Functional Outcome After Nonoperative Management of Tibial Plateau Fractures in Skeletally Mature Patients: What Sizes of Gaps and Stepoffs Can be Accepted?

BACKGROUND: Gap and stepoff measurements provide information about fracture displacement and are used for clinical decision-making when choosing either operative or nonoperative management of tibial plateau fractures. However, there is no consensus about the maximum size of gaps and stepoffs on CT images and their relation to functional outcome in skeletally mature patients with tibial plateau fractures who were treated without surgery. Because this is important for patient counseling regarding treatment and prognosis, it is critical to identify the limits of gaps and stepoffs that are well tolerated. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) In patients treated nonoperatively for tibial plateau fractures, what is the association between initial fracture displacement, as measured by gaps and stepoffs at the articular surface on a CT image, and functional outcome? (2) What is the survivorship of the native joint, free from conversion to a total knee prosthesis, among patients with tibial plateau fractures who were treated without surgery? METHODS: A multicenter cross-sectional study was performed in all patients who were treated nonoperatively for a tibial plateau fracture between 2003 and 2018 in four trauma centers. All patients had a diagnostic CT scan, and a gap and/or stepoff more than 2 mm was an indication for recommending surgery. Some patients with gaps and/or stepoffs exceeding 2 mm might not have had surgery based on shared decision-making. Between 2003 and 2018, 530 patients were treated nonoperatively for tibial plateau fractures, of which 45 had died at follow-up, 30 were younger than 18 years at the time of injury, and 10 had isolated tibial eminence avulsions, leaving 445 patients for follow-up analysis. All patients were asked to complete the validated Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire consisting of five subscales: symptoms, pain, activities of daily living (ADL), function in sports and recreation, and knee-related quality of life (QOL). The score for each subscale ranged from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better function. A total of 46% (203 of 445) of patients participated at a mean follow-up of 6 ± 3 years since injury. All knee radiographs and CT images were reassessed, fractures were classified, and gap and stepoff measurements were taken. Nonresponders did not differ much from responders in terms of age (53 ± 16 years versus 54 ± 20 years; p = 0.89), gender (70% [142 of 203] women versus 59% [142 of 242] women; p = 0.01), fracture classifications (Schatzker types and three-column concept), gaps (2.1 ± 1.3 mm versus 1.7 ± 1.6 mm; p = 0.02), and stepoffs (2.1 ± 2.2 mm versus 1.9 ± 1.7 mm; p = 0.13). In our study population, the mean gap was 2.1 ± 1.3 mm and stepoff was 2.1 ± 2.2 mm. The participating patients divided into groups with increasing fracture displacement based on gap and/or stepoff (< 2 mm, 2 to 4 mm, or > 4 mm), as measured on CT images. ANOVA was used to assess whether an increase in the initial fracture displacement was associated with poorer functional outcome. We estimated the survivorship of the knee free from conversion to total knee prosthesis at a mean follow-up of 5 years using a Kaplan-Meier survivorship estimator. RESULTS: KOOS scores in patients with a less than 2 mm, 2 to 4 mm, or greater than 4 mm gap did not differ (symptoms: 83 versus 83 versus 82; p = 0.98, pain: 85 versus 83 versus 86; p = 0.69, ADL: 87 versus 84 versus 89; p = 0.44, sport: 65 versus 64 versus 66; p = 0.95, QOL: 70 versus 71 versus 74; p = 0.85). The KOOS scores in patients with a less than 2 mm, 2 to 4 mm, or greater than 4 mm stepoff did not differ (symptoms: 84 versus 83 versus 77; p = 0.32, pain: 85 versus 85 versus 81; p = 0.66, ADL: 86 versus 87 versus 82; p = 0.54, sport: 65 versus 68 versus 56; p = 0.43, QOL: 71 versus 73 versus 61; p = 0.19). Survivorship of the knee free from conversion to total knee prosthesis at mean follow-up of 5 years was 97% (95% CI 94% to 99%). CONCLUSION: Patients with minimally displaced tibial plateau fractures who opt for nonoperative fracture treatment should be told that fracture gaps or stepoffs up to 4 mm, as measured on CT images, could result in good functional outcome. Therefore, the arbitrary 2-mm limit of gaps and stepoffs for tibial plateau fractures could be revisited. The survivorship of the native knee free from conversion to a total knee prosthesis was high. Large prospective cohort studies with high response rates are needed to learn more about the relationship between the degree of fracture displacement and functional recovery after tibial plateau fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Difference in Pain, Complication Rates, and Clinical Outcomes After Suprapatellar Versus Infrapatellar Nailing for Tibia Fractures? A Systematic Review of 1447 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of suprapatellar (SP)-nailing versus infrapatellar (IP)-nailing of tibia fractures in anterior knee pain, complications (retropatellar chondropathy, infection, and malalignment) and physical functioning and quality of life. A clinical question-driven and thorough systematic review of current literature is provided. DATA SOURCE: PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2020 relating to SP and IP-nailing of tibia fractures. The study is performed in concordance with PRISMA-guidelines. STUDY SELECTION: Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective observational studies reporting on outcomes of interest. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was performed independently by 2 assessors. Methodological quality and risk of bias was assessed according to the guidelines of the McMaster Critical Appraisal. DATA SYNTHESIS: Continuous variables are presented as means with SD and dichotomous variables as frequency and percentages. The weighted mean, standardized weighted mean differences, and 95% confidence interval were calculated. A pooled analysis could not be performed because of differences in outcome measures, time-points, and heterogeneity. RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 1447 patients were analyzed. The weighted incidence of anterior knee pain was 29% after SP-nailing and 39% after IP-nailing, without reported significance. There was a significant lower rate of malalignment after the SP-approach (4% vs. 26%) with small absolute differences in all planes. No substantial differences were observed in retropatellar chondropathy, infection, physical functioning, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review does not reveal superiority of either technique in any of the respective outcomes of interest. Definitive choice should depend on the surgeon's experience and available resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

High delayed and missed injury rate after inter-hospital transfer of severely injured trauma patients.

PURPOSE: Missed injuries are reported in 1.3-65% of all admitted trauma patients. The severely injured patient that needs a higher level of care which requires an inter-hospital transfer has an increased risk for missed injuries. The aim of this study was to establish the incidence and clinical relevance of missed injuries in severely injured patients who require inter-hospital transfer to a level 1 trauma center. METHODS: All patients with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16 transferred to the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG) between January 2010 and July 2015 were included. Data were obtained from a prospective trauma database and supplemented with information from the patient records. A delayed diagnosis was defined as any injury detected within the first 24 h after the initial trauma, with or without a tertiary survey. Missed diagnoses were defined as any injury diagnosed after 24 h following trauma. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-one trauma patients were included. A total of 88 patients (35%) were found to have ≥ 1 new diagnoses with 65 (26%) patients that had 1 or more delayed diagnoses and 23 (9.2%) patients had 1 or more missed diagnoses (detected > 24 h after injury) after transfer to our hospital. For 47 of the 88 patients (53%), the new diagnoses required a change of management. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was the only statistically significant risk factor for a new diagnosis upon transfer. CONCLUSIONS: Inter-hospital transfer of severely injured patients increases the risk of a delayed detection of injuries. We found that 35% of all transferred patients with an ISS ≥ 16 have at least new diagnoses, with over half of these diagnoses requiring a change of management. Given these findings, clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion when receiving a transferred severely injured trauma patient.