Aims

Using data from the Hip Fracture Evaluation with Alternatives of Total Hip Arthroplasty versus Hemiarthroplasty (HEALTH) trial, we sought to determine if a difference in functional outcomes exists between monopolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasty (HA).

Despite the routine use of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, postoperative infection following fracture surgery remains a persistent issue with substantial morbidity. The use of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis may have a protective effect and some orthopaedic surgeons have adopted their use in recent years, despite limited evidence of its beneficial effect. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the current literature regarding the effect of prophylactic local antibiotics on the rate of infection in fracture surgery in both open and closed fractures.

A comprehensive search of Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed was performed. Cohort studies were eligible if they investigated the effect on infection rate of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis compared with systemic prophylaxis alone following fracture surgery. The data were pooled in a meta-analysis.

In total, four randomized controlled trials and 11 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 6161 fractures from various anatomical locations were eligible for inclusion. The majority of the included studies were Level 3 evidence and had a moderate risk of bias. When all fractures were pooled, the risk of infection was significantly reduced when local antibiotics were applied compared with the control group receiving systemic prophylaxis only (OR = 0.39; 95%CI: 0.26 to 0.53, P < 0.001). In particular, there was a significant reduction in deep infections (OR = 0.59; 95%CI: 0.38 to 0.91, P = 0.017). The beneficial effect of local antibiotics for preventing total infection was seen in both open fractures (OR = 0.35; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.53, P < 0.001) and closed fractures (OR = 0.58; 95%CI: 0.35 to 0.95, P = 0.029) when analyzed separately.

This meta-analysis suggests a significant risk reduction for postoperative infection following fracture surgery when local antibiotics were added to standard systemic prophylaxis, with a protective effect present in both open and closed fractures.

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore the functional results in a fitter subgroup of participants in the Hip Fracture Evaluation with Alternatives of Total Hip Arthroplasty versus Hemiarthroplasty (HEALTH) trial to determine whether there was an advantage of total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus hemiarthroplasty (HA) in this population.

Aims

Despite long-standing dogma, a clear relationship between the timing of surgical irrigation and debridement (I&D) and the development of subsequent deep infection has not been established in the literature. Traditionally, I&D of an open fracture has been recommended within six hours of injury based on animal studies from the 1970s, however the clinical basis for this remains unclear. Using data from a multicentre randomized controlled trial of 2,447 open fracture patients, the primary objective of this secondary analysis is to determine if a relationship exists between timing of wound I&D (within six hours of injury vs beyond six hours) and subsequent reoperation rate for infection or healing complications within one year for patients with open limb fractures requiring surgical treatment.

Aims

This study reviews the past 30 years of research from the Canadian Orthopedic Trauma Society (COTS), to identify predictive factors that delay or accelerate the course of randomized controlled trials in orthopaedic trauma.

Lung cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed, the leading cause of cancer-related deaths, and bone metastases occurs in 20–40% of lung cancer patients. They often present symptomatically with pain or skeletal related events (SREs), which are independently associated with decreased survival. Bone modifying agents (BMAs) such as Denosumab or bisphosphonates are routinely used, however no specific guidelines exist from the National Comprehensive Cancer Center or the European Society of Medical Oncologists. Perhaps preventing the formation of guidelines is the lack of a high-quality quantitative synthesis of randomized controlled trial (RCT) data to determine the optimal treatment for the patient important outcomes of 1) Overall survival (OS), 2) Time to SRE, 3) SRE incidence, and 4) Pain Resolution. The objective of this study was to perform the first systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the best BMA for treatment of metastatic lung cancer to bone.

We conducted our study in accordance to the PRISMA protocol. We performed a librarian assisted search of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library and Chinese databases including CNKI and Wanfang Data. We included studies that are RCTs reporting outcomes specifically for lung cancer patients treated with a bisphosphonate or Denosumab. Screening, data extraction, risk of bias and GRADE were performed in duplicate. The NMA was performed using a Bayesian probability model with R. Results are reported as relative risks, odds ratios or mean differences, and the I2 value is reported for heterogeneity. We assessed all included articles for risk of bias and applied the novel GRADE framework for NMAs to rate the quality of evidence supporting each outcome.

We included 132 RCTs comprising 11,161 patients with skeletal metastases from lung cancer. For OS, denosumab was ranked above zoledronic acid (ZA) and estimated to confer an average of 3.7 months (95%CI: −0.5 – 7.6) increased survival compared to untreated patients. For time to SRE, denosumab was ranked first with an average of 9.1 additional SRE-free months (95%CI: 4.0 – 14.0) compared to untreated patients, while ZA conferred an additional 4.8 SRE-free months (2.4 – 7.0). Patients treated with the combination of Ibandronate and systemic therapy were 2.3 times (95%CI: 1.7 – 3.2) more likely to obtain successful pain resolution, compared to untreated. Meta-regression showed no effect of heterogeneity length of follow-up or pain scales on the observed treatment effects. Heterogeneity in the network was considered moderate for overall survival and time to SRE, mild for SRE incidence, and low for pain resolution. While a generally high risk of bias was observed across studies, whether they were from Western or Chinese databases. The overall GRADE for the evidence underlying our results is High for Pain control and SRE incidence, and Moderate for OS and time to SRE.

This study represents the most comprehensive synthesis of the best available evidence guiding pharmacological treatment of bone metastases from lung cancer. Denosumab is ranked above ZA for both overall survival and time to SRE, but both treatments are superior to no treatment. ZA was first among all bisphosphonates assessed for odds of reducing SRE incidence, while the combination of Ibandronate and radionuclide therapy was most effective at significantly reducing pain from metastases. Clinicians and policy makers may use this synthesis of all available RCT data as support for the use of a BMA in MBD for lung cancer.

The purpose of this project was to evaluate North American trauma surgeon preferences regarding patient positioning for antegrade fixation of mid shaft femoral shaft fractures.

This project was a cross sectional survey taken of orthopaedic fellows and staff surgeons, belonging to three organizations across North America. An estimated sample size was calculated a priori, while various online techniques were utilized to reduce non responder and fatigue bias. The survey was distributed multiple times to optimize yield.

Two hundred twelve (212) participants responded in full, 134 (56%) of whom practiced in Canada. The majority of surgeons worked in level one trauma centres (74%), while 72% treated more than one femoral shaft fracture per week. The most common patient position for mid shaft fixation amongst all surgeons was lateral positioning with manual traction (68%), however community surgeons were significantly more likely to use a fracture table. The most common difficulties faced with using a fracture table were inability to achieve fracture reduction and peroneal nerve palsies. The majority (64%) of surgeons quoted a complication rate with fracture tables of greater than 1 per 100 cases.

Lateral position with use of manual traction is the preferred set up for antegrade fixation of femoral shaft fracture in this large North American cohort of trauma surgeons. However, a large subset of community and non academic surgeons still prefer use of the fracture table. Amongst all respondents, a high rate of fracture table complications, including malreduction, were quoted. To date, there is no prospective data comparing these two options for patient positioning, and a randomized controlled trial may be an appropriate next step.

The purpose of this study was to define the risk and incidence of eventual ankle arthroplasty or fusion after documented ankle fracture in a large cohort, and compare that rate to matched healthy patients from the general population.

The Ontario health insurance plan (OHIP) physician billing database, Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) Physician Database, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) databases, Discharge Abstract Database (DAD) and Same Day Surgery (SDS) were used to identify patients treated surgically and non-surgically for ankle fractures. Each patient was matched to four individuals from the general population (13.5 million) with no documented prior treatment for ankle fracture, according to age, sex, income, and urban/rural residence. Fusion and replacement incidence was compared using time-to-event analysis (Kaplan-Meier). A Cox Proportional Hazards model was used to explore the influence of patient, provider and surgical factors on time to surgery.

We identified 45,444 (58.8% female, mean age 48.7 years) and 140, 629 (53.9% female, mean age 47.1 years) patients who had undergone open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) or non-operative management of an ankle fracture (NOA), respectively. Among ORIF patients, n=237 (0.5%) and n=69 (0.15%) patients underwent fusion or arthroplasty after a median 2.8 and 6.9 years, respectively. Among non-operatively treated ankle fractures, n=198 (0.14%) and n=36 (0.03%) patients underwent fusion or arthroplasty after a median of 3.2 and 5.6 years, respectively. Surgical treatment (vs. non-operatively treated fracture), older age, greater co-morbidity and a history of infection post fracture significantly increased the risk of eventual fusion or arthroplasty (HR 3.6 (3.1–4.3), p < 0 .001, HR 1.01 (1.01–1.02), p=0.009, HR 1.2 (1.1–1.3), p < 0 .001, HR 11.3 (6.8–18.7), p < 0 .001, respectively). Compared to matched controls, the risk of fusion/arthroplasty was not independent of time, following an exponential decay pattern. ORIF patient risk was 20 times greater than the general population in the first three years post-ORIF, and approached the risk of non-operatively treated patients (HR 4.5 (95CI: 3.5–5.8), p < 0 .0001) by approximately 14 years out from injury on time and comorbidity adjusted KM curves.

Rates of fusion/arthroplasty are very low after ORIF and non-operative treatment of an ankle fracture in the general population of a public healthcare system. Utilization patterns suggest fusion is more common earlier, and arthroplasty remote, which may be a factor of patient age, injury severity, and complications from initial injury/surgery. Patients who underwent ORIF have >20 times the risk of fusion/arthroplasty in the short-term, however, the risk decreases over time eventually approaching that of non-operatively treated patients (∼4.5x the general population) when compared to non-fractured controls.

Despite long-standing dogma, a clear relationship between the timing of surgical irrigation and the development of subsequent deep infection has not been established in the literature. Traditionally, irrigation of an open fracture has been recommended within six-hours of injury based on animal studies from the 1970s, however the clinical basis for this remains unclear. Using data from a multi-centre randomized controlled trial of 2,447 open fracture patients, the primary objective of this secondary analysis is to determine if a relationship exists between timing of wound irrigation (within six hours of injury versus beyond six hours) and subsequent reoperation rate for infection or healing complications within one year for patients with open extremity fractures requiring surgical treatment.

To adjust for the influence of patient and injury characteristics on the timing of irrigation, a propensity score was developed from the data set. Propensity-adjusted regression allowed for a matched cohort analysis within the study population to determine if early irrigation put patients independently at risk for reoperation, while controlling for confounding factors. Results were reported as odds ratios (ORs), 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs), and p-values. All analyses were conducted using STATA 14 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).

Two thousand, two hundred eighty-six of 2,447 patients randomized to the trial from 41 orthopaedic trauma centers across five countries had complete data regarding time to irrigation. Prior to matching, the patients managed with early irrigation had a higher proportion requiring reoperation for infection or healing complications (17% versus 12.8%, p=0.02), however this does not account for selection bias of more severe injuries preferentially being treated earlier. After the propensity score-matching algorithm was applied, there were 373 matched pairs of patients available for comparison. In the matched cohort, reoperation rates did not differ between early and late groups (16.1% vs 16.6%, p=0.84). When accounting for propensity matching in a logistic regression analysis, early irrigation was not associated with reoperation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.40, p=0.73).

When accounting for other variables, late irrigation does not independently increase risk of reoperation.

Fractures of the clavicle are relatively common, occurring mostly in younger patients and have historically been managed non-operatively. Recent studies have shown an advantage to surgical reduction and stabilisation of clavicle fractures with significant displacement. Currently, fracture displacement is measured using simple anterior-posterior two-dimensional x-rays of the clavicle. Since displacement can occur in all three-dimensions, however, evaluation of the amount displacement can be difficult and inaccurate. The purpose of this study was to determine the view that provides the most accurate assessment.

Nine CT scans of acute displaced clavicle fractures were analysed with AmiraDEV5.2.2 Imaging software. Measurements for degrees of shortening and fracture displacement of the fracture clavicle were taken. Using a segmentation and manipulation module (ITK toolkit), five digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) mimicking antero-posterior x-rays were created for every CT, with each differing by projection angle (ranging from 20° upwards tilt to 20° downwards tilt). Measurements were taken on each DRR using landmarks of entire clavicle length, distance from vertebrae to fracture (medial fragment length), distance from fracture to acromium (lateral fragment length), and horizontal shortening, and then compared to the true measurement obtained from the original CT.

For all 9 samples, after comparing the measurements of clavicle fracture displacement in each 2D image, we found that an AP view with a 20° downward tilt yielded displacement measurements closest to the 3D (“gold standard”) measurements. The results agree with previous data collected from cadaveric specimens using physical X-ray film images. DDRs enable creation of multiple standard AP radiographs from which accurate tilt can be measured. The large deviation in measurements on different DRR projections motivates consideration of standardising X-ray projections. A uniform procedure would allow one to correctly evaluate the displacement of clavicular fractures if fracture displacement information is to be utilized in motivating surgical decision-making.