Beta-Blocker Therapy Is Associated With Increased 1-Year Survival After Hip Fracture Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The high mortality rates seen within the first postoperative year after hip fracture surgery have remained relatively unchanged in many countries for the past 15 years. Recent investigations have shown an association between beta-blocker (BB) therapy and a reduction in risk-adjusted mortality within the first 90 days after hip fracture surgery. We hypothesized that preoperative, and continuous postoperative, BB therapy may also be associated with a decrease in mortality within the first year after hip fracture surgery. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all adults who underwent primary emergency hip fracture surgery in Sweden, between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2017, were included. Patients with pathological fractures and conservatively managed hip fractures were excluded. Patients who filled a prescription within the year before and after surgery were defined as having ongoing BB therapy. The primary outcome of interest was postoperative mortality within the first year. To reduce the effects of confounding from covariates due to nonrandomization in the current study, the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used. Subsequently, Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to the weighted cohorts. These analyses were repeated while excluding patients who died within the first 30 days postoperatively. This reduces the effect of early deaths due to surgical and anesthesiologic complications as well as the higher degree of advanced directives present in the study population compared to the general population, which allowed for the evaluation of the long-term association between BB therapy and mortality in isolation. Results are reported as hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Statistical significance was defined as a 2-sided P value <.05. RESULTS: A total of 134,915 cases were included in the study. After IPTW, BB therapy was associated with a 42% reduction the risk of mortality within the first postoperative year (adjusted HR = 0.58, 95% CI, 0.57-0.60; P < .001). After excluding patients who died within the first 30 days postoperatively, BB therapy was associated with a 27% reduction in the risk of mortality (adjusted HR = 0.73, 95% CI, 0.71-0.75; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A significant reduction in the risk of mortality in the first year following hip fracture surgery was observed in patients with ongoing BB therapy. Further investigations into this finding are warranted.

Association Between Short-, Intermediate-, and Long-term Mortality and Myocardial Injury After Noncardiac Surgery After Hip Fracture Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort.

BACKGROUND: For more than 20 years, hip fracture 1-year mortality has remained around 20%. An elevation of the postoperative troponin peak within 72 hours (myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery [MINS]) is associated with a greater risk of short-term mortality in the general population. However, there seem to be conflicting results in the specific population who undergo hip fracture surgery, with some studies finding an association between troponin and mortality and some not. The objective of the present study was to investigate the association of MINS and the short- (before 28th day), intermediate- (before 180th day), and long-term (before 365th day) mortality after hip fracture surgery. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort of patients undergoing hip fracture surgery from November 2013 to December 2015. MINS was defined as postoperative troponin peak within the 72 hours >5 ng/L. Four MINS subgroups were defined according to the value of troponin peak (ie, ≥5-<20, ≥20-<65, ≥65-<1000, and ≥1000 ng/L). To document the association between the different mortality terms and the troponin peak, odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (aOR) associated with their 95% confidence interval (CI) with the log of the scaled troponin peak within 72 hours were estimated, with and without patients presenting a postoperative acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate hazard ratio (HR) and adjusted HR (aHR) of death between the no MINS and MINS subgroups. The adjustment was performed on the main confounding factors (ie, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] physical status, dementia status, age, and time from admission to surgery). RESULTS: Among 729 participants, the mean age was 83.1 (standard deviation [SD] = 10.8) years, and 77.4% were women; 30 patients presented an ACS (4%). Short-, intermediate-, and long-term mortality were at 5%, 16%, and 23%, respectively. The troponin peak was significantly associated with all terms of mortality before and after adjustment and before and after exclusion of patients presenting an ACS. HR and aHR for each subgroup of troponin level were significantly associated with an increased probability of survival, except for the 5 to 20 ng/L group for which aHR was not significant (1.75, 95% CI, 0.82-3.74). In the landmark analysis, there was still an association between survival at the 365th day and troponin peak after the short- and intermediate-term truncated mortality. CONCLUSIONS: MINS is associated with short-, intermediate-, and long-term mortality after hip fracture surgery. This could be a valuable indicator to determine the population at high risk of mortality that could benefit from targeted prevention and possible intervention.

What Is the Quality of Surgical Care for Patients with Hip Fractures at Critical Access Hospitals?

BACKGROUND: Critical access hospitals (CAHs) play an important role in providing access to care for many patients in rural communities. Prior studies have shown that these facilities are able to provide timely and quality care for patients who undergo various elective and emergency general surgical procedures. However, little is known about the quality and reimbursement of surgical care for patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures at CAHs compared with non-CAH facilities. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Are there any differences in 90-day complications, readmissions, mortality, and Medicare payments between patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures at CAHs and those undergoing surgery at non-CAHs? METHODS: The 2005 to 2014 Medicare 100% Standard Analytical Files were queried using ICD-9 procedure codes to identify Medicare-eligible beneficiaries undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (79.15, 79.35, and 78.55), hemiarthroplasty (81.52), and THA (81.51) for isolated closed hip fractures. This database was selected because the claims capture inpatient diagnoses, procedures, charged amounts and paid claims, as well as hospital-level information of the care, of Medicare patients across the nation. Patients with concurrent fixation of an upper extremity, lower extremity, and/or polytrauma were excluded from the study to ensure an isolated cohort of hip fractures was captured. The study cohort was divided into two groups based on where the surgery took place: CAHs and non-CAHs. A 1:1 propensity score match, adjusting for baseline demographics (age, gender, Census Bureau-designated region, and Elixhauser comorbidity index), clinical characteristics (fixation type and time to surgery), and hospital characteristics (whether the hospital was located in a rural ZIP code, the average annual procedure volume of the operating facility, hospital bed size, hospital ownership and teaching status), was used to control for the presence of baseline differences in patients presenting at CAHs and those presenting at non-CAHs. A total of 1,467,482 patients with hip fractures were included, 29,058 of whom underwent surgery in a CAH. After propensity score matching, each cohort (CAH and non-CAH) contained 29,058 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess for differences in 90-day complications, readmissions, and mortality between the two matched cohorts. As funding policies of CAHs are regulated by Medicare, an evaluation of costs-of-care (by using Medicare payments as a proxy) was conducted. Generalized linear regression modeling was used to assess the 90-day Medicare payments among patients undergoing surgery in a CAH, while controlling for differences in baseline demographics and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures were less likely to experience many serious complications at a critical access hospital (CAH) than at a non-CAH. In particular, after controlling for patient demographics, hospital-level factors and procedural characteristics, patients treated at a CAH were less likely to experience: myocardial infarction (3% (916 of 29,058) versus 4% (1126 of 29,058); OR 0.80 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.88]; p < 0.001), sepsis (3% (765 of 29,058) versus 4% (1084 of 29,058); OR 0.69 [95% CI 0.63 to 0.78]; p < 0.001), acute renal failure (6% (1605 of 29,058) versus 8% (2353 of 29,058); OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.61 to 0.69]; p < 0.001), and Clostridium difficile infections (1% (367 of 29,058) versus 2% (473 of 29,058); OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.88]; p < 0.001) than undergoing surgery in a non-CAH. CAHs also had lower rates of all-cause 90-day readmissions (18% (5133 of 29,058) versus 20% (5931 of 29,058); OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.79 to 0.86]; p < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (4% (1273 of 29,058) versus 5% (1437 of 29,058); OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.82 to 0.95]; p = 0.001) than non-CAHs. Further, CAHs also had risk-adjusted lower 90-day Medicare payments than non-CAHs (USD 800, standard error 89; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients who received hip fracture surgical care at CAHs had a lower risk of major medical and surgical complications than those who had surgery at non-CAHs, even though Medicare reimbursements were lower as well. Although there may be some degree of patient selection at CAHs, these facilities appear to provide high-value care to rural communities. These findings provide evidence for policymakers evaluating the impact of the CAH program and allocating funding resources, as well as for community members seeking emergent care at local CAH facilities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Análisis de la mortalidad tras el tratamiento quirúrgico de las fracturas periprotésicas de fémur distal / Analysis of mortality after surgical treatment of periprosthetic distal femur fractures

INTRODUCCIÓN: Está aumentando la incidencia de las fracturas periprotésicas de rodilla debido al incremento en el número de artroplastias totales de rodilla realizadas, junto al envejecimiento poblacional. Encontramos escasos estudios que analicen en nuestro medio la mortalidad a largo plazo tras la intervención quirúrgica. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar la mortalidad y la supervivencia tras el tratamiento quirúrgico de las fracturas periprotésicas de fémur distal en nuestro medio. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Realizamos un estudio observacional retrospectivo de una serie consecutiva de 97 pacientes intervenidos quirúrgicamente en nuestro centro por fractura periprotésica de rodilla entre los años 2007 y 2015, con un seguimiento mínimo de 12 meses. Se analizaron estadísticamente diversas variables sociodemográficas, clínicas y quirúrgicas. Se realizó una consulta al índice nacional de defunciones del Ministerio de Sanidad para el análisis de mortalidad y se analizó la supervivencia utilizando el método Kaplan-Meier. RESULTADOS: Revisamos un total de 97 pacientes con edad media de 75años, de los cuales 86 fueron mujeres y 11 fueron hombres. El 50,5% de los pacientes presentaban alguna comorbilidad. La demora media hasta la intervención fue de 3,1 días. Respecto al tratamiento, 45 pacientes fueron intervenidos mediante osteosíntesis con placa (49,5%), 40 de ellos con clavo intramedular (41,2%) y en 9 se realizó una revisión de la artroplastia (9,3%). Se registraron un total de 30 defunciones durante el seguimiento, con una mortalidad acumulada al año, a los 3años y a los 10 años del 7,2, del 17,5 y del 30,9%, respectivamente, aumentando progresivamente en mayores de 75 años. No hubo diferencias significativas en las tasas de mortalidad respecto al método de osteosíntesis. La principal complicación fue la seudoartrosis (6,2%). CONCLUSIONES: Las fracturas periprotésicas de rodilla se asocian a altas tasas de complicaciones y de mortalidad, siendo la edad del paciente y la propia lesión factores no modificables que pueden influir en la mortalidad tras la cirugía, mientras que otras variables, como el tipo de intervención o la demora quirúrgica, no mostraron diferencias en las tasas de mortalidad en nuestro estudio

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of periprosthetic fractures of the knee is increasing due to the increase in the number of total knee arthroplasties performed, together with population aging. We found few studies that analyze mortality in our setting after surgery. Our objective was to evaluate mortality and survival after surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur in our environment. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We conducted a retrospective observational study of a consecutive series of 97 patients surgically treated in our centre for periprosthetic knee fracture between 2007-2015, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Diverse sociodemographic, clinical and surgical variables were analyzed. A consultation was made to the National Death Index of the Ministry of Health for the analysis of mortality and survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: We reviewed a total of 97 patients with an average age of 75 years, of which 86 were women and 11 were men. Of the patients, 50.5% of patients had some comorbidity. The average delay until the intervention was 3.1 days. With respect to the treatment, 45 patients were operated by osteosynthesis with plate (49.5%), 40 with intramedullary nail (41.2%) and 9 with revision of the arthroplasty (9.3%). A total of 30 deaths were recorded during the follow-up, with cumulative mortality in the first year, at 3 and at 10 years of 7.2%, 17.5% and 30.9%, respectively, progressively increasing in people over 75 years. There was no significant difference in mortality rates with the osteosynthesis method. The main complication was pseudoarthrosis (6.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Periprosthetic knee fractures are associated with high rates of complications and mortality. The patient's age and the lesion itself are non-modifiable factors that can influence mortality after surgery, while other variables such as the type of intervention or surgical delay did not show differences in mortality rates in our study

Is There an Association Between Prophylactic Femur Stabilization and Survival in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease?

BACKGROUND: The femur is the most common site of metastasis in the appendicular skeleton, and metastatic bone disease negatively influences quality of life. Orthopaedic surgeons are often faced with deciding whether to prophylactically stabilize an impending fracture, and it is unclear if prophylactic fixation increases the likelihood of survival. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Is prophylactic femur stabilization in patients with metastatic disease associated with different overall survival than fixation of a complete pathologic fracture? METHODS: We performed a retrospective, comparative study using the national Veterans Administration database. All patient records from September 30, 2010 to October 1, 2015 were queried. Only nonarthroplasty procedures were included. The final study sample included 950 patients (94% males); 362 (38%) received prophylactic stabilization of a femoral lesion, and 588 patients (62%) underwent fixation of a pathologic femur fracture. Mean followup duration was 2 years (range, 0-7 years). We created prophylactic stabilization and pathologic fracture fixation groups for comparison using Common Procedural Terminology and ICD-9 codes. The primary endpoint of the analysis was overall survival. Univariate survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method; between-group differences were compared using the log-rank test. Covariate data were used to create a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model for survival to adjust for confounders in the two groups, including Gagne comorbidity score and cancer type. RESULTS: After adjusting for comorbidities and cancer type, we found that patients treated with prophylactic stabilization had a lower risk of death than did patients treated for pathologic femur fracture (hazard ratio = 0.75, 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In the national Veterans Administration database, we found greater overall survival between patients undergoing prophylactic stabilization of metastatic femoral lesions and those with fixation of complete pathologic fractures. We could not determine the cause of this association, and it is possible, if not likely, that patients treated for fracture had more aggressive disease causing the fracture than did those undergoing prophylactic stabilization. Currently, most orthopaedic surgeons who treat pathological fractures stabilize the fracture prophylactically when reasonable to do so. We may be improving survival in addition to preventing a pathological fracture; further study is needed to determine whether the association is cause-and-effect and whether additional efforts to identify and treat at-risk lesions improves patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Analysis of mortality after surgical treatment of periprosthetic distal femur fractures. / Análisis de la mortalidad tras el tratamiento quirúrgico de las fracturas periprotésicas de fémur distal.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of periprosthetic fractures of the knee is increasing due to the increase in the number of total knee arthroplasties performed, together with population aging. We found few studies that analyze mortality in our setting after surgery. Our objective was to evaluate mortality and survival after surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur in our environment. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We conducted a retrospective observational study of a consecutive series of 97 patients surgically treated in our centre for periprosthetic knee fracture between 2007-2015, with a minimum follow-up of 12months. Diverse sociodemographic, clinical and surgical variables were analyzed. A consultation was made to the National Death Index of the Ministry of Health for the analysis of mortality and survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: We reviewed a total of 97 patients with an average age of 75years, of which 86 were women and 11 were men. Of the patients, 50.5% of patients had some comorbidity. The average delay until the intervention was 3.1days. With respect to the treatment, 45 patients were operated by osteosynthesis with plate (49.5%), 40 with intramedullary nail (41.2%) and 9 with revision of the arthroplasty (9.3%). A total of 30 deaths were recorded during the follow-up, with cumulative mortality in the first year, at 3 and at 10 years of 7.2%, 17.5% and 30.9%, respectively, progressively increasing in people over 75years. There was no significant difference in mortality rates with the osteosynthesis method. The main complication was pseudoarthrosis (6.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Periprosthetic knee fractures are associated with high rates of complications and mortality. The patient's age and the lesion itself are non-modifiable factors that can influence mortality after surgery, while other variables such as the type of intervention or surgical delay did not show differences in mortality rates in our study.

High mortality following distal femur fractures: a cohort study including three hundred and two distal femur fractures.

PURPOSE: What are the overall, 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year mortality rates following distal femur fractures? METHODS: Epidemiological cohort study. Retrospective reviews of charts and X-rays based on a search in the National Danish Health Registry. RESULTS: A total of 293 patients were treated for 302 distal femur fractures between 2005 and 2010. The mean age at the time of fracture was 44.0 years for males and 71.6 years for females. The overall mortality rates after a non-periprosthetic distal femur fracture at 30 days, six months, and one year were 5%, 15%, and 21%, respectively. The mortality rates for patients at > 60 years at 30 days, six months, and one year were 8%, 26%, and 35%, respectively. The mortality rates for patients at ≤ 60 years at 30 days, six months, and one year were 1%, 2%, and 3%, respectively. The overall mortality rates after a periprosthetic distal femur fracture at 30 days, six months, and one year were 10%, 15%, and 15%. Males were 2.6 (95% CI 1.01-6.86, P = 0.04) times more likely to die within the first year compared to women. Patients treated by conservative means shows a 2.8 (95% CI 1.41-5.54, P = 0.03) times increased likelihood of death within the first year compared to patients treated with surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The overall one year mortality rate was 21% for non-periprosthetic distal femur fractures and was elevated to 35% in patients older than 60 years. Patients presenting with a periprosthetic fracture showed a one year mortality rate of 15%.

Prediction of mortality at one year after surgery for pertrochanteric fracture in the elderly via a Bayesian belief network.

BACKGROUND: Pertrochanteric fractures in the elderly are common and associated with considerable mortality and disability. However, the predictors of the fracture mortality have been somewhat controversial. The aim of this study was to use univariate, multivariate analyses and a Bayesian belief network (BBN) model, which are graphic and intuitive to the clinician, to understand of the prognosis of pertrochanteric fractures. METHODS: Records of patients undergoing surgery at our hospital between January 2013 and June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Univariate and multivariate regression as well as a machine-learned BBN model were used to estimate mortality at one year after surgery for pertrochanteric fracture in the elderly. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 448 surgically treated patients who were followed up for 12 months (age ≥60 years). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, albumin, serum potassium, blood urea nitrogen and blood lactate were independent risk factors for death in surgical treatment patients (P < 0.05). First-degree predictors of mortality following surgery were established: the number of comorbid diseases, serum albumin, blood lactate and blood urea nitrogen. Following cross-validation, the area under the ROC curve was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.76-0.91) for the one-year probability of postoperative mortality. CONCLUSION: We believe cohesive models such as the Bayesian belief network can be useful as clinical decision-support tools and provide clinicians with information to the treatment of old pertrochanteric fracture. This method warrants further development and must be externally validated in other patient populations.

Surgery vs conservative treatment for type II and III odontoid fractures in a geriatric population: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether surgery or conservative treatment is more suitable for elderly patients with type II and type III odontoid fractures. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of surgical and conservative treatments for type II and type III odontoid fractures. METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library in January 2017. Only articles comparing surgery with conservative treatment in elderly patients with type II and type III odontoid fractures were selected. After 2 authors independently assessed the retrieved studies, 18 articles were included in this meta-analysis, and the primary endpoints were the nonunion rate and mortality rate. The secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, complications, and the length of the hospital stay. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Sensitivity analyses were performed for high-quality studies, and the publication bias was evaluated using a funnel plot. RESULTS: Lower nonunion (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.18-0.40, P < .05) and mortality rates (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.34-0.79, P < .05) confirmed the superiority of surgery in treating type II and type III fractures. The secondary outcomes differed. Patients in the surgery group felt more satisfied with the outcome (OR: 3.44, 95% CI: 1.19-9.95, P < .05), and the complications were similar in the 2 groups (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.78-1.68, P = .5), whereas patients in conservative groups spent less time in the hospital (OR: 5.10, 95% CI: 2.73-7.47, P < .05). The results of the subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis were similar to the original outcomes, and no obvious publication bias was observed in the funnel plot. CONCLUSION: Most elderly (younger than 70 years) patients with type II or type III odontoid fractures should be considered candidates for surgical treatment, due to the higher union rate and lower mortality rate, while statistically significant differences were not observed in the population with an advanced age (older than 70 years). Therefore, the selection of the therapeutic approach for elderly patients with odontoid fractures requires further exploration. Simultaneously, based on our meta-analysis, a posterior arthrodesis treatment was significantly superior to the anterior odontoid screw treatment.

Anesthesia Type Is Not Associated With Postoperative Complications in the Care of Patients With Lower Extremity Traumatic Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Lower extremity fracture fixation is commonplace and represents the majority of orthopedic trauma surgical volume. Despite this, few studies have examined the use of regional anesthesia or neuraxial anesthesia (RA/NA) versus general anesthesia (GA) in this surgical population. We aimed to determine the overall rates of RA/NA use and whether RA/NA was associated with lower mortality and morbidity versus GA for patients with lower extremity orthopedic trauma. METHODS: We conducted a propensity-matched, retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients. We used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) dataset to identify patients undergoing surgical correction of low velocity orthopedic lower extremity traumas between 2011 and 2016. Patients were separated into 2 groups based on anesthesia type (RA/NA versus GA). The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included return to the operating room, failure to wean from the ventilator, intubation, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, myocardial infarction, transfusion, venous thromboembolism (VTE), urinary tract infection, sepsis, length of stay, days from operation to discharge, number of complications, and unplanned readmission. RESULTS: We identified 18,467 patients undergoing surgical repair of lower extremity fractures. Approximately 9.58% had RA/NA and 89.9% had GA as their primary anesthetic. After 1:1 propensity matching, the final cohort had 3254 patients. Our analysis did not find a difference in 30-day mortality between the 2 groups. There were also no significant differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the potential advantages of RA/NA, utilization for lower extremity trauma was low in our analysis; only 9.58% of patients were in the RA/NA group, with the majority receiving spinal anesthesia. This may be due to surgeon preference to allow for postoperative monitoring for neurologic injury and compartment syndrome or logistical factors given the urgent nature of these trauma cases. No significant differences in 30-day mortality and postoperative complications were found between RA/NA and GA for patients with lower extremity orthopedic fractures. The choice of anesthesia is multifactorial and may be driven by patient and provider preferences in these operations.

"Obesity Paradox" Holds True for Patients with Hip Fracture: A Registry-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are associated with high mortality and reduced quality of life. Studies have reported a high body mass index (BMI) as being positively associated with survival when linked to old age and some chronic diseases. This phenomenon is called the "obesity paradox." The association between BMI and survival after hip fracture has not been thoroughly studied in large samples, nor has to what extent the association is altered by comorbidities, sex, and age. The objective of this study was to investigate the association of BMI with survival after hip fracture and with the probability of returning to living at home after hip fracture. METHODS: This cohort study was based on data from a prospectively maintained national registry of patients with hip fracture. A total of 17,756 patients ≥65 years of age who were treated for hip fracture during the period of 2013 to 2016, and followed until the end of 2017, were included. BMI was clinically assessed at hospital admission, comorbidity was measured with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and the date of death was retrieved from a national database. Self-reported data on living arrangements were assessed on admission and 4 months after fracture. Multivariable regression models were used to estimate the associations. RESULTS: Despite ASA scores being similar among all BMI groups, obese patients had the highest 1-year survival and patients with a BMI of <22 kg/m had the lowest. Adjustment for potential confounders strengthened the associations. For the chance of returning to living at home, no advantage was seen for obese patients, but patients with a BMI of <22 kg/m had clearly worse odds compared with patients who were of normal weight, overweight, or obese. CONCLUSIONS: The obesity paradox appears to be true for hip fracture patients aged 65 and older. Attention should be given to patients with malnutrition and underweight status rather than to those with overweight status or obesity when developing the orthogeriatric care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Reasons for delaying surgery following hip fractures and its impact on one year mortality.

PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to identify the reasons for delayed surgery following hip fractures and analyze the impact of these reasons on 1-year mortality. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 1234 patients with mean age of 83.1 (range 65-92, SD 8.0) who underwent hip fracture surgery compared three subgroups: (1) surgery within two days from admission (609 patients); (2) delayed surgery for medical reasons (286); and (3) delayed surgery for organizational causes (339). Medical reason was defined as the need of medical optimization of the patient prior to surgery. Pre-operative assessment was performed by the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Hodkinson mental status, Katz index for activities of daily living, and Short-Form (SF-12) questionnaire. Univariate analyses were used (chi-square and Fisher exact or Mantel-Haenszel tests for categorical data, and variance analysis, Student t test, or Mann-Whitney U test for continuous data). Logistic regression models were used for influence of variables on complications and one year mortality. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in complications or one year mortality rates between patients with surgery within two days and those with delayed surgery for medical reasons. However, the patients with delayed surgery for organizational causes had significant higher rates of both complications and one year mortality compared to the other two groups (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that waiting time for hip fracture surgery more than two days was not associated with higher complication or mortality rate if waiting was to stabilize patients with active comorbidities at admission, compared to stable patients at admission with early surgery. Although early surgery within two days from admission is desirable for stable patients at admission, in patients with complex comorbidities, the surgery should be performed once they are optimized. However, the patients with delayed surgery for organizational reasons had a significant higher rate of post-operative complications and one year mortality compared to the other two groups.

Are Case Volume and Facility Complexity Level Associated With Postoperative Complications After Hip Fracture Surgery in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System?

BACKGROUND: Hospital-related factors associated with mortality and morbidity after hip fracture surgery are not completely understood. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the largest single-payer, networked healthcare system in the country serving a relatively homogenous patient population with facilities that vary in size and resource availability. These characteristics provide some degree of financial and patient-level controls to explore the association, if any, between surgical volume and facility resource availability and hospital performance regarding postoperative complications after hip fracture surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do VHA facilities with the highest complexity level designation (Level 1a) have a disproportionate number of better-than-expected performance outliers for major postoperative complications compared with lower-complexity level facilities? (2) Do VHA facilities with higher hip fracture surgical volume have a disproportionate number of better-than-expected performance outliers for major postoperative complications compared with lower-volume facilities? METHODS: We explored the Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Project (VASQIP) database from October 2001 to September 2012 for records of hip fracture surgery performed. Data reliability of the VASQIP database has been previously validated. We excluded nine of the 98 VHA facilities for contributing fewer than 30 records. The remaining 89 VHA facilities provided 23,029 records. The VHA designates a complexity level to each facility based on multiple criteria. We labeled facilities with a complexity Level 1a (38 facilities)-the highest achievable VHA designated complexity level-as high complexity; we labeled all other complexity level designations as low complexity (51 facilities). Facility volume was divided into tertiles: high (> 277 hip fracture procedures during the sampling frame), medium (204 to 277 procedures), and low (< 204 procedures). The patient population treated by low-complexity facilities was older, had a higher prevalence of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (26% versus 22%, p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of patients having surgery within 2 days of hospital admission (83% versus 76%, p < 0.001). High-complexity facilities treated more patients with recent congestive heart failure exacerbation (4% versus 3%, p < 0.001). We defined major postoperative complications as having at least one of the following: death within 30 days of surgery, cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation, new q-wave myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism, ventilator dependence for at least 48 hours after surgery, reintubation for respiratory or cardiac failure, acute renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy, progressive renal insufficiency with a rise in serum creatinine of at least 2 mg/dL from preoperative value, pneumonia, or surgical site infection. We used the observed-to-expected ratio (O/E ratio)-a risk-adjusted metric to classify facility performance-for major postoperative complications to assess the performance of VHA facilities. Outlier facilities with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for O/E ratio completely less than 1.0 were labeled "exceed expectation;" those that were completely greater than 1.0 were labeled "below expectation." We compared differences in the distribution of outlier facilities between high and low-complexity facilities, and between high-, medium-, and low-volume facilities using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: We observed no association between facility complexity level and the distribution of outlier facilities (high-complexity: 5% exceeded expectation, 5% below expectation; low-complexity: 8% exceeded expectation, 2% below expectation; p = 0.742). Compared with high-complexity facilities, the adjusted odds ratio for major postoperative complications for low-complexity facilities was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.67-1.09; p = 0.108).We observed no association between facility volume and the distribution of outlier facilities: 3% exceeded expectation and 3% below expectation for high-volume; 10% exceeded expectation and 3% below expectation for medium-volume; and 7% exceeded expectation and 3% below expectation for low-volume; p = 0.890). The adjusted odds ratios for major postoperative complications were 0.87 (95% CI, 0.73-1.05) for low- versus high-volume facilities and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79-1.02] for medium- versus high-volume facilities (p = 0.155). CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support restricting facilities from treating hip fracture patients based on historical surgical volume or facility resource availability. Identification of consistent performance outliers may help health care organizations with multiple facilities determine allocation of services and identify characteristics and processes that determine outlier status in the interest of continued quality improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Fixation of flail chest or multiple rib fractures: current evidence and how to proceed. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present current evidence on rib fixation and to compare effect estimates obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched on June 16th 2017 for both RCTs and observational studies comparing rib fixation versus nonoperative treatment. The MINORS criteria were used to assess study quality. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. The primary outcome measure was mortality. Secondary outcome measures were hospital length of stay (HLOS), intensive care unit length of stay (ILOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV), pneumonia, and tracheostomy. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies were included resulting in 5874 patients with flail chest or multiple rib fractures: 1255 received rib fixation and 4619 nonoperative treatment. Rib fixation for flail chest reduced mortality compared to nonoperative treatment with a risk ratio of 0.41 (95% CI 0.27, 0.61, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%). Furthermore, rib fixation resulted in a shorter ILOS, DMV, lower pneumonia rate, and need for tracheostomy. Results from recent studies showed lower mortality and shorter DMV after rib fixation, but there were no significant differences for the other outcome measures. There was insufficient data to perform meta-analyses on rib fixation for multiple rib fractures. Pooled results from RCTs and observational studies were similar for all outcome measures, although results from RCTs showed a larger treatment effect for HLOS, ILOS, and DMV compared to observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: Rib fixation for flail chest improves short-term outcome, although the indication and patient subgroup who would benefit most remain unclear. There is insufficient data regarding treatment for multiple rib fractures. Observational studies show similar results compared with RCTs.

Does Surgery Reduce the Risk of Complications Among Patients with Multiple Rib Fractures? A Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple rib fractures are common in trauma patients, who are prone to trauma-associated complications. Surgical or nonsurgical interventions for the aforementioned conditions remain controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of our study was to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical prognosis of surgical fixation of multiple rib fractures in terms of (1) hospital-related endpoints (including duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay [LOS] and hospital LOS), (2) complications, (3) pulmonary function, and (4) pain scores. METHODS: We screened PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized and prospective studies published before January 2018. Individual effect sizes were standardized; the pooled effect size was calculated using a random-effects model. Primary outcomes were duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of stay (ICU LOS), and hospital LOS. Moreover, complications, pulmonary function, and pain were assessed. RESULTS: The surgical group had a reduced duration of mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference [WMD], -4.95 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.97 to -1.94; p = 0.001), ICU LOS (WMD, -4.81 days; 95% CI, -6.22 to -3.39; p < 0.001), and hospital LOS (WMD, -8.26 days; 95% CI, -11.73 to -4.79; p < 0.001) compared with the nonsurgical group. Complications likewise were less common in the surgical group, including pneumonia (odds ratio [OR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27-0.64; p < 0.001), mortality (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.07-0.87; p = 0.030), chest wall deformity (OR, 0.02; 95% CI. 0.00-0.12; p < 0.001), dyspnea (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.54; p < 0.001), chest wall tightness (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.05-0.22; p < 0.001) and incidence of tracheostomy (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.20-0.57; p < 0.001). There were no differences between the surgical and nonsurgical groups in terms of pulmonary function, such as forced vital capacity (WMD, 6.81%; 95% CI: -8.86 to 22.48; p = 0.390) and pain scores (WMD, -11.41; 95% CI: -42.09 to 19.26; p = 0.470). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis lends stronger support to surgical fixation, rather than conservative treatment, for multiple rib fractures. Nevertheless, additional trials should be conducted to investigate surgical indications, timing, and followup for quality of life. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

The effect of a multidisciplinary approach on geriatric hip fractures in Japan.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to report results of the multidisciplinary treatment approach for geriatric hip fractures and evaluate its effectiveness compared with conventional treatment. Patients aged 65 years and older who presented with a hip fracture at our hospital on or after 2014 were treated according to a multidisciplinary approach. METHOD: Two groups of patients with hip fracture were compared. Group I (n = 364) was treated according to the new multidisciplinary approach in 2014-2016, and Group II (n = 105) which received conventional treatment in 2012. Time to surgery, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, osteoporosis treatment, functional recovery, in-hospital mortality, 90-day mortality, and 1-year mortality were evaluated. The medical costs of multidisciplinary treatment were compared with those in other hospitals every year. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the time to surgery between Group I and Group II, but each was considerably shorter than the average time in other Japanese hospitals. The length of hospital stay was longer in Group I. The overall postoperative complication rate was lower in Group I, but there was no significant difference for each individual complication. The rate of anti-osteoporosis pharmacotherapy administration at the time of discharge was significantly higher in Group I. Moreover, the proportion of patients who recovered to their pre-injury functional level was significantly higher in Group I. The mortality rates did not significantly differ year on year. The total hospitalization medical cost per patient for the multidisciplinary treatment was lower than other hospital costs every year. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary treatment produced no significant improvement in time to surgery, length of hospital stay, or postoperative complications. However, the use of the multidisciplinary treatment approach led to a significant increase in osteoporosis treatment rate and better functional recovery. Furthermore, the total medical costs for multidisciplinary treatment were lower than the acute care hospital costs.

Development of a Core Outcome Set for studies evaluating the effects of anaesthesia on perioperative morbidity and mortality following hip fracture surgery.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative studies of patients following hip fracture have large heterogeneity within their reported outcomes. This study aimed to develop a core outcome set for use in perioperative studies comparing the types of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. METHODS: The consensus process consisted of a systematic review of the literature, three rounds of a Delphi survey, two consensus webinars, and face-to-face patient meetings. RESULTS: The Delphi participants represented nine stakeholder groups. The numbers of participants completing Rounds 1-3 were 242, 186, and 169, respectively. Seventeen outcomes that met the predefined consensus criteria were considered at two consensus meetings. A final set of 10 core outcomes was agreed: mortality, time from injury to surgery, acute coronary syndrome, hypotension, acute kidney injury, delirium, pneumonia, orthogeriatric input, being out of bed at day 1, and pain. CONCLUSIONS: We generated a consensus-based set of core outcomes recommended for use in all perioperative trials evaluating the effects of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. An important next step is developing consensus-based consistency on how they should be measured. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/757.

Frailty and Malnutrition Are Associated With Inpatient Postoperative Complications and Mortality in Hip Fracture Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship of nutrition parameters with the modified frailty index (mFI) and postoperative complications in hip fracture patients. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Urban, American College of Surgeons-Verified, Level-1, Trauma Center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred seventy-seven consecutive patients with isolated hip fractures. INTERVENTION: N/A. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: On admission, albumin and total lymphocyte count (TLC) levels and complication data were collected. Additionally, mFI scores were calculated. Statistical analysis was then used to analyze the association between frailty, malnutrition, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Overall, 62.6% and 17.5% of patients were malnourished as defined by TLC of <1500 cells per cubic millimeter and albumin of <3.5 g/dL, respectively. Both TLC (P = 0.024; r = -0.12) and albumin (P < 0.001; r = -0.23) weakly correlated with frailty. Combining malnutrition and frailty revealed predictive synergy. Albumin of <3.5 g/dL and mFI of ≥0.18 in the same patient resulted in a positive predictive value of 69% and a likelihood ratio of 4 (2.15-7.43) for postoperative complications. Similarly, the combination of hypoalbuminemia and frailty resulted in a positive predictive value of 23.3% and likelihood ratio of 8.52 (P < 0.001) for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: When patients are frail and malnourished, there is a risk elevation beyond that of frailty or malnutrition in isolation. This high-risk cohort can be easily identified at admission with routine laboratory values and clinical history. There is an opportunity to improve outcomes in frail hip fracture patients because malnutrition represents a potentially modifiable risk factor. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Nutritional Status and Nutritional Treatment Are Related to Outcomes and Mortality in Older Adults with Hip Fracture.

Malnutrition is very prevalent in geriatric patients with hip fracture. Nevertheless, its importance is not fully recognized. The objective of this paper is to review the impact of malnutrition and of nutritional treatment upon outcomes and mortality in older people with hip fracture. We searched the PubMed database for studies evaluating nutritional aspects in people aged 70 years and over with hip fracture. The total number of studies included in the review was 44, which analyzed 26,281 subjects (73.5% women, 83.6 ± 7.2 years old). Older people with hip fracture presented an inadequate nutrient intake for their requirements, which caused deterioration in their already compromised nutritional status. The prevalence of malnutrition was approximately 18.7% using the Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA) (large or short form) as a diagnostic tool, but the prevalence was greater (45.7%) if different criteria were used (such as Body Mass Index (BMI), weight loss, or albumin concentration). Low scores in anthropometric indices were associated with a higher prevalence of complications during hospitalization and with a worse functional recovery. Despite improvements in the treatment of geriatric patients with hip fracture, mortality was still unacceptably high (30% within 1 year and up to 40% within 3 years). Malnutrition was associated with an increase in mortality. Nutritional intervention was cost effective and was associated with an improvement in nutritional status and a greater functional recovery. To conclude, in older people, the prevention of malnutrition and an early nutritional intervention can improve recovery following a hip fracture.

Safe working in a 7-day service. Experience of hip fracture care as documented by the UK National Hip Fracture Database.

Objective: to describe differences in care and 30-day mortality of patients admitted with hip fracture on weekends (Saturday-Sunday) compared to weekdays (Monday-Friday), and their relationship to the organisation of care. Methods: data came from the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD) linked to ONS mortality data on 52,599 patients presenting to 162 units in England between 1 January and 31 December 2014. This was combined with information on geriatrician staffing and major trauma centre (MTC) status. 30-day mortality and care were compared for patients admitted at weekends and weekdays; separately for patients treated in units grouped by the mean level of input by geriatricians, weekend geriatrician clinical cover and MTC status. Differences were adjusted for variation in patients' characteristics. Results: there was no evidence of differences in 30-day mortality between patients admitted at weekends compared to weekdays (7.2 vs 7.5%, P = 0.3) before or after adjusting for patient characteristics in either MTCs or general hospitals. The proportion receiving a preoperative geriatrician assessment was lower at weekends (42.8 vs 60.7%, P < 0.001). 30-day mortality was lower in units with higher levels of geriatrician input, but there was no weekend mortality effect associated with lower levels of input or absence of weekend cover. Conclusion: there was no evidence of a weekend mortality effect among patients treated for hip fracture in the English NHS. It appears that clinical teams provide comparably safe and effective care throughout the week. However, greater geriatrician involvement in teams was associated with overall lower mortality.