Regional and experiential differences in surgeon preference for the treatment of cervical facet injuries: a case study survey with the AO Spine Cervical Classification Validation Group

Purpose: The management of cervical facet dislocation injuries remains controversial. The main purpose of this investigation was to identify whether a surgeon’s geographic location or years in practice influences their preferred management of traumatic cervical facet dislocation injuries. Methods: A survey was sent to 272 AO Spine members across all geographic regions and with a variety of practice experience. The survey included clinical case scenarios of cervical facet dislocation injuries and asked responders to select preferences among various diagnostic and management options. Results: A total of 189 complete responses were received. Over 50% of responding surgeons in each region elected to initiate management of cervical facet dislocation injuries with an MRI, with 6 case exceptions. Overall, there was considerable agreement between American and European responders regarding management of these injuries, with only 3 cases exhibiting a significant difference. Additionally, results also exhibited considerable management agreement between those with ≤ 10 and > 10 years of practice experience, with only 2 case exceptions noted. Conclusion: More than half of responders, regardless of geographical location or practice experience, identified MRI as a screening imaging modality when managing cervical facet dislocation injuries, regardless of the status of the spinal cord and prior to any additional intervention. Additionally, a majority of surgeons would elect an anterior approach for the surgical management of these injuries. The study found overall agreement in management preferences of cervical facet dislocation injuries around the globe

Musculoskeletal infection in orthopaedic trauma: Assessment of the 2018 international consensus meeting on musculoskeletal infection

Fracture-related infections (FRIs) are among the most common complications following fracture fixation, and they have a huge economic and functional impact on patients. Because consensus guidelines with respect to prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of this major complication are scarce, delegates from different countries gathered in Philadelphia in July 2018 as part of the Second International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection. This paper summarizes the discussion and recommendations from that consensus meeting, using the Delphi technique, with a focus on FRIs. A standardized definition that was based on diagnostic criteria was endorsed, which will hopefully improve reporting and research on FRIs in the future. Furthermore, this paper provides a grade of evidence (strong, moderate, limited, or consensus) for strategies and practices that prevent and treat infection. The grade of evidence is based on the quality of evidence as utilized by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. The guidelines presented herein focus not only on the appropriate use of antibiotics, but also on practices for the timing of fracture fixation, soft-tissue coverage, and bone defect and hardware management. We hope that this summary as well as the full document by the International Consensus Group are utilized by those who are charged with musculoskeletal care internationally to optimize their management strategies for the prevention and treatment of FRIs. COPYRIGHT © 2020 BY THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY, INCORPORATE