Pre-operative evaluation prior to soft tissue sarcoma excision - Why can't we get it right?

BACKGROUND: To define the association between an appropriate pre-operative workup (pre-operative advanced imaging studies, diagnostic biopsy) and incomplete soft tissue sarcoma (STS) excision. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective review of 397 consecutive patient records (2000-2008), looking at primary site advanced imaging (MRI or CT) and diagnostic biopsy procedures completed prior to the initial attempt at definitive surgical excision. Downstream effects of an inadequate pre-operative workup were also evaluated, including time to referral to a sarcoma multi-disciplinary care team and perceived alteration of surgical care in order to obtain a complete excision of the altered sarcoma bed. RESULTS: Thirty-eight percent (149/397) of soft tissue sarcomas identified underwent an incomplete excision prior to referral. A significant difference in the incidence of pre-operative primary site advanced imaging (91% vs. 42%, p < 0.001) and a pre-operative diagnostic biopsy (85% vs. 16%, p < 0.001) was found between the wide excision group and incomplete excision groups. Pre-operative biopsy (p < 0.001), tumor size >5 cm (p < 0.001), and a referral from an orthopaedic surgeon (p < 0.02) were all associated with reduced risk of incomplete excision in multivariate analysis. Seventy-four percent of patients in the incomplete excision group required an alteration in their definitive wide margin surgical resection, including rotational muscle flap coverage (37%), free flap coverage (11%), or amputation (11%). CONCLUSION: A minority of patients referred following incomplete excision of a STS had undergone an appropriate pre-operative workup prior to referral, leading to increased long-term morbidity following definitive re-excision. Education efforts to heighten awareness of suspicious soft tissue lesions remain vital.

Open distal tibial shaft fractures: a retrospective comparison of medial plate versus nail fixation.

PURPOSE: Studies comparing open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) vs. intramedullary nailing (IMN) for distal tibia shaft fractures focus upon closed injuries containing small patient series with open fractures. As such, complication rates for open fractures are unknown. To characterize complications associated with ORIF vs. IMN, we compared complications based on surgical approach in a large patient series of open distal tibia shaft fractures. METHODS: Through retrospective analysis at an urban level I trauma center, 180 IMN and 36 ORIF patients with open distal tibia fractures from 2002 to 2012 were evaluated. Patient charts were reviewed to identify patient demographics, fracture grade (G), patient comorbidities, and postoperative complications including nonunion, malunion, infection, hardware-related pain, and wound dehiscence. Fisher's exact tests compared complications between ORIF and IMN groups. Multivariate regression identified risk factors with statistical significance for the development of a postoperative complication. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty IMN (G1 22, G2 79, and G3 79) and 36 ORIF (G1 10, G2 16, and G3 10) patients were included for analysis. ORIF patients had a higher rate of nonunion (25.0 %, n = 9) compared with IMN patients (10.6 %, n = 20, p = 0.03). No additional complication had a significant statistical difference between groups. Multivariable analysis shows only surgical method influenced the development of complications: ORIF patients had 2.52 greater odds of developing complications compared with IMN patients (95 % CI 1.05-6.02; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: ORIF leads to higher rates of nonunion and significantly increases the odds of developing a complication compared with IMN for open distal tibia fractures. This is the first study investigating complication rates based on surgical approach in a large cohort of patients with exclusively open distal tibia fractures.