Can Clinical and Surgical Parameters Be Combined to Predict How Long It Will Take a Tibia Fracture to Heal? A Prospective Multicentre Observational Study: The FRACTING Study

Background. Healing of tibia fractures occurs over a wide time range of months, with a number of risk factors contributing to prolonged healing. In this prospective, multicentre, observational study, we investigated the capability of FRACTING (tibia FRACTure prediction healING days) score, calculated soon after tibia fracture treatment, to predict healing time. Methods. The study included 363 patients. Information on patient health, fracture morphology, and surgical treatment adopted were combined to calculate the FRACTING score. Fractures were considered healed when the patient was able to fully weight-bear without pain. Results. 319 fractures (88%) healed within 12 months from treatment. Forty-four fractures healed after 12 months or underwent a second surgery. FRACTING score positively correlated with days to healing: r = 0.63 (p < 0.0001). Average score value was 7.3 \ub1 2.5; ROC analysis showed strong reliability of the score in separating patients healing before versus after 6 months: AUC = 0.823. Conclusions. This study shows that the FRACTING score can be employed both to predict months needed for fracture healing and to identify immediately after treatment patients at risk of prolonged healing. In patients with high score values, new pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments to enhance osteogenesis could be tested selectively, which may finally result in reduced disability time and health cost savings

Is it really advantageous to operate proximal femoral fractures within 48 h from diagnosis? – A multicentric retrospective study exploiting COVID pandemic-related delays in time to surgery

Objectives: Hip fractures in the elderly are common injuries that need timely surgical management. Since the beginning of the pandemic, patients with a proximal femoral fracture (PFF) experienced a delay in time to surgery. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate a possible variation in mortality in patients with PFF when comparing COVID-19 negative versus positive. Methods: This is a multicentric and retrospective study including 3232 patients with PFF who underwent surgical management. The variables taken into account were age, gender, the time elapsed between arrival at the emergency room and intervention, pre-operative American Society of Anesthesiology score, pre-operative cardiovascular and respiratory disease, and 10-day/1-month/6-month mortality. For 2020, we had an additional column, “COVID-19 swab positivity.” Results: COVID-19 infection represents an independent mortality risk factor in patients with PFFs. Despite the delay in time-to-surgery occurring in 2020, no statistically significant variation in terms of mortality was detected. Within our sample, a statistically significant difference was not detected in terms of mortality at 6 months, in patients operated within and beyond 48 h, as well as no difference between those operated within or after 12/24/72 h. The mortality rate among subjects with PFF who tested positive for COVID-19 was statistically significantly higher than in patients with PFF who tested. COVID-19 positivity resulted in an independent factor for mortality after PFF. Conclusion: Despite the most recent literature recommending operating PFF patients as soon as possible, no significant difference in mortality was found among patients operated before or after 48 h from diagnosis

One-stage procedure for open tibial fractures: feasible without orthoplastic surgery?

Background: Open tibial fractures are mostly the result of high-energy traumas and often involve severe injuries with extensive bone and soft tissue loss, damage of muscles and neurovascular structures. Over recent- years, - the growth of Ortho-Plastic teams, as a well-coordinated bone, joint and soft tissue treatment, contributed to change the approach to these fractures and to achieve higher successful results in lower limb salvage. Unfortunately, many hospitals cannot benefit of a combined team in emergency, and the orthopedic surgeon is forced to manage personally these kinds of traumas. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all the open tibial fractures treated at our Orthopaedic Department over the last 10 years, in order to assess the treatments performed (one-stage fixation with Intramedullary Nailing or Open Reduction Internal Fixation - ORIF, versus two/multiple-stage fixation with temporary External Fixation followed by nailing or ORIF) and the differences in the outcome between the different methods. Purpose: Based on our experience and review of the literature, the purpose of this paper is to define what cases can be managed by a single-stage orthopaedic approach, and when the orthopaedist should lay down his arms in favor of other specialties

Periprosthetic femoral re-fractures pathogenesis, classification, and surgical implications

Periprosthetic femoral re-fractures (PFRFs) represent an emerging challenge for orthopaedic surgeons, since their incidence is growing in the last years, but very few experiences about their management have been currently published. The present study aims to (1) introduce, for the first time, an etiologic classification for PRFRs and (2) to provide surgical and pharmacological tips for the correct management of these injuries. Periprosthetic femoral re-fractures (PFRFs) could be classified into traumatic-PFRFs (T-PFRFs) and pathological-PFRFs (P-PFRFs). T-PFRFs, i.e. the “true” periprosthetic re-fractures, present as new fracture lines occurring proximally or distally to a previous periprosthetic fracture, that has correctly healed. They are generally unpredictable injuries but, in selected cases, it is possible to predict them by analyzing the construct used in the treatment of the previous periprosthetic fracture. P-PFRFs, on the other hand, define re-fractures occurring on a previous periprosthetic non-union or delayed union: the new fracture line appears in the same district of the old one. According to the etiologic factors influencing the P-PFRFs pathogenesis, it is possible to define re-fractures caused by mechanical failures, biological failures, septic failures and multifactorial failures, i.e., a combination of the previously mentioned concerns. A successful postoperative outcome, following the surgical management of PFRFs, requires the correct identification of all the underlying causes, which should be promptly and appropriately managed

Skeletal System Biology and Smoke Damage: From Basic Science to Medical Clinic

Cigarette smoking has a negative impact on the skeletal system, as it reduces bone mass and increases fracture risk through its direct or indirect effects on bone remodeling. Recent evidence demonstrates that smoking causes an imbalance in bone turnover, making bone vulnerable to osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Moreover, cigarette smoking is known to have deleterious effects on fracture healing, as a positive correlation between the daily number of cigarettes smoked and years of exposure has been shown, even though the underlying mechanisms are not fully understood. It is also well known that smoking causes several medical/surgical complications responsible for longer hospital stays and a consequent increase in the consumption of resources. Smoking cessation is, therefore, highly advisable to prevent the onset of bone metabolic disease. However, even with cessation, some of the consequences appear to continue for decades afterwards. Based on this evidence, the aim of our review was to evaluate the impact of smoking on the skeletal system, especially on bone fractures, and to identify the pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for the impairment of fracture healing. Since smoking is a major public health concern, understanding the association between cigarette smoking and the occurrence of bone disease is necessary in order to identify potential new targets for intervention

Evaluation of blood loss and implant alignment after total knee arthroplasty with inertial based extramedullary femoral cutting guide

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare, in terms of blood loss and implant alignment, a new generation of smart extramedullary (EM) cutting guides with the conventional intramedullary (IM) guide for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The hypothesis was that the EM system would result in less blood loss and fewer days of hospitalization, while ensuring equal or higher accuracy in the alignment of the femoral implant. Methods Thirty-six patients were enrolled for the present study: 18 patients underwent TKA using the EM guide and for the other 18 patients the IM guide was used. Preoperative and postoperative X-rays were acquired. The preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin values were compared. Lastly, length of hospital stay was recorded. Results The hemoglobin difference was significantly lower in the EM group. The alignment of the prosthetic femoral implant in the two groups was comparable but all patients in the EM cohort had a final alignment within 3 degrees of range on the frontal view, while 22% of the patients in the IM cohort had a final alignment exceeding 3 degrees of range. The mean hospitalization duration showed no significant difference between groups, though EM group showed 1.6 days less compared with IM group. Conclusions The inertial-based EM guide system couldbeusefulfordecreasingblood loss compared with conventional guide. This device tended to have better results even in terms of accuracy, but this difference was not significant. Level of Evidence This is a level II, prospective cohort study

Internal fixation of acetabular quadrilateral plate fractures in elderly patients: Could the fracture reduction quality affect their functional recovery?

Background: Osteoporotic acetabular fractures frequently involve the quadrilateral plate (QP), a flat and thin bone constituting the medial wall of the acetabulum. This study aims to assess the impact of the quality of osteoporotic QP fractures reduction on the patients' functional recovery, at 24 months follow-up. Methods: Patients referring with osteoporotic QP fractures to our Level I trauma centre were prospectively recruited. Inclusion criteria: patients aged 60 years old or older; osteoporosis, defined as Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) T-score ≤ - 2.5; acute acetabular fracture; anatomic or good fracture reduction according to Matta on postoperative CT. Exclusion criteria: moderate cognitive impairment (defined as Mini-Mental State Examination < 19); a history of malignant neoplasm; concomitant fractures in other sites; traumatic head injury; lower limb joint prostheses; patient not able to walk independently before trauma; poor fracture reduction, according to Matta, on postoperative CT. All the QP fractures were surgically managed. After surgery, the reduction of each QP fracture was classified as anatomical (displacement 0-1 mm), good (displacement 2-3 mm) and poor (displacement > 3 mm) on postoperative CT. Based on this classification: patients with a poor fracture reduction were excluded from this study, patients with an anatomical reduction were recruited in Group-A and patients with a good reduction in Group-B. All the patients underwent a clinical and radiographic 24-months follow-up. Results: 68 patients (males 38; females 30; mean age 68.6 years old; range 60-79) were finally included in in the study. No cases of open fractures or concomitant pelvic ring fractures were observed. Based on the post-operative CT, 39 patients showed an anatomic fracture reduction (Group-A) while the remaining 29 patients revealed a good fracture reduction (Group-B). Complication rates and mean clinical scores showed no significant differences between groups, at 24-months follow-up. Conclusions: In this study, the functional recovery at 24 months follow-up showed no significant differences in elderly patients with QP fracture undergoing anatomical reconstruction (displacement 0-1 mm) compared to patients receiving a good QP fracture reconstruction (displacement ≤ 3 mm)

Overview of fracture liaison services in the UK and Europe:standards, model of care, funding, and challenges

Fragility fractures represent a growing global problem, including in the United Kingdom and European countries. Reports demonstrate the benefits of national guidance and organized fragility fracture programs through fracture liaison services to deliver care to patients who sustain these injuries. The challenge of assembling multidisciplinary teams, providing routine screening of appropriate patients, and monitoring therapies where there is a known compliance problem, remains an obstacle to the success of fragility fracture treatment programs to all. Efforts should continue to introduce and maintain fracture liaison services through coordinated national approaches and advanced systems