Let's Agree to Disagree on Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Distal Radius Fractures in Older People: Protocol for a Prospective International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures are the most frequently encountered fractures in Western societies, typically affecting patients aged 50 years and older. Although this is a common injury, the best treatment for these fractures in older patients is still under debate. OBJECTIVE: This prospective study aims to compare the outcome of operatively and nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures in the older population. Only patients with distal radius fractures for which equipoise regarding the optimal treatment exists will be included. METHODS: This prospective international multicenter observational cohort study will be designed as a natural experiment. Natural experiments are observational studies in which treatment allocation is determined by factors outside the control of the investigators but also (largely) independent of patient characteristics. Patients aged 65 years and older with an acute distal radius fracture will be considered for inclusion. Treatment allocation (operative vs nonoperative) will be based on the local preferences of the treating hospital either in Switzerland or the Netherlands. Hence, the process governing treatment allocation resembles that of randomization. Patients will be identified after treatment has been initiated. Based on the radiographs and baseline information of the patient, an expert panel of 6 certified trauma surgeons from 2 regions will provide their treatment recommendation. Only patients for whom the experts disagree on treatment recommendations will ultimately be included in the study (ie, for whom there is a clinical equipoise). For these patients, both operative and nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures are viable, and treatment choice is predominantly determined by personal or local preference. The primary outcome will be the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes will include the Physical Activity Score for the Elderly, the EQ questionnaire, pain, the living situation, range of motion, complications, and radiological outcomes. By including outcomes such as living situation and the Physical Activity Score for the Elderly, which are not relevant for younger cohorts, valuable information to tailor treatment to the needs of the older population can be gained. According to the sample size collection, which was based on the minimal important clinical difference of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation, 92 patients will have to be included, with at least 46 patients in each treatment group. RESULTS: Enrollment began in July 2023 and is expected to continue until summer 2024. The final follow-up will be 2 years after the last patient is included. CONCLUSIONS: Although many trials on this topic have previously been published, there remains an ongoing debate regarding the optimal treatment for distal radius fractures in older patients. This observational study, which will use a fairly new methodological study design, will provide further information on treatment outcomes for older patients with distal radius fractures for which to date equipoise exists regarding the optimal treatment. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/52917.

Does plate position influence the outcome in midshaft clavicular fractures? A multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE: To date, it remains unclear whether superior or anterior plating is the best option for treating midshaft clavicular fractures. The aim of this study was to compare both techniques with regard to the incidence of implant removal due to implant irritation, risk of complications, time to union, and function. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all midshaft clavicular fractures treated operatively between 2017 and 2020 in two hospitals in Switzerland were analyzed. The participating hospitals differed with regard to their standard practice; one offered superior plating only, while the other predominantly employed an anterior plate. The primary outcome was the incidence of implant removal for irritation. Secondary outcomes were time to union, complications, re-interventions, and range of motion during the follow-up period of at least 6 months. RESULTS: In total, 168 patients were included in the study of which 81 (48%) received anterior plating and 87 (52%) superior plating. The overall mean age was 45 years (SD 16). There was no significant difference between anterior and superior plating with regard to implant removal (58.5% versus 57.1%, p = 0.887), infection (5.7% versus 1.8%, p = 0.071), and time to union (median 48 weeks versus 52 weeks, p = 0.643). Data on range of motion were available in 71 patients. There was no significant difference in anteflexion (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) and abduction (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This retrospective cohort study did not find sufficient evidence to recommend one implant position over the other for midshaft clavicular fractures with regard to removal due to irritation. Time to union was similar and Infections were equally rare in both groups. Notably, a considerable number of patients in both groups had their implants removed due to irritation. Larger prospective studies are needed to determine how much plate position contributes to the occurrence of irritation and whether other patient or implant-related factors might play a role. Until this is clarified, implant position should be based on surgeons preference and experience.

Outcomes after fixation of rib fractures sustained during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A retrospective single center analysis.

Background: Historically rib fractures have been typically treated non-operatively. Recent studies showed promising results after osteosynthesis of rib fractures in trauma patients with flail segments or multiple rib fractures. However, there is a paucity of data on rib fixation after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This study evaluated the outcomes of patients who received rib fixation after CPR. Methods: Adult patients who received surgical fixation of rib fractures sustained during CPR between 2010 and 2020 were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective study. Outcome measures included complications, quality of life (EQ 5D 5L) and level of dyspnea. Results: Nineteen patients were included with a mean age of 66.8 years. The mean number of fractured ribs was ten, seven patients additionally had a sternum fracture. Pneumonia occurred in 15 patients (74%), of which 13 were diagnosed preoperatively and 2 post-operatively. Six patients developed a postoperative pneumothorax, none of which required revision surgery. One patient showed persistent flail chest after rib fixation and required additional fixation of a concomitant sternum fracture. One infection of the surgical site of sternal plate occurred, while no further surgery related complications were reported. Mean EQ-5D-5L was 0.908 and the average EQ VAS was 80. One patient reported persisting dyspnea. Conclusion: To date, this is the largest reported cohort of patients who received rib fixation for fractures sustained during CPR. No complications associated with rib fixation were reported whereas one infection after sternal fixation did occur. Current follow-up demonstrated a good long-term quality of life after fixation, warranting further studies on this topic. Deeper knowledge on this subject would be beneficial for a wide spectrum of physicians.

The value of fibular fixation in patients with stabilized distal tibia fractures.

PURPOSE: There is currently no consensus regarding the need for fixation of concomitant fibula fractures in patients with surgically treated distal tibia fracture. Although studies have shown it to be beneficial for fractures involving the syndesmosis, it remains unclear for suprasyndesmotic fractures. This study evaluates what effect the fixation of such suprasyndesmotic fibula fractures had on patients who underwent fixation of distal tibia fractures. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all consecutive adult patients who received surgical treatment for an extra-articular or simple intraarticular distal tibia fracture between 2012 and 2020 and had a concomitant fibula fracture proximal to the syndesmosis. Two groups were formed depending on whether the fibula was stabilized. The need for revision surgery, the occurrence of complications, fracture healing, rotational and angular malalignment were evaluated for both groups. RESULTS: This study included 120 patients, of which 40 (33.3%) had operative treatment of the fibula fracture. Of those with stabilized fibula fractures, 28 (70%) were treated with a plate and 12 (30%) with a titanium elastic nail. The group of patients with surgically treated fibula fractures had significantly more angular malalignments (10% vs 1.2%, p = 0.042), while there was no difference regarding rotational malalignment or fracture healing. Further, infections of the fibular surgical site occurred in 15% of surgically treated patients leading to significantly more revision surgeries in this group (40% vs 20%, p = 0.03). All infections occurred when a plate was used. CONCLUSION: This study was unable to show any benefit from stabilizing concomitant, suprasyndesmotic fibula fractures in surgically treated distal tibia fractures. On the contrary, infection, revision surgery and angular malalignment were more frequent when the fibula was fixed. Therefore, such concomitant fibula fractures should not routinely be fixed and if stabilization is deemed necessary, the implant should be chosen carefully.

Improving the protocol for whole-body CT scans in trauma patients.

PURPOSE: While whole-body computed tomography is an established diagnostic method for the work up of polytraumatized patients, the protocols used differ between trauma centers. This study aimed to compare scan duration and estimated radiation of two protocols. Secondary aim was to assess if using the revised CT protocol reduced the number of additional images of the upper extremities. METHODS: Two groups of consecutive trauma patients, which both received a whole-body CT, were analyzed. Patients, who received a three-phased CT during which their arms needed to be repositioned from their side to above the head, were assigned to group A. Those, who received a CT with their arms placed on a pillow ventral to the abdomen throughout the entire scan were assigned to group B. Estimated radiation dose, scan duration, number of upper limb injuries and number of additional images of the upper limbs within 24 h after initial CT were assessed. RESULTS: Group A consisted of 182 patients, group B of 218. The scan duration was 3 min shorter (p < 0.001) and the estimated radiation dose lower (15.0 vs 22.9 mSv, p < 0.001) in group B. There was no difference in the number of upper limb injuries detected or the number of upper limb additional images required within 24 h. CONCLUSION: Using a whole-body CT scan protocol in which the arms remain on a pillow ventral to the torso instead of one which requires a repositioning of the arms, both scan duration and estimated radiation dose can be reduced. Despite the arms being within the scanned area in the revised protocol, the number of additional imaging of the upper extremities could not be reduced.