Interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the distal femur (the far end of the thigh bone just above the knee) are a considerable cause of morbidity. Various different surgical and non-surgical treatments have been used in the management of these injuries but the best treatment remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was October 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in adults comparing interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur. Interventions included surgical implants (retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN), fixed-angle devices, non-locking plate fixation, locking plate, internal fixation, distal femoral replacement, mono-axial plates, poly-axial plates and condylar buttress plates) and non-surgical management. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our critical outcomes were validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), direct adverse events, participant-reported quality of life (QoL) and pain scores. Our other important outcomes were adverse events indirectly related to intervention, symptomatic non-union, malunion and resource use. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 studies with 753 participants: 13 studies compared different surgical interventions, and one study compared surgical with non-surgical management. Here, we report the effects for RIMN compared with locking plates. Three studies (221 participants) reported this comparison; it included the largest study population and these are the two most commonly used devices in contemporary orthopaedic trauma practice. Studies used three different tools to assess PROMs. We found very-low certainty evidence for lower Disability Rating Index scores after RIMN at short-term follow-up favouring RIMN (mean difference (MD) -21.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -38.16 to -5.64; 1 study, 12 participants) and low-certainty evidence of little or no difference at long-term follow-up (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.22, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.06; 2 studies, 198 participants). Re-expressing the SMD of the long-term follow-up data to Knee Society Score (KSS) used by one study found no clinical benefit of RIMN, based on a minimal clinically important difference of 9 points (MD 2.47, 95% CI -6.18 to 0.74). The effect on QoL was very uncertain at four months (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.44; 1 study, 14 participants) and one year (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.21; 1 study, 156 participants); this evidence was very low certainty. For direct adverse events, studies reported reoperation, loss of fixation, superficial and deep infection, haematoma formation and implant loosening. Effects for all events were imprecise with the possibility of benefit or harm for both treatments. We considered reoperation the most clinically relevant. There was very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference in reoperation between the two implants (risk ratio (RR) 1.48, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.00; 1 study, 104 participants). No studies reported pain.  For other important outcomes, we noted that people treated with RIMN may be more likely to have varus/valgus deformity (RR 2.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.37; 1 study, 33 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, we found no evidence of any important differences between treatments in terms of bony union, indirect adverse events, or resource use. Other comparisons of surgical interventions included in the review were: RIMN versus single fixed-angle device (3 studies, 175 participants); RIMN versus non-locking plate fixation (1 study, 18 participants); locking plate versus single fixed-angle device (2 studies, 130 participants); internal fixation versus distal femoral replacement (1 study, 23 participants); mono-axial plates versus poly-axial plates (2 studies, 67 participants); mono-axial plate versus condylar buttress plate (1 study, 78 participants). The certainty of the evidence for outcomes in these comparisons was low to very low, and most effect estimates were imprecise. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the major limitations of the available evidence concerning current treatment interventions for fractures of the distal femur. The currently available evidence is incomplete and insufficient to inform clinical practice. Priority should be given to randomised controlled trials comparing contemporary treatments for people with fractures of the distal femur. At a minimum, these should report validated patient-reported functional and quality-of-life outcomes at one and two years, with an agreed core outcome set. All trials should be reported in full using the CONSORT guidelines.

Free functional muscle transfer for upper limb paralysis - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Functional restoration of upper limb paralysis represents a major reconstructive challenge. Free functional muscle transfer (FFMT) enables reanimation in patients with a lack of local donor tissues or delayed presentation. This systematic review summarises the evidence for FFMT in the reconstruction of upper limb paralysis. METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed with a systematic review using methodology adapted from the Cochrane Handbook and the PRISMA statement. Data from included studies were compiled and narratively synthesised. Studies were assessed for risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 1155 records were screened, with 39 observational studies of 904 patients included. The most common aetiology was brachial plexus injury (736, 81.4%). Mean time from injury to intervention was 26 months. Restoration of elbow flexion was the commonest reconstructive goal. The most common donor muscle was gracilis (91.5%). Reported outcomes were heterogeneous with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) available in only 7 of 39 studies. Nearly half of FFMTs had a post-operative MRC grade of <4 and 18.1% had an MRC <3. Mean flap failure rate was 3.6% (range 0-10.5%). All studies were at high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: FFMT may be an effective surgical intervention for upper limb paralysis; however, the current evidence has significant shortcomings. There is no consensus regarding outcome measures nor is it possible to identify prognostic factors for its effectiveness. This review highlights a need for improved study design with pre-operative assessment, standardisation in outcome reporting, and the use of PROMs to determine the effectiveness of FFMT in upper limb paralysis.

Research priorities for the management of complex fractures: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: To determine research priorities for the management of complex fractures, which represent the shared priorities of patients, their families, carers and healthcare professionals. DESIGN/SETTING: A national (UK) research priority setting partnership. PARTICIPANTS: People who have experienced a complex fracture, their carers and relatives, and relevant healthcare professionals and clinical academics involved in treating patients with complex fractures. The scope includes open fractures, fractures to joints broken into multiple pieces, multiple concomitant fractures and fractures involving the pelvis and acetabulum. METHODS: A multiphase priority setting exercise was conducted in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 21 months (October 2019 to June 2021). A national survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties which were then combined into several indicative questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not already been sufficiently answered. A second national survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 18 questions was taken to a stakeholder workshop, where a consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities. RESULTS: A total of 532 uncertainties, submitted by 158 respondents (including 33 patients/carers) were received during the initial survey. These were refined into 58 unique indicative questions, of which all 58 were judged to be true uncertainties after review of the existing evidence. 136 people (including 56 patients/carers) responded to the interim prioritisation survey and 18 questions were taken to a final consensus workshop between patients, carers and healthcare professionals. At the final workshop, a consensus was reached for the ranking of the top 10 questions. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 research priorities for complex fracture include questions regarding rehabilitation, complications, psychological support and return to life-roles. These shared priorities will now be used to guide funders and teams wishing to research complex fractures over the coming decade.

Open lower limb fractures in the UK trauma system: A multicentre prospective audit of current practice.

INTRODUCTION: Open fractures represent limb-threatening and life-changing injuries. Clear standards define how patients with these injuries should be managed in the UK. The study of open fractures is, therefore, a key measurable example of major trauma management as a whole. This study was conducted to characterise the demographic, assessment and treatment of patients sustaining lower limb open fractures across UK Regional Trauma Networks. METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, audit was conducted according to a prespecified protocol against the relevant British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) & British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS) standards for Trauma. All UK hospitals treating adults with open fractures were eligible to take part in the study. Patients included were injured during a six month collection period at each site. RESULTS: 3 Major Trauma Centres (MTCs) and 5 Trauma Units (TUs) were enrolled, with data collected by 24 collaborators. 239 patients were included, 11 had bilateral open fractures. There were 38 patient datasets collected from TUs and 201 from MTCs. Patients were predominantly male with high energy injuries. 31.3% of patients from MTCs were transferred in from another facility. Antibiotics were given to 41.7% of patients within 1 hour. 74.4% of limbs with open fractures had a splint applied in the emergency department. 85.8% of patients had a documented orthoplastics plan. 41.7% of patients with a high energy injury had their wound debrided within 12 hours. DISCUSSION: 42.3% of patients with open fractures in our cohort were managed at some point in a TU, indicating triage was required within the trauma network. Due to sampling, we may be under-estimating the number of patients passing through TUs, however, we have demonstrated that this cohort exists. These patients are under-represented in many other studies and registries such as the Trauma Audit Research Network (TARN) due to the funding model for data collection that privileges data collection in MTCs. CONCLUSION: This study gives extensive new insight into the demographics and management of patients with open lower limb fractures in the UK, demonstrating a widespread involvement of TUs and consistent deviation from national standards.

A Quality Improvement Initiative: Supporting the Potential of Foundation Year Doctors with a "Trauma Innovation Forum"

Junior doctors rotating through departments arrive with fresh perspectives and are particularly suited for identifying problems and providing creative solutions to improve patient care. They may, however, be unfamiliar with the process of implementing an idea into practice. We recognize the need to support foundation year doctors to develop successful quality improvement projects (QIPs). We developed a new initiative to host an annual event that gives foundation year doctors a platform to develop QIPs for their department. These ideas were pitched to an audience comprising trauma consultants from the Oxford University Hospitals and multidisciplinary staff from hospitals across the region. It offered a dedicated time away from clinical pressure to propose and receive immediate expert feedback from members of the trauma multidisciplinary team. With this refinement and supervisor project matching, it facilitated multiple areas of targeted change for the department in just one evening. In total, eight QIPs were developed from the event. Here we outline our approach and the structure of our event, which can serve as a tool for similar initiatives to be replicated in other hospitals.

Does This Patient Have Hip Osteoarthritis?: The Rational Clinical Examination Systematic Review.

IMPORTANCE: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is a common cause of pain and disability. OBJECTIVE: To identify the clinical findings that are most strongly associated with hip OA. DATA SOURCES: Systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL from inception until November 2019. STUDY SELECTION: Included studies (1) quantified the accuracy of clinical findings (history, physical examination, or simple tests) and (2) used plain radiographs as the reference standard for diagnosing hip OA. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Studies were assigned levels of evidence using the Rational Clinical Examination scale and assessed for risk of bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Data were extracted using individual hips as the unit of analysis and only pooled when findings were reported in 3 or more studies. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs). RESULTS: Six studies were included, with data from 1110 patients and 1324 hips, of which 509 (38%) showed radiographic evidence of OA. Among patients presenting to primary care physicians with hip or groin pain, the affected hip showed radiographic evidence of OA in 34% of cases. A family history of OA, personal history of knee OA, or pain on climbing stairs or walking up slopes all had LRs of 2.1 (sensitivity range, 33%-68%; specificity range, 68%-84%; broadest LR range: 95% CI, 1.1-3.8). To identify patients most likely to have OA, the most useful findings were squat causing posterior pain (sensitivity, 24%; specificity, 96%; LR, 6.1 [95% CI, 1.3-29]), groin pain on passive abduction or adduction (sensitivity, 33%; specificity, 94%; LR, 5.7 [95% CI, 1.6-20]), abductor weakness (sensitivity, 44%; specificity, 90%; LR, 4.5 [95% CI, 2.4-8.4]), and decreased passive hip adduction (sensitivity, 80%; specificity, 81%; LR, 4.2 [95% CI, 3.0-6.0]) or internal rotation (sensitivity, 66%; specificity, 79%; LR, 3.2 [95% CI, 1.7-6.0]) as measured by a goniometer or compared with the contralateral leg. The presence of normal passive hip adduction was most useful for suggesting the absence of OA (negative LR, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.11-0.54]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Simple tests of hip motion and observing for pain during that motion were helpful in distinguishing patients most likely to have OA on plain radiography from those who will not. A combination of findings efficiently detects those most likely to have severe hip OA.

Significance of cartilage endplate within herniated disc tissue.

PURPOSE: Disc herniations sometimes contain hyaline cartilage fragments, but their origins and significance are uncertain. METHODS: Herniations were removed surgically from 21 patients (aged 35-74 years) whose main symptom was sciatica (10 patients) or back pain (11 patients). Frozen sections, 5 µm thick, were examined histologically, and antibodies were used to label the matrix-degrading enzyme MMP 1, pro-inflammatory mediator TNFα, and cell proliferation marker Ki-67. Proportions of each tissue type were quantified by image analysis. Cartilage and bone components of the endplate were examined in 7-µm frozen sections from 16 cadaveric spines, aged 61-98 years. RESULTS: Cartilage fragments were found in 10/21 herniations. They averaged 5.0 mm in length, comprised 25 % of the herniation area, and two had some bone attached. Hyaline cartilage was more common in herniations from patients with sciatica (7/10) than with back pain (3/11, P = 0.050), and the area (%) of the herniation occupied by the cartilage was greater in sciatica patients (P < 0.05). Cartilage fragments showed little evidence of swelling, proteoglycan loss or inflammatory cell invasion, although cell clustering was common, and TNFα was sometimes expressed. Each cartilage fragment showed at least one straight edge, as if it had been peeled off the bony endplate, and this mechanism of failure was demonstrated in preliminary mechanical experiments. CONCLUSION: Disc herniations often include hyaline cartilage pulled from the vertebral endplates. Cartilage fragments show little swelling or proteoglycan loss, and may be slow to resorb, increasing the risk of persisting sciatica. Loss of cartilage will increase endplate permeability, facilitating endplate inflammation and disc infection.