Tm Wong

Sliding hip screw versus sliding helical blade for intertrochanteric fractures: a propensity score-matched case control study.

The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation. In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group. Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation. The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398–404.The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation. In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group. Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation. The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398-404.

Important tips and numbers on using the cortical step and diameter difference sign in assessing femoral rotation – Should we abandon the technique?

Rotational malalignment during femoral nailing is common despite having various intraoperative assessment methods. The cortical step sign and diameter difference sign (CSSDDS) is commonly used because of convenience, yet it lack proper scientific scrutiny and is thought to be error prone. Using a software algorithm, cross-sectional dimensions were obtained from CT scans of 22 intact adult femurs at the proximal, mid and distal diaphysis. With multiple simulated scenarios the sensitivity of CSSDDS was comprehensively determined at all possible C-arm positions. At rotation, cortical width changed most significantly around the thick linea aspera and femoral diameter changed most significantly at the sagittal plane. At 15 degrees of rotation and with the linea aspera in view, CSSDDS thresholds of 0.3mm, 0.6mm and 1mm had sensitivities of 98.8%, 93.1% and 73.8%. With the linea aspera masked behind the femur and out of view, the sensitivities significantly deteriorated to 96.4%, 77.1% and 44.1% respectively. CSSDDS is sufficiently sensitive only when strict rules are followed. It is imperative that the operator position the image intensifier in lateral view under proper magnification so that steps of less than 0.6mm around the linea aspera may be appreciated.

Seasonal Variation in Hip Fracture Mortality

Objectives: This study aims to identify if wintertime surgery increases the mortality of the patients after hip fracture operations. Design: Retrospective observational cohort study. Setting: The data for this citywide retrospective observational cohort study came from Clinical Data Analysis Reporting System. Patient: This study included 35 409 patients with hip fracture operations from July 2005 to December 2013. Main Outcome Measures: Cox regression hazard model was used to estimate the independent effect of operation being performed in winter on the hazard of mortality. The hazard model included covariates found to be independent predictors of mortality: age, sex, surgical delay, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Results: There was a seasonal variation with more hip fracture operations happening in the winter months. The 1-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 5-year mortality were 3%, 11%, 17%, and 47%, respectively. Operation performed in winter was associated with a higher hazard of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.040; 95% confidence interval: 1.010-1.072; P = .009). The HR was greater with male sex (HR 1.786; P = .000), advanced age (≥85 years old: HR 2.819; P = .000), the longer surgical delay (HR 1.018; P = .000), and higher CCI (severe CCI group: HR 2.963; P = .000). Conclusion: Wintertime hip fracture surgery was associated with an increased hazard of mortality after adjusting for other known risk factors affecting mortality post hip fracture operations.

Fixing a fractured arthrodesed hip with rapid prototype templating and minimal invasive plate osteosynthesis

CASE: We present an elderly lady with an intertrochanteric fracture of a previously fused hip. A 3D printed model of her pelvis and femur was used for implant templating before surgery. Minimal invasive fixation was performed with a spanning reversed distal femur locking plate without the need for removal of the previous implant. Multiple long locking screws were placed in the supra-acetabular region. The patient had union in 4 months, return to function and no complication. Conclusion: The technique allowed us to optimize implant selection and insert screws safely at difficult trajectories using minimal invasive surgery.

Infection after fracture osteosynthesis – Part II: Treatment

In the first part of this article, we have discussed the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, diagnosis and classification of infection after fracture osteosynthesis with implants, termed here as osteosynthesis-associated infection (OAI). Prolonged antibiotic treatment is usually necessary. Implant retention and maintenance of fracture stability to allow for fracture healing in spite of infection are allowed for OAI. Depending on the severity of infection, status of fracture healing and host status, the treatment follows five common pathways. These are non-operative treatment, debridement with implant retention, conversion of fixation, implant removal and suppression therapy. The decision-making process leading to each treatment pathway and challenging scenarios is discussed in detail.

Infection after fracture osteosynthesis – Part I: Pathogenesis, diagnosis and classification

Bone and surgical site infections after osteosynthesis are notoriously difficult to manage and pose a tremendous burden in fracture management. In this article, we use the term osteosynthesis-associated infection (OAI) to refer to this clinical entity. While relatively few surgically treated fractures become infected, it is challenging to perform a rapid diagnosis. Optimal management strategies are complex and highly customized to each scenario and take into consideration the status of fracture union, the presence of hardware and the degree of mechanical stability. At present, a high level of relevant evidence is unavailable; most findings presented in the literature are based on laboratory work and non-randomized clinical studies. We present this overview of OAI in two parts: an examination of recent literature concerning OAI pathogenesis, diagnosis and classification and a review of treatment options.

Restoration of Humeral Bone Stock Two Years After Internal Fixation of a Periprosthetic Fracture with a Loose Stem

Case: We describe 2 patients who sustained a periprosthetic humeral fracture with a loosened long-stemmed Coonrad-Morrey total elbow prosthesis. As noted in the literature, the success rate for a major revision with use of strut grafts is around 70%; therefore, both cases were managed without revision of the prosthesis. A submuscular locking plate was placed following typical fracture fixation principles. Screws that interfered with the humeral stem and the distal flange stabilized both the distal fragment and the humeral stem. Conclusion: At 2 years postoperatively, both fractures had healed, with increased endosteal bone stock. In each case, the prosthesis was successfully salvaged, and radiographic reconstitution of the implant-bone interface was noted after 2 years.

Sliding hip screw versus slidinghelical blade for intertrochanteric fractures

The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation. In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group. Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation. The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398–404.The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation. In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group. Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation. The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398-404.

Sliding hip screw versus sliding helical blade for intertrochanteric fractures

The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation. In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group. Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation. The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398–404.The spiral blade modification of the Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) was designed for superior biomechanical fixation in the osteoporotic femoral head. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes and in particular the incidence of loss of fixation. In a series of 197 consecutive patients over the age of 50 years treated with DHS-blades (blades) and 242 patients treated with conventional DHS (screw) for AO/OTA 31.A1 or A2 intertrochanteric fractures were identified from a prospectively compiled database in a level 1 trauma centre. Using propensity score matching, two groups comprising 177 matched patients were compiled and radiological and clinical outcomes compared. In each group there were 66 males and 111 females. Mean age was 83.6 (54 to 100) for the conventional DHS group and 83.8 (52 to 101) for the blade group. Loss of fixation occurred in two blades and 13 DHSs. None of the blades had observable migration while nine DHSs had gross migration within the femoral head before the fracture healed. There were two versus four implant cut-outs respectively and one side plate pull-out in the DHS group. There was no significant difference in mortality and eventual walking ability between the groups. Multiple logistic regression suggested that poor reduction (odds ratio (OR) 11.49, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.45 to 90.9, p = 0.021) and fixation by DHS (OR 15.85, 95%CI 2.50 to 100.3, p = 0.003) were independent predictors of loss of fixation. The spiral blade design may decrease the risk of implant migration in the femoral head but does not reduce the incidence of cut-out and reoperation. Reduction of the fracture is of paramount importance since poor reduction was an independent predictor for loss of fixation regardless of the implant being used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:398-404.