True antiglide fixation of Danis-Weber B fibula fractures has lower rates of removal of hardware

Injury ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham J. DeKeyser ◽  
Megan L. Campbell ◽  
Patrick J. Kellam ◽  
Justin M. Haller ◽  
David L. Rothberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Duc M. Nguyen ◽  
Allison L. Boden ◽  
Megan K. Allen ◽  
Tamara John ◽  
Greg M. Knoll ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare radiographic outcomes in patients treated with the traditional method of open reduction, internal fixation (ORIF) and casting as compared with those treated with ORIF and dorsal spanning plate (DSP) fixation. We hypothesized that the application of a DSP to augment the repair of perilunate dislocations would maintain carpal stability while also allowing early loadbearing through the carpus. Materials and Methods This is a retrospective radiographic review of patients with a perilunate dislocation, who were treated with ORIF and casting or ORIF with a dorsal spanning plate between 2012–2018. Scapholunate (SL) and lunotriquetral (LT) intervals were measured immediately after the index surgery and after scheduled hardware removal. A total of 28 patients met inclusion criteria, including 13 cases with traditional treatment and 15 cases with dorsal spanning plate fixation. Results Comparison of the change in SL interval and LT interval between the 13 patients in the traditional treatment group and the 15 patients in the DSP group did not yield any clinically relevant variation after statistical analysis. Both groups demonstrated minimal change in the radiographic markers of carpal stability from postoperative radiographs obtained immediately after the index repair and after the removal of hardware. Conclusion DSP fixation placed at the index surgery with early loadbearing for the treatment of perilunate dislocation is not inferior to the current mainstay of treatment consisting of cast immobilization without loadbearing and does not confer any increased carpal instability in comparison to ORIF and casting.


Cartilage ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 194760352092477
Author(s):  
Avinesh Agarwalla ◽  
Joseph N. Liu ◽  
Grant H. Garcia ◽  
Anirudh K. Gowd ◽  
Richard N. Puzzitiello ◽  
...  

Purpose. The aims of this study were to (1) examine the timeline of return to sport (RTS) following isolated lateral opening wedge distal femoral osteotomy (DFO), (2) evaluate the degree of participation on RTS, and (3) identify risk factors for failure to RTS. Methods. Nineteen consecutive patients undergoing isolated lateral opening wedge DFO were reviewed retrospectively at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. Patients completed a sports questionnaire, visual analogue scale for pain (VAS-Pain), Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE), and a satisfaction questionnaire. Results. Seventeen patents (89.5%; age 32.1 ± 10.1 years; gender 9 males, 52.9%) were contacted at 7.3 ± 4.4 years (range 2.0-13.8 years). Twelve patients (70.6%) resumed playing ≥1 sport at an average time of 9.5 ± 3.3 months (range 3-12 months). Of these 12 patients, 6 returned to a lower level of participation (50.0%). Seven patients (41.2%) had returned to the operating room for further surgery, which included removal of hardware (5.9%) and total knee arthroplasty (5.9%). The average VAS-Pain, SANE, and Marx scores were 3.4 ± 2.6 (range 0-8), 56.2 ± 18.7 (range 20-85), and 5.0 ± 5.3 (range 0-16), respectively. Fourteen patients (82.4%) were at least somewhat satisfied with their procedure. Conclusion. In patients with isolated lateral compartment osteoarthritis and valgus deformity, lateral opening wedge DFO allows 70.6% of patients to RTS by 9.5 ± 3.3 months. However, most patients may be unable to return to their presymptomatic level of function. Patient expectations regarding RTS can be appropriately managed with adequate preoperative patient education. Level of Evidence. IV, case series.


2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-643 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara L. Sedney ◽  
Scott D. Daffner ◽  
Jared J. Stefanko ◽  
Hesham Abdelfattah ◽  
Sanford E. Emery ◽  
...  

OBJECT As spinal fusions become more common and more complex, so do the sequelae of these procedures, some of which remain poorly understood. The authors report on a series of patients who underwent removal of hardware after CT-proven solid fusion, confirmed by intraoperative findings. These patients later developed a spontaneous fracture of the fusion mass that was not associated with trauma. A series of such patients has not previously been described in the literature. METHODS An unfunded, retrospective review of the surgical logs of 3 fellowship-trained spine surgeons yielded 7 patients who suffered a fracture of a fusion mass after hardware removal. Adult patients from the West Virginia University Department of Orthopaedics who underwent hardware removal in the setting of adjacent-segment disease (ASD), and subsequently experienced fracture of the fusion mass through the uninstrumented segment, were studied. The medical records and radiological studies of these patients were examined for patient demographics and comorbidities, initial indication for surgery, total number of surgeries, timeline of fracture occurrence, risk factors for fracture, as well as sagittal imbalance. RESULTS All 7 patients underwent hardware removal in conjunction with an extension of fusion for ASD. All had CT-proven solid fusion of their previously fused segments, which was confirmed intraoperatively. All patients had previously undergone multiple operations for a variety of indications, 4 patients were smokers, and 3 patients had osteoporosis. Spontaneous fracture of the fusion mass occurred in all patients and was not due to trauma. These fractures occurred 4 months to 4 years after hardware removal. All patients had significant sagittal imbalance of 13–15 cm. The fracture level was L-5 in 6 of the 7 patients, which was the first uninstrumented level caudal to the newly placed hardware in all 6 of these patients. Six patients underwent surgery due to this fracture. CONCLUSIONS The authors present a case series of 7 patients who underwent surgery for ASD after a remote fusion. These patients later developed a fracture of the fusion mass after hardware removal from their previously successfully fused segment. All patients had a high sagittal imbalance and had previously undergone multiple spinal operations. The development of a spontaneous fracture of the fusion mass may be related to sagittal imbalance. Consideration should be given to reimplanting hardware for these patients, even across good fusions, to prevent spontaneous fracture of these areas if the sagittal imbalance is not corrected.


Injury ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (12) ◽  
pp. 2619-2624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Barquet ◽  
Peter V. Giannoudis ◽  
Andrés Gelink

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Prediger ◽  
Tim Mathes ◽  
Christian Probst ◽  
Dawid Pieper

Abstract Background Osteosynthesis is the internal fixation of fractures or osteotomy by mechanical devices (also called hardware). After bone healing there are two options: One is to remove the hardware the other is to leave it in place. The elective removal of the hardware in asymptomatic patients is controversially discussed. We performed a scoping review to assess if there is evidence on the removal of hardware in patients without medical indication (elective) compared to retaining of the hardware. In addition we wanted to find out which type of evidence is available. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in Pubmed, Embase, EconLit and Cinahl (11/2019). We included studies comparing asymptomatic patients with an internal fixation in the lower or upper extremities whose internal fixation was electively (without medical indication) removed or retained. We did not restrict inclusion to any effectiveness/safety outcome and considered any comparative study design as eligible. Study selection and data extraction was performed by two reviewers. Results We identified 13476 titles/abstracts. Of these we obtained 115 full-text publications which were assessed in detail against the inclusion criteria. We included 13 studies (1 RCT, 4 cohort studies, 8 before-after studies) and identified two ongoing RCTs. Nine assessed the removal of the internal fixation in the lower extremities (six of these syndesmotic screws in ankle fractures only) and two in the upper extremities. One study analysed the effectiveness of hardware removal in children in all types of extremity fractures. Outcomes reported included various scales measuring functionality, pain and clinical assessments (e.g. range of motion) and health-related quality of life. Conclusions We identified 13 studies that evaluated the effectiveness/safety of hardware removal in the extremities. Moreover we found two ongoing RCTs. The follow up times were short, the patient groups small and the ways of measurement differed. In general clinical heterogeneity was high. Evidence on selected topics e.g. syndesmotic screw removal is available nevertheless not sufficient to allow a meaningful assessment of effectiveness.


2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 252-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kempland C. Walley ◽  
Kurt J. Hofmann ◽  
Brian T. Velasco ◽  
John Y. Kwon

Background. While trans-syndesmotic fixation with metal screws is considered the gold standard in treating syndesmotic injuries, controversy exists regarding the need and timing of postoperative screw removal. Formal recommendations have not been well established in the literature and clinical practice is highly variable in this regard. The purpose of this systematic review is to critically examine the most recent literature regarding syndesmotic screw removal in order to provide surgeons an evidence-based approach to management of these injuries. Methods. The Cochrane Library and PubMed Medline databases were explored using search terms for syndesmosis and screw removal between October 1, 2010 and June 1, 2016. Results. A total of 9 studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 8 retrospective cohort studies) were found that described the outcomes of either retained or removed syndesmotic screws. Overall, there was no difference in functional, clinical or radiographic outcomes in patients who had their syndesmotic screw removed. There was a higher likelihood of recurrent syndesmotic diastasis when screws were removed between 6 and 8 weeks. There was a higher rate of postoperative infections when syndesmotic screws were removed without administering preoperative antibiotics. Conclusion. Removal of syndesmotic screws is advisable mainly in cases of patient complaints related to the other implanted perimalleolar hardware or malreduction of the syndesmosis after at least 8 weeks postoperatively. Broken or loose screws should not be removed routinely unless causing symptoms. Antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended on removal. Radiographs should be routinely obtained immediately prior to removal and formal discussions should be had with patients prior to surgery to discuss management options if a broken screw is unexpectedly encountered intraoperatively. Radiographs and/or computed tomography imaging should be obtained after syndesmotic screw removal when indicated for known syndesmotic malreduction. Levels of Evidence: Level IV: Systematic review


2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 708-714 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Kampa ◽  
A. Al-Beer ◽  
T. Axelrod

Surgery may be indicated in treating Madelung’s deformity and numerous techniques have been described. This study reports the early clinical and radiological results of a radial biplanar opening wedge osteotomy and modified Darrach procedure, using the excised ulnar head as a trapezoidal bone graft. Between 2000 and 2008, five adult wrists with symptomatic Madelung’s deformity underwent surgery. All patients were female, with an average age at surgery of 34 years. Assessment included range of movement, grip strength, DASH scores and radiological imaging. All patients improved both subjectively and objectively with regards to pain, functional range of movement, and appearance at mean follow-up of 55 months (range 14—113). All osteotomies united. One patient required removal of hardware for restricted rotation. This technique provided satisfactory results that are comparable to other studies, and avoids the use of iliac crest bone graft.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011419S0011
Author(s):  
Jorge Briceño ◽  
Kristen L. Stupay ◽  
Bruno Moura ◽  
Brian Velasco ◽  
John Y. Kwon

Category: Midfoot/Forefoot Introduction/Purpose: Surgical outcomes of Lisfranc injuries depend on achieving an anatomical and stable reduction. Severity of injury defines the best treatment option and surgical techniques vary from internal fixation to arthrodesis. While effective, limitations of commonly used metal implants include iatrogenic articular cartilage damage, implant breakage and need for implant removal. Additionally, these surgical techniques do not preserve tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint motion. This report demonstrates a novel, easy and inexpensive surgical technique to stabilize TMT joint instability utilizing “flexible fixation” utilized in a case series of 8 patients. Methods: A dorsal approach over the second metatarsal is performed in a standard fashion, after careful dissection and direct visualization of the joint, the TMT joint is anatomically reduced and stabilized with k-wires avoiding damage of the cartilage. Two 2.7 or 3.5 screws with washers are placed from dorsal to plantar in the base of the metatarsal and in the respective tarsal bone to serve as posts. A non-absorbable #2 FiberWire (Arthrex, Naples, Florida) is looped 3 to 5 times in a Figure-of-8 fashion around the screws beneath the washers, tensioned, knotted and secured by tightening the screws. Repeat fluoroscopic stress views are performed to ensure stability of the TMT joint. Results: N/A Conclusion: For selected patients with Lisfranc injuries demonstrating no significant comminution or gross instability, flexible fixation using sutures is a promising technique due its potential benefits over trans-articular screws or bridge-plating techniques. This technique is inexpensive, avoids iatrogenic cartilage damage and subsequent removal of hardware.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (04) ◽  
pp. 441-446
Author(s):  
Rohit Singhal ◽  
Nisarg Mehta ◽  
Phil Brown ◽  
Graham Cheung ◽  
Daniel J. Brown

Background: Ulnar shortening osteotomy (USO) is a well-established procedure for ulnar impaction syndrome. Various types of osteotomies have been described. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the results of transverse osteotomy (TO) fixed with a small fragment dynamic compression plate (Synthes, Pennsylvania, USA), to oblique osteotomy (OO) fixed with a procedure specific plate and instrumentation system (Acumed LLC, Oregon, USA). A total of 39 patients underwent TO and 62 patients underwent OO between 2007 and 2016. The main outcomes compared were rate of union, duration of radiological healing, implant removal rate and other complications. Results: The two groups were comparable with regards to demographics, side operated and smoking status (p > 0.05). Amongst the TO group; 36 out of 39 patients (92.3%) achieved union, 3 patients (7.7%) developed non-union. Six out of the 36 healed TO (16.6%) required removal of hardware due to implant-related pain. No other complications were recorded amongst TO group needing surgical intervention. Amongst the OO group, 2 of the early cohort of 62 patients (3.2%) sustained acute failure of the metalwork due to technical error. One of the remaining 60 patients (1.6%) developed non-union giving an overall union rate of 95.2%. Two patients out of 59 healed OO (3.3%) required removal of hardware. Conclusions: Although there were 2 early failures, there was a trend towards improved union rate with OO, but this did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05). There was a significantly higher hardware removal rate recorded in TO group (p = 0.023). The OO showed shorter duration for radiological healing than TO (p < 0.05). USO performed with an OO and fixed with procedure specific plate has lower implant removal rate, a shorter duration for radiological healing and comparable union rate to TO fixed with DCP, but needs careful attention to detail.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document