Explore the vast range of titles available.

Observational studies have suggested that accelerated surgery is associated with improved outcomes in patients with a hip fracture. The HIP ATTACK trial assessed whether accelerated surgery could reduce mortality and major complications. HIP ATTACK was an international, randomised, controlled trial done at 69 hospitals in 17 countries. Patients with a hip fracture that required surgery and were aged 45 years or older were eligible. Research personnel randomly assigned patients (1:1) through a central computerised randomisation system using randomly varying block sizes to either accelerated surgery (goal of surgery within 6 h of diagnosis) or standard care. The coprimary outcomes were mortality and a composite of major complications (ie, mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism, sepsis, pneumonia, life-threatening bleeding, and major bleeding) at 90 days after randomisation. Patients, health-care providers, and study staff were aware of treatment assignment, but outcome adjudicators were masked to treatment allocation. Patients were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02027896). Between March 14, 2014, and May 24, 2019, 27 701 patients were screened, of whom 7780 were eligible. 2970 of these were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive accelerated surgery (n=1487) or standard care (n=1483). The median time from hip fracture diagnosis to surgery was 6 h (IQR 4–9) in the accelerated-surgery group and 24 h (10–42) in the standard-care group (p<0·0001). 140 (9%) patients assigned to accelerated surgery and 154 (10%) assigned to standard care died, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·91 (95% CI 0·72 to 1·14) and absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 1% (−1 to 3; p=0·40). Major complications occurred in 321 (22%) patients assigned to accelerated surgery and 331 (22%) assigned to standard care, with an HR of 0·97 (0·83 to 1·13) and an ARR of 1% (−2 to 4; p=0·71). Among patients with a hip fracture, accelerated surgery did not significantly lower the risk of mortality or a composite of major complications compared with standard care. Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Purpose To compare the clinical, radiological outcomes, economic and technical differences for ORIF by cancellous screw fixation versus ARIF by double-tunnel suture fixation for displaced tibial-side PCL avulsion fractures. Methods Forty patients with displaced tibial-sided PCL avulsions were operated upon after randomizing them into two groups (20 patients each in the open and arthroscopic group) and followed up prospectively. Assessment included duration of surgery, cost involved, pre- and post-operative functional scores, radiological assessment of union, and posterior laxity using stress radiography and complications. Results The mean follow-up period was 33 months (27–42) (open group) and 30 months (26–44) (arthroscopic group). The duration of surgery was significantly larger in the arthroscopic group (47.8 ± 17.9 min) as compared to the open group (33.4 ± 10.1 min). The costs involved were significantly higher in the arthroscopic group ( p − 0.01). At final follow-up, knee function in the form of IKDC (International Knee Documentation Committee) evaluation (89.9 ± 4.8-open and 89.3 ± 5.9-arthroscopic) and Lysholm scores (94.2 ± 4.1-open and 94.6 ± 4.1-arthroscopic) had improved significantly with the difference (n.s.) between the two groups. The mean posterior tibial displacement was 5.7 ± 1.8 mm in the open group and 6.3 ± 3.1 mm in the arthroscopic group which was (n.s.). There were two non-unions and one popliteal artery injury in the arthroscopic group. Conclusion Both ARIF and ORIF for PCL avulsion fractures yield good clinical and radiological outcomes. However, ORIF was better than ARIF in terms of cost, duration of surgery, and complications like non-union and iatrogenic vascular injury. Level of evidence II.

Background Thoracolumbar fractures are most frequent along the spine, and surgical treatment is indicated for unstable fractures. Percutaneous minimally invasive surgery was introduced to reduce the pain associated with the open posterior approach and reduce the morbidity of the procedure by avoiding damage and dissection of the paravertebral muscles. The goal of this study is to compare the surgical treatment of fractures of the thoracolumbar spine treated by the conventional open approach and the percutaneous minimally invasive approach using similar types of pedicle spine fixation systems. Methods/designs This study is designed as a multi-center, randomized controlled trial of patients aged 18–65 years who are scheduled to undergo surgical posterior fixation. Treatment by the conventional open approach or percutaneous minimally invasive approach will be randomly assigned. The primary outcome measure is postoperative pain, which will be measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS). The secondary outcome parameters are intraoperative bleeding, postoperative drainage, surgery time, length of hospital stay, SF-36, EQ-5D-5 l, HADS, pain medication, deambulation after surgery, intraoperative fluoroscopy time, vertebral segment kyphosis, fracture vertebral body height, compression of the vertebral canal, accuracy of the pedicle screws, and breakage or release of the implants. Patient will be followed up for 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively and evaluated according to the outcomes using clinical and radiological examinations, plain radiographs and computed tomografy (CT). Discussion Surgical treatment of thoracolumbar fractures by the open or percutaneous minimally invasive approach will be compared in a multicenter randomized study using similar types of fixation systems, and the results will be evaluated according to clinical and radiological parameters at 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months of follow-up. Trial registration ClinicalTrial.gov approval number: 1.933.631, code: NCT03316703 in may 2017.

Background In elderly tibial plateau fractures (TPFs), the lateral condyles are involved frequently. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and double reverse traction repositor (DRTR) assisted closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) in elderly patients with lateral TPFs. Methods From January 2015 to July 2020, we retrospectively reviewed 68 patients treated surgically at our trauma center for lateral TPFs (Schatzker type I-III). 31 patients were eventually assigned to the DRTR assisted CRIF group, whereas 37 patients were assigned to the ORIF group. The primary outcomes included surgical details, radiological assessment, follow-up knee function, and complications. Results The DRTR assisted CRIF group experienced a 43.6 mL decrease in intraoperative blood loss (161.3 ml vs 204.9 ml, p  = 0.033), and the operation duration was 32.1 min shorter than the ORIF group (83.8 min vs 115.9 min, p  < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of widening of the tibia plateau (WTP), depth of articular depression (DAD), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and posterior tibial slope angle (PTSA) immediately after surgery and at the last follow-up. No differences in malreduction ( p  = 0.566) or reduction loss ( p  = 0.623) were observed between the groups, and Lysholm and HSS scores were similar between the two groups (83.6 ± 15.8 vs 83.4 ± 5.1, p  = 0.934; 89.3 ± 7.8 vs 86.9 ± 6.2, p = 0.172; respectively). However, ORIF was associated with a greater increase in postoperative complications than DRTR assisted CRIF (3.2% vs 27%, p  = 0.008). Conclusion Both types of internal fixation provide good radiological outcomes and knee function in the treatment of lateral TPFs in the elderly. However, DRTR assisted CRIF has the advantage of a shorter duration of surgery, less blood loss, and fewer postoperative complications, and appears to be a better treatment option for elderly patients with lateral TPFs.

This study compared the results of external fixation combined with limited open reduction and internal fixation (EF + LORIF), minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO), and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for distal tibia fractures. A total of 84 patients with distal tibia shaft fractures were randomized to operative stabilization using EF + LORIF (28 cases), MIPPO (28 cases), or IMN (28 cases). The 3 groups were comparable with respect to patient demographics. Data were collected on operative time and radiation time, union time, complications, time of recovery to work, secondary operations, and measured joint function using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. There was no significant difference in time to union, incidence of union status, time of recovery to work, and AOFAS scores among the 3 groups ( P >.05). Mean operative time and radiation time in the MIPPO group were longer than those in the IMN or EF + LORIF groups ( P <.05). Wound complications after MIPPO were more common compared with IMN or EF + LORIF ( P <.05). Anterior knee pain occurred frequently after IMN (32.1%), and irritation symptoms were encountered more frequently after MIPPO (46.4%). Although EF + LORIF was associated with fewer secondary procedures vs MIPPO or IMN, it was related with more pin-tract infections (14.3%). Findings indicated that EF + LORIF, MIPPO, and IMN all achieved similar good functional results. However, EF + LORIF had some advantages over MIPPO and IMN in reducing operative and radiation times, postoperative complications, and reoperation rate. [ Orthopedics. 2016; 39(4):e627–e633.]

Background An anatomical reconstruction of the ankle congruity is the important prerequisite in the operative treatment of acute ankle fractures. Despite anatomic restoration patients regularly suffer from residual symptoms after these fractures. There is growing evidence, that a poor outcome is related to the concomitant traumatic intra-articular pathology. By supplementary ankle arthroscopy anatomic reduction can be confirmed and associated intra-articular injuries can be treated. Nevertheless, the vast majority of complex ankle fractures are managed by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) only. Up to now, the effectiveness of arthroscopically assisted fracture treatment (AORIF) has not been conclusively determined. Therefore, a prospective randomised study is needed to sufficiently evaluate the effect of AORIF compared to ORIF in complex ankle fractures. Methods/design We perform a randomised controlled trial at Munich University Clinic enrolling patients (18–65 years) with an acute ankle fracture (AO 44 A2, A3, B2, B3, C1 - C3 according to AO classification system). Patients meeting the inclusion criteria are randomised to either intervention group (AORIF, n  = 37) or comparison group (ORIF, n  = 37). Exclusion criteria are fractures classified as AO type 44 A1 or B1, pilon or plafond-variant injury or open fractures. Primary outcome is the AOFAS Score (American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society). Secondary outcome parameter are JSSF Score (Japanese Society of Surgery of the Foot), Olerud and Molander Score, Karlsson Score, Tegner Activity Scale, SF-12, radiographic analysis, arthroscopic findings of intra-articular lesions, functional assessments, time to return to work/sports and complications. This study protocol is accordant to the SPIRIT 2013 recommendation. Statistical analysis will be performed using SPSS 22.0 (IBM). Discussion The subjective and functional outcome of complex ankle fractures is regularly unsatisfying. As these injuries are very common it is essential to improve the postoperative results. Potentially, arthroscopically assisted fracture treatment can significantly improve the outcome by addressing the intra-articular pathologies. Given the absolute lack of studies comparing AORIF to ORIF in complex ankle fractures, this randomised controlled trail is urgently needed to evaluate the effectiveness of additional arthroscopy. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT02449096 (Trial registration date: April 7th, 2015).

IntroductionAnkle fractures are common in the elderly population. Surgical fixation is technically challenging and often results in complications due to high rates of osteoporosis and vascular disease. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) often requires prolonged periods of non-weight bearing increasing the risks of complications. Tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing has been suggested as an alternative to ORIF which allows immediate weight bearing, and is suggested to result in fewer complications. This study aims to compare the two surgical techniques in the elderly population with ankle fractures.Methods and analysisThe study will be a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial comparing ORIF to TTC nailing in 110 patients with ankle fractures aged 50 or above with a Charlson Comorbidity Index of greater than or equal to four. Participants and assessors will not be blinded to intervention. The primary outcome measure will be overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes include length of hospital stay, mobility at discharge, discharge destination, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot score, the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score, mortality rate, rate of secondary surgical interventions and number of blood transfusions required postoperatively. Our null hypothesis is that there is no clinically significant difference in the primary outcome measure between the two treatment groups.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by Metro South Hospital and Health Services Human Research Ethics Committee (EC00167) (reference number HREC/17/QPAH/351).DiscussionCompletion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of TTC nailing versus ORIF in treatment of the elderly ankle fracture. If TTC nailing is found to result in superior outcomes, this trial has the capacity to change current clinical practice.Trial registration numberACTRN12617001588381;Pre-results andU1111-1203-1704.

Background In the past several years, an increase in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for intra-articular distal radius fractures has been observed. This technique leads to a quicker recovery of function compared to non-operative treatment. However, some patients continue to have a painful and stiff wrist postoperatively. Arthroscopically assisted removal of intra-articular fracture haematoma and debris may improve the functional outcomes following operative treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures. The purpose of this randomised controlled trial is to determine the difference in functional outcome, assessed with the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score, after ORIF with and without an additional wrist arthroscopy in adult patients with displaced complete articular distal radius fractures. Methods In this multicentre trial, adult patients with a displaced complete articular distal radius fracture are randomised between ORIF with an additional wrist arthroscopy to remove fracture haematoma and debris (intervention group) and conventional fluoroscopic-assisted ORIF (control group). The primary outcome is functional outcome assessed with the PRWE score after three months. Secondary outcomes are wrist function assessed with the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, postoperative pain, range of motion, grip strength, complications and cost-effectiveness. Additionally, in the intervention group, the quality of reduction, associated ligamentous injuries and cartilage damage will be assessed. A total of 50 patients will be included in this study. Discussion Although ORIF of intra-articular distal radius fractures leads to a quicker resume of function compared to non-operative treatment, some patients continue to have a painful and stiff wrist postoperatively. We hypothesise that, due to the removal of fracture haematoma and debris by an additional arthroscopy, functional outcomes will be better compared to the non-arthroscopically treated group. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02660515 . Registered on 13 January 2016.

Background Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) represents a standard surgical technique for the management of patellar fractures, with tension band fixation serving as the commonly employed method. To enhance fixation strength, wires are frequently threaded through the medullary canal of the bone. This study aims to evaluate the potential benefits of utilizing transosseous wire fixation in the treatment of patellar fractures and its impact on patient outcomes. Method In this study, 223 patients with patellar fractures who had undergone open reduction and tension band surgery at our hospital were included, and a retrospective case-control study was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups: fixation using pin-tail bolt locking intramedullary Kirschner wires was received by one (observation group), while the standard treatment protocol was received by the other (control group). Both groups were followed regularly for one year, and postoperative complications were recorded. A comparative analysis was performed to evaluate differences in postoperative functional recovery and knee joint range of motion between the two groups. All statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS (version 26.0). Results A total of 223 patients were included in the study; 72 of these were assigned to the observation group and received transosseous wire placement, while the remaining patients were assigned to the control group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of gender, age, or fracture type. No statistically significant difference was found in the number of intraoperative X-ray fluoroscopies ( P  = 0.11). However, the operative time was significantly longer in the observation group compared with the control group ( P  < 0.05). No significant differences were detected in the incidence of nonunion ( P  = 0.56), refracture ( P  = 0.58), internal fixator fracture ( P  = 0.32), or wound infection ( P  = 0.96) between the two groups. In contrast, a statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of internal fixation loosening ( P  < 0.05). Among patients with internal fixation loosening, no significant difference was noted in Bostman scores between the control and observation groups ( P  = 0.60). Conclusion It is indicated by findings that although postoperative complication rates are not increased by the use of transosseous wire fixation in patellar fractures, no significant benefits are provided by this technique in terms of functional scores, knee range of motion, or the rate of fracture healing.

Background Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis (MIPO) has emerged as an option for the treatment of fractures; however, there is limited literature regarding its application in radius shaft fractures. The purpose of this study was to introduce a MIPO technique for treating radius shaft fractures and to compare its clinical and radiologic outcomes with those of open reduction and internal fixation using a plate (ORIF). Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 49 cases of diaphyseal radius fractures between March 2018 and November 2021. The MIPO group (20 patients) and ORIF group (29 patients) were treated by a single surgeon. Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on union rates, range of motion (ROM), and complications. Radiological assessments included fracture healing, ulnar variance, and alignment. Results Union was achieved in all cases in both groups. The union time was similar, with 13.1 weeks for the MIPO group and 12.6 weeks for the ORIF group. Forearm rotation was comparable between the two groups (MIPO: supination 87.3°, pronation 79.5°; ORIF: supination 87.4°, pronation 80.2°). Clinical outcomes were excellent in 92.3% of MIPO patients and 96.5% of ORIF patients. Ulnar variance was similar in both groups, indicating good alignment and preservation of length. No complications, such as infection or neurovascular injury, were observed in either group. Conclusion In our study, the MIPO technique for radius shaft fractures demonstrated clinically favorable outcomes without major complications. However, further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods is needed to fully evaluate the utility and long-term outcomes of the MIPO technique for radius shaft fractures. Clinical trial number Not applicable.