Induced Membrane Technique Is Effective for the Management of Acute Traumatic Bone Loss in Both Diaphyseal and Metaphyseal Lower Extremity Fractures.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of Masquelet-induced membrane technique (IMT) in metaphyseal and diaphyseal fractures with acute bone loss. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Four Level 1 Academic Trauma Centers. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Patients acutely treated with IMT for traumatic lower extremity bone loss at 4 Level 1 trauma centers between 2010 and 2020. INTERVENTION: Operative treatment with placement of cement spacer within 3 weeks of initial injury followed by staged removal and bone grafting to the defect. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Fracture union, infection, revision grafting, time to union, and amputation. RESULTS: One hundred twenty fractures met inclusion criteria, including 43 diaphyseal fractures (DIM) and 77 metaphyseal fractures (MIM). Demographic characteristics were not significantly different, except for age (DIM 34 years vs. MIM 43 years, P < 0.001). Union after treatment with IMT was 89.2% overall. After controlling for age, this was not significantly different between DIM (41/43, 95.3%) and MIM (66/77, 85.7%) ( P = 0.13) nor was the rate of infection between groups. There was no difference in any secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The overall union rate in the current series of acute lower extremity fractures treated with the induced membrane technique was 89%. There was no difference in successful union between patients with diaphyseal bone loss or metaphyseal bone loss treated with IMT. Similarly, there was no difference in patients with tibial or femoral bone loss treated with induced membrane. Defect size after debridement may be more prognostic for secondary operations rather than the limb segment involved or the degree of soft-tissue injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Impact of Extreme Weather on Healthcare Utilization by People with HIV in Metropolitan Miami.

Extreme weather events (EWE) are expected to increase as climate change intensifies, leaving coastal regions exposed to higher risks. South Florida has the highest HIV infection rate in the United States, and disruptions in clinic utilization due to extreme weather conditions could affect adherence to treatment and increase community transmission. The objective of this study was to identify the association between EWE and HIV-clinic attendance rates at a large academic medical system serving the Miami-Dade communities. The following methods were utilized: (1) Extreme heat index (EHI) and extreme precipitation (EP) were identified using daily observations from 1990-2019 that were collected at the Miami International Airport weather station located 3.6 miles from the studied HIV clinics. Data on hurricanes, coastal storms and flooding were collected from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storms Database (NOAA) for Miami-Dade County. (2) An all-HIV clinic registry identified scheduled daily visits during the study period (hurricane seasons from 2017-2019). (3) Daily weather data were linked to the all-HIV clinic registry, where patients' 'no-show' status was the variable of interest. (4) A time-stratified, case crossover model was used to estimate the relative risk of no-show on days with a high heat index, precipitation, and/or an extreme natural event. A total of 26,444 scheduled visits were analyzed during the 383-day study period. A steady increase in the relative risk of 'no-show' was observed in successive categories, with a 14% increase observed on days when the heat index was extreme compared to days with a relatively low EHI, 13% on days with EP compared to days with no EP, and 10% higher on days with a reported extreme weather event compared to days without such incident. This study represents a novel approach to improving local understanding of the impacts of EWE on the HIV-population's utilization of healthcare, particularly when the frequency and intensity of EWE is expected to increase and disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. More studies are needed to understand the impact of EWE on routine outpatient settings.