External versus internal fixation for bicondylar tibial plateau fractures: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether external fixation or open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) is optimal for patients with bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase Classic, Embase, AMED, the Cochrane Library, Open Grey, Orthopaedic Proceedings, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Current Controlled Trials, US National Institute for Health Trials Registry, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The search was conducted on 3rd October 2014 and no language limits were applied. Inclusion criteria were all clinical study designs comparing external fixation with open reduction internal fixation of bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. Studies of only one treatment modality were excluded, as were those that included unicondylar tibial plateau fractures. Treatment effects from studies reporting dichotomous outcomes were summarised using odds ratios. Continuous outcomes were converted to standardized mean differences to assess the treatment effect, and inverse variance methods used to combine data. A fixed effect model was used for meta-analyses. RESULTS: Patients undergoing external fixation were more likely to have returned to preinjury activities by six and twelve months (P = 0.030) but not at 24 months follow-up. However, external fixation was complicated by a greater number of infections (OR 2.59, 95 % CI 1.25-5.36, P = 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of deep infection, venous thromboembolism, compartment syndrome, or need for re-operation between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Although external fixation and ORIF are associated with different complication profiles, both are acceptable strategies for managing bicondylar tibial plateau fractures

Role of high tibial osteotomy in chronic injuries of posterior cruciate ligament and posterolateral corner

High tibial osteotomy (HTO) is a surgical procedure used to change the mechanical weight-bearing axis and alter the loads carried through the knee. Conventional indications for HTO are medial compartment osteoarthritis and varus malalignment of the knee causing pain and dysfunction. Traditionally, knee instability associated with varus thrust has been considered a contraindication. However, today the indications include patients with chronic ligament deficiencies and malalignment, because an HTO procedure can change not only the coronal but also the sagittal plane of the knee. The sagittal plane has generally been ignored in HTO literature, but its modification has a significant impact on biomechanics and joint stability. Indeed, decreased posterior tibial slope causes posterior tibia translation and helps the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient knee. Vice versa, increased tibial slope causes anterior tibia translation and helps the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL)-deficient knee. A review of literature shows that soft tissue procedures alone are often unsatisfactory for chronic posterior instability if alignment is not corrected. Since limb alignment is the most important factor to consider in lower limb reconstructive surgery, diagnosis and treatment of limb malalignment should not be ignored in management of chronic ligamentous instabilities. This paper reviews the effects of chronic posterior instability and tibial slope alteration on knee and soft tissues, in addition to planning and surgical technique for chronic posterior and posterolateral instability with HTO