in patients with segmental long bone defects, with a bone union rate of 85 percent and a limb salvage rate over 90 percent in patients with Gustilo type IIIB fractures. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Therapeutic, IV.

Lateral compression type 1 pelvic fractures comprise a spectrum of injuries of varying stability. The clinician should be cognizant of signs and symptoms of instability including complete sacral fractures, bilateral ramus fractures, displacement greater than 1 cm, high-energy mechanism, and inability to bear weight. Management of these injuries is controversial, but the clinician should consider examination under anesthesia and potentially surgical stabilization.

Proximal tibia fractures including intra-articular plateau fractures are complex injuries that benefit from an algorithmic approach in terms of treatment to optimize outcomes and minimize complications. Certainly, nonsurgical treatment will be an option for some injuries; however, this chapter will focus on those injuries best addressed with surgicalsurgical treatment. Indications for surgical treatment include joint incongruity, joint instability and limb malalignment. In regard to surgical treatment, important considerations include appropriate management of the soft-tissue envelope, staged provisional reduction and stabilization versus immediate definitive fixation, single versus multiple surgical approaches, unilateral versus bicondylar fixation, and treatment of concomitant fracture-dislocation. This chapter describes surgical approaches to the proximal tibia ranging from the standard anterolateral to complex dual approaches or posterior approaches. Soft-tissue management becomes important due to the high-energy nature of these injuries with trauma both at the time of injury and then the surgical insult. Learning to identify and minimize these risks as well as addressing the soft-tissue defects that may require treatment is highlighted. Implant selection and fixation options for bicondylar plateau fractures will be discussed. Finally, use of nails, especially suprapatellar nails for proximal extra-articular proximal tibia fractures is described.

BACKGROUND:Workers Compensation claims have been previously associated with inferior clinical outcomes. However, variation in inpatient stays for orthopedic trauma injuries according to insurance type has not been previously examined. METHODS:We investigated the differences according to insurance for tibial shaft fractures in regard to length of stay and disposition. Using the New York SPARCS database, we identified 1,856 adult non-elderly patients with an isolated tibial shaft fracture who underwent surgery. Patients were stratified by insurance type, including private, Medicaid, Workers Compensation, and no-fault, which covers medical expenses related to automobile or pedestrian accidents. RESULTS:Compared to private insurance (mean: 2.7 days), length of stay was longer for no-fault (mean: 3.9 days; adjusted difference +33%, p < 0.001) and Medicaid (mean: 3.5 days; adjusted difference +22%, p < 0.001), but not significantly different for Workers Compensation (mean: 3.5 days; adjusted difference +4%, p = 0.474). Compared to private insurance (rate: 3.5%), disposition to a facility was significantly higher for no-fault (rate: 10.1%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.3, p < 0.001) and Medicaid (rate: 7.6%; OR = 2.2, p = 0.003), but was not significantly different for Workers Compensation (rate: 6.3%; OR = 1.8, p = 0.129). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with no-fault insurance, but not Workers Compensation, are subject to longer hospital stays and are more likely to be discharged to a facility following operative fixation of an isolated tibial shaft fracture. These findings suggest that financial, social, and legal factors influence medical care for patients involved in automobile accidents with no-fault insurance.

CASE/METHODS:An 65-year-old immunocompetent female developed a Leclercia adecarboxylata infection following the repair of closed olecranon fracture. L. adecarboxylata is associated with polymicrobial infections, infections in immunocompromised patients and penetrating or open wounds. Following speciation, intravenous ceftriaxone was started. Two weeks later, the patient presented with leukopenia and neutropenia. Per infectious disease recommendations, the patient was switched to intravenous ertapenem with resolution of both infection and neutropenia. The olecranon fracture went on to heal fully. CONCLUSIONS:This case describes a rare postoperative monomicrobial infection with L. adecarboxylata in an immunocompetent host following musculoskeletal trauma and identifies L. adecarboxylata as a potential emerging hospital-acquired pathogen following orthopedic surgery.

Currently, clinical determination of pathologic fracture risk in the hip is conducted using measures of defect size and shape in the stance loading condition. However, these measures often do not consider how changing lesion locations or how various loading conditions impact bone strength. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of defect location on bone strength parameters in both the sideways fall and stance-loading conditions. We recruited 20 female subjects aged 48-77 years for this study and performed MRI of the proximal femur. Using these images, we simulated 10-mm pathologic defects in greater trochanter, superior, middle, and inferior femoral head, superior, middle, and inferior femoral neck, and lateral, middle, and medial proximal diaphysis to determine the effect of defect location on change in bone strength by performing finite element analysis. We compared the effect of each osteolytic lesion on bone stiffness, strength, resilience, and toughness. For the sideways fall loading, defects in the inferior femoral head (12.21%) and in the greater trochanter (6.43%) resulted in the greatest overall reduction in bone strength. For the stance loading, defects in the mid femoral head (-7.91%) and superior femoral head (-7.82%) resulted in the greatest overall reduction in bone strength. Changes in stiffness, yield force, ultimate force, resilience, and toughness were not found to be significantly correlated between the sideways fall and stance-loading for the majority of defect locations, suggesting that calculations based on the stance-loading condition are not predictive of the change in bone strength experienced in the sideways fall condition. While stiffness was significantly related to yield force (R²â€¯> 0.82), overall force (R²â€¯> 0.59), and resilience (R²â€¯> 0.55), in both, the stance-loading and sideways fall conditions for most defect locations, stiffness was not significantly related to toughness. Therefore, structure-dependent measure such as stiffness may not fully explain the post-yield measures, which depend on material failure properties. The data showed that MRI-based models have the sensitivity to determine the effect of pathologic lesions on bone strength.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The transition to bundled payment reimbursement for geriatric hip fractures has incentivized the identification of avoidable inefficiencies in the cost and quality of care. Although a "weekend effect" has been described with regard to hip fracture mortality, measures of efficiency according to the day of hip fracture admission are currently unclear. METHODS:We identified 62,303 patients aged 65 years or older with a primary diagnosis of femoral neck or intertrochanteric hip fracture in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System between 2009 and 2014. Outcome measures included preoperative delay, postoperative length of stay (LOS), and cost of admission. RESULTS:Preoperative delay was longer for weekend admissions, but shorter for admissions on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. Postoperative LOS was longer for admissions on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. Discharge rates varied considerably according to the day of admission, ranging from 12% to 43% by hospital day 4 and 53% to 72% by hospital day 6. No differences in cost according to day of admission were found once preoperative delay and postoperative LOS were accounted for. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Notable variation exists in hospitalizations for geriatric hip fracture depending on the day of admission. Our data suggest the presence of a weekend effect, in which changes in staffing of surgical, medical, and ancillary services lead to increased waiting times for surgery for new admissions and delays in discharge of early- and mid-week admissions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, retrospective study.