Outcomes of midfoot and hindfoot fractures in multitrauma patients.

INTRODUCTION: Multitrauma patients suffering hindfoot fractures, including calcaneal and talar fractures, often result in poor outcomes. However, less is known about the outcomes following midfoot fracture in the mutitrauma population. This study aims to describe the epidemiology of midfoot fractures in multitrauma patients and to compare the outcomes of midfoot and hindfoot fractures in this population. METHODS: Data about multitrauma patients (Injury Severity Score >12) sustaining a unilateral midfoot or hindfoot fracture were obtained from the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry (VOTOR) and from retrospective review of medical records at a major trauma centre. Further outcome data were obtained via a survey using the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons Foot and Ankle Score (AAOS FAS) and the 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). RESULTS: 122 multitrauma patients were included; 81 with hindfoot fractures and 41 with midfoot fractures. The median ISS (IQR) was 22 (17-29) and 27 (17-24) for the hindfoot and midfoot groups, respectively (p = 0.23). Hindfoot and midfoot fractures were commonly associated with intracranial injuries (80.3%), spine injuries (60.7%), ipsilateral lower extremity injuries (24.6%) and pelvic injuries (16.4%). The mean (SD) time to follow up was 4.5 (±2.7) years. There were no differences in mean SF-12 physical (37.97 vs 35.22, p = 0.33) or mental (46.90 vs 46.67, p = 0.94) component summary scores between the groups. There were no differences in mean AAOS FAS standard scores (69.3 vs 69.1, p = 0.97) or shoe comfort scores (median 40 vs 40 p = 0.18) between the groups. CONCLUSION: Functional outcomes in multitrauma patients with midfoot or hindfoot fractures were comparable. These findings suggest that midfoot fractures should be treated with the same degree of due diligence as hindfoot fractures in the multitrauma patient.

Nails or plates for fracture of the distal femur? data from the Victoria Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry.

AIMS: Fractures of the distal femur are an important cause of morbidity. Their optimal management remains controversial. Contemporary implants include angular-stable anatomical locking plates and locked intramedullary nails (IMNs). We compared the long-term patient-reported functional outcome of fixation of fractures of the distal femur using these two methods of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 297 patients were retrospectively identified from a State-wide trauma registry in Australia: 195 had been treated with a locking plate and 102 with an IMN. Baseline characteristics of the patients and their fractures were recorded. Health-related quality-of-life, functional and radiographic outcomes were compared using mixed effects regression models at six months and one year. RESULTS: There was a clinically relevant and significant difference in quality-of-life at six months in favour of fixation with an IMN (mean difference in EuroQol-5 Dimensions Score (EQ-5D) = 0.12; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22; p = 0.025). There was weak evidence that this trend continued to one year (mean difference EQ-5D = 0.09; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.19; p = 0.073). There was a significant although very small reduction in angular deformity using an IMN (mean difference -1.02; 95% CI -1.99 to -0.06; p = 0.073). There was no evidence that there was a difference in any other outcomes at any time point. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: IMN may be a superior treatment compared with anatomical locking plates for fractures of the distal femur. These findings are concordant with other data from pilot randomised studies which favour treatment of these fractures with an IMN. This study strongly supports the need for a definitive randomised trial. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:846-50.