Trauma - RC Q's Flashcards
RC 2018 LRINEC components for nec fasc? High score assx with which organism? Comorbidities that increase risk of NF?
<ul> <li><b>Score >6 assx with Pseudomonas Aeruginosa</b></li><li><b>s</b>core > 6 has PPV of 92% of having necrotizing fasciitis </li> <ul> <li>think: CBC (Hb, WBC), lytes (Na, Cr), infx (CRP, glu)</li><li>CRP (mg/L) </li> <ul> <li>≥150: 4 points</li><li><150: 0 points</li> </ul> <li>WBC count (×103/mm3) </li> <ul> <li><15: 0 points</li> <li>15–25: 1 point</li> <li>>25: 2 points</li> </ul> <li>Hemoglobin (g/dL) </li> <ul> <li>>13.5: 0 points</li> <li>11–13.5: 1 point</li> <li><11: 2 points</li> </ul> <li>Sodium (mmol/L) </li> <ul> <li><135: 2 points</li> </ul> <li>Creatinine (umol/L) </li> <ul> <li>>141: 2 points</li> </ul> <li>Glucose (mmol/L) </li> <ul> <li>>10: 1 point</li></ul></ul><li>Comorbidities:</li><li>DM</li> <li>Age</li> <li>Obesity</li> <li>AIDS</li> <li>Cancer</li> <li>PVD</li> <li>IV drug use</li> <li>Alcohol abuse</li> <li>Chronic immunosuppresion</li></ul>
<div>Notes</div>
<ul><li>Mortality 10% (6-76%) - RFs: time from admission to debridement, age>60, Streptococcal toxic shock, immunocompromised</li><li><div>Triad: swelling, erythema, pain (out of proportion) - most sensitive symptom</div></li><li><div>antibiotics<ul><li>initial antibiotics<ul><li>start empirically with penicillin, clindamycin, metronidazole, and and aminoglycoside</li></ul></li><li>definitive antibiotics<ul><li>penicillin G<ul><li>for strep or clostridium</li></ul></li><li>imipenemordoripenemormeropenem<ul><li>for polymicrobial</li></ul></li><li>addvancomycin<strong></strong>or<strong></strong>daptomycin<ul><li>if MRSA suspected</li></ul></li></ul></li></ul></div></li></ul>
<div><div> <div><u>Type</u></div> <div><u>Organism</u></div> <div><u>Characteristics</u></div> <div>Type 1</div> <div></div> <div>Polymicrobial</div> <div>Typical 4-5aerobic and anaerobicspecies cultured:</div> <div>•non-Group A Strep</div> <div>•anaerobes including Clostridia</div> <div>•facultative anaerobes</div> <div>•enterobacteria</div> <div>•Synergistic virulence between organisms</div> <div>• Most common (80-90%)</div> <div>• Seen in immunosuppressed (diabetics and cancer patients)</div> <div>• Postop abdominal and perineal infections</div> <div>Type 2</div> <div></div> <div>Monomicrobial</div> <div>• Group A β-hemolyticStreptococciis most common organism isolated</div> <div>• 5% of cases</div> <div>• Seen in healthy patients</div> <div>• Extremities</div> <div>Can cause infx within 24hrs of surgery</div> <div>Type 3</div> <div>Marine Vibrio vulnificus</div> <div>(gram negative rods)</div> <div>++ virulent</div> <div>• Marine exposure</div> <div>Type 4</div> <div>MRSA</div> <div></div><div><br></br></div> </div></div>
<div>RC 2012, 2011 - Distal radius; all of the following are risk factors for failure of non-op treatment except</div>
<div>A. Age > 80 </div>
<div>B. Dorsal angulation</div>
<div>C. Metaphyseal Comminution </div>
<div>D. Radial shortening</div>
B.<div><br></br></div><div><div>Mackenney, McQueen (JBJS 2006) Prediction of instability in distal radius fractures</div> <ul> <li>Patient age, metaphyseal comminution of the fracture and ulnar variance were most consistent predictors of radiographic outcome</li> <li>Dorsal angulation not found to be a significant predictor</li></ul></div>
<div>RC 2018 - Regarding clavicle fractures, all have been shown to increase nonunion rates EXCEPT?</div>
<ol> <li>Fracture displacement</li> <li>Increasing age</li> <li>Female gender</li> <li>Ipsilateral scapula fracture</li></ol>
<div><div>RC 2014, 2015 What is a risk factor for mid-shaft clavicle non-union:</div> <div>A. Scapula fracture</div> <div>B. Male</div> <div>C. Younger age</div> <div>D. Degree of displacement</div></div>
<div>RC 2018:D</div>
<div>RC 2014: D</div>
<div><br></br></div>
Pt: female, age>60<div># pattern: displacement > 1.5cm, comminution</div>
RC 2013 - What has the highest chance of a clavicle non union <ul> <li>A. proximal 1/3 clavicle</li> <li>B. Middle 1/3 clavicle</li> <li>C. Distal 1/3 clavicle lateral to CC ligaments</li> <li>D. Distal 1/3 medial to CC ligaments</li></ul>
“D. Lateral 1/3rd - medial to CC ligament (type 2)<div>(lateral to CC is often undisplaced - type 1)</div><div><br></br></div><div>Nonunion rate 28-75% but only 20-34% are symptomatic</div><div><br></br></div><div><img></img><br></br></div>”
<div>RC 2013, 12, 11 - Clavicle fracture; what is NOT indication to fix?</div>
<div>A. Grade III open</div>
<div>B. Floating Shoulder</div>
<div>C. 5 mm displaced lateral clavicle</div>
<div>D. 1.5 cm shortening</div>
<div></div>
<div>Answer: C</div>
<div><br></br></div>
Shortening >1.5-2cm<div>Displacement >100%</div><div><br></br></div><div>Open #, polytrauma, early functional recovery</div><div><br></br></div><div>Union times 16 weeks vs 24 weeks</div>
RC 2017 - 50-year-old female with 3 part proximal humerus. All are accepted methods of fixation except <ol> <li>Percutaneous pinning with C-arm imaging</li><li>Open reduction with pins and tension bands</li> <li>ORIF with a plate</li> <li>Hemi</li></ol>
b.<div><ul> <li>CRPP beneficial for 2 part, 3 part, and valgus-impacted 4 part #s</li> <li>ORIF w/ plate = obvious</li> <li>Hemi = good option</li> <li>Open reduction w/ pins and tension band? Never seen it, never mentioned in JAAOS article…</li> <li>ANSWER: B</li></ul></div>
<div>RC 2013 - What is the first priority during reconstruction of a traumatic brachial plexus injury?</div>
<ol> <li>Shoulder stability</li> <li>Wrist extension</li> <li>Protective sensation of the hand</li> <li>Elbow flexion</li></ol>
<div><b>4. elbow flexion</b></div>
<b><div><b><br></br></b></div>1- elbow flexion (MCQ 2013)</b><div>2- Shoulder abduction</div><div>3 - hand sensation</div><div>4- wrist extension/finger flexion</div><div>5- wrist flexion and finger extension</div><div>6- intrinsic hand function</div>
RC 2012 - Components of SSSC?
Glenoid<div>Coracoid</div><div>CC ligaments</div><div>Clavicle</div><div>AC ligaments</div><div>Acromion</div>
<div>RC 2013 - What is true regarding a humeral nail vs. ORIF of a humerus fracture? </div>
<div>A. Humeral nail associated with more shoulder pain </div>
<div>B. ORIF has more malunion </div>
<div>C. Radial nerve palsy is contraindication to humeral nail </div>
<div>D. Varus angulation of 15 degrees is poorly tolerated</div>
<div>A.</div>
<div><br></br></div>
Nail: higher nonunion 3-30%, higher delayed nonunion, re-op 10-40%, <b>shoulder impingement 15%</b><div>Plate: nonunion 3%, re-op 10%</div>
RC Oral - TT for radial nerve palsy?
“Wrist ext: PT -> ECRB<div>thumb ext: PL –> EPL</div><div>finger ext: FCR –> EDC</div><div><br></br></div><div><img></img> <div></div> <img></img> <img></img><br></br></div>”
RC 2017 - Picture of Type IV capitellum fracture (McKee variant), what is true? <ol> <li>The trochlea is intact</li> <li>The capitellum is intact</li> <li>An olecranon osteotomy must be done</li> <li>A direct midline anterior approach is not a good option</li></ol><div><div>RC 2016 - Which of the following is true? </div> <div>A. An olecranon osteotomy is required </div> <div>B. An anterior approach is contra-indicated </div> <div>C. The capitellum is fractured and the trochlea is intact </div> <div>D. The capitellum is intact and the trochlea is fractured</div></div><div><br></br></div><div><div>RC 2012 - Double Bubble XRAY showing coronal shear fracture of elbow. What is true</div> <ol> <li>Need to view trochlea</li> <li>Can fix from an antecubital approach</li> <li>MCL is torn</li> <li>Represents an Isolated capitellar fracture</li></ol></div>
“<div>RC 2017 - D; RC 2016 - B, RC 2012 - A</div><div><br></br></div>Type 1/4 –> ORIF with Posterior incision, lateral approach +/- medial approach or olecranon osteotomy<div><br></br></div><div><b>do not go anterior; go lateral</b></div><div><b>type 4s extend into trochlea - double bubble</b></div><div><img></img><b><br></br></b></div><div><img></img><b><br></br></b></div>”
<div>RC 2008 - After performing a radial head replacement, the elbow is still unstable when in supination. All the following are potential reasons except:</div>
<div>1 – Radial head implant is too large</div>
<div>2 – LUCL is avulsed off of lateral epicondyle</div>
<div>3 – Coranoid fracture that has not been fixed</div>
<div>4 – MCL rupture that was not recognized</div>
<div>1. RH is prob too small!</div>
<div><br></br></div>
RC 2016 - Technical Considerations for Fixing Coronoid?
-Exposure: medially, FCU split gives best visualization<div><br></br><div>-Reduction: flex elbow to reduce tension, ensure cortical read and articular read good</div><div>-Fixation: buttress plate, dorsal to volar screws, suture repair</div><div><br></br></div><div>-others: talk about algorithm for TT injury (ie can maybe fix coronoid through lateral approach with RH gone)</div></div>
RC 2014, 2012 List 3 ways to judge fragment size for RH replacement?
<div>-Clinical: assess lateral aspect of UH with and without trial head in place (<b>most sensitive)</b>; implant should be at the level of the lateral edge of coronoid (PRUJ <1mm proximal to lateral edge of coronoid), reconstruct fragments then downsize 2mm, stable through ROM<br></br></div>
<div>-X-ray: assymetry of medial UH articular (but this is bad: requires 6mm of overlengthing for this to change); cf contralateral side</div>
<div>RC 2018,2014 Which of the following is true regarding olecranon fractures:</div>
<ol> <li>A decrease in the proximal ulna dorsal angulation (PUDA) results in a decrease in elbow extension</li> <li>When performing an olecranon excision and triceps advancement for a comminuted fracture, attaching the triceps to the anterior aspect of the ulna results in increased extension strength</li> <li>It is sometimes acceptable to leave an articular gap or bone loss in severely comminuted fractures</li> <li>A tension band results in increased compressive strength at the fracture site compared to a pre-countered plate</li></ol>
<div>Answer: C</div>
<div>RC 2015, 2012 - What is the mechanism of injury in Bado I Monteggia fractures:</div>
<div>A. Forced supination</div>
<div>B. Forced pronation</div>
<div>C. Hyperextension</div>
<div>D. Fall on flexed elbow</div>
” <div> <div>B. hyperpronation</div><div><br></br></div><div>remember: type 2 has a posterior RH (think of supination pushing the RH out the back like in PLRI). so type 1 = anterior RH = forced pronation</div><div><img></img></div><div>Note: monteggia assx with 20% risk of PIN injury</div> </div>”
RC 2018 -<div>(1) What is the superficial muscle interval of the Henry approach to the distal radius?</div><div>(2) What neurovascular structures will you encounter in the middle and distal portions of this approach?</div><div>(3)Volar muscles to elevate off radius for plating?</div>
“<ul> <li>What is the superficial muscle interval of the Henry approach to the distal radius?</li> <ul> <li>Distal: FCR (median) and brachioradialis (radial)</li> <li>Prox: PT (median) and BR (radial)</li> <li><img></img></li> </ul> </ul> <div></div> <ul> <li>What neurovascular structures will you encounter in the middle and distal portions of this approach?</li> <ul> <li>Proximal: PIN</li> <ul> <li>Supinate to incise supinator and protect PIN</li> </ul> </ul> </ul> <div><img></img></div> <div></div> <ul> <li>Middle: Superficial radial nerve, radial artery</li> <ul> <li>Pronate to take off PT</li> <li><img></img></li> </ul> <li>Distal: palmar cutaneous branch of median nerve, radial artery</li> <ul> <li><img></img></li> </ul> <li></li> </ul> <ul> <li>What 4 muscles must be taken/dissected off or divided to place a plate along the entire length of the volar radius?</li> <ul> <li>PQ, FPL, PT, FDS, supinator</li> <li><img></img></li> </ul> <li>When working in the proximal third of this approach, what nerve will you need to protect?</li> <ul> <li>PIN</li> <ul> <li><img></img></li> </ul> </ul></ul><div></div>”
<div>RC 2018 - Regarding the volar henry approach:</div>
<ul> <li>What is the superficial muscle interval of the Henry approach to the distal radius?</li><li><div>What neurovascular structures will you encounter in the middle and distal portions of this approach?</div></li><li><div><div>What 4 muscles must be taken/dissected off or divided to place a plate along the entire length of the volar radius?</div></div></li><li><div><div>When working in the proximal third of this approach, what nerve will you need to protect?</div></div></li></ul>
“<div><div><ul> <li>What is the superficial muscle interval of the Henry approach to the distal radius?</li> <ul> <li>Distal: FCR (median) and brachioradialis (radial)</li> <li>Prox: PT (median) and BR (radial)</li> <li><img></img></li> </ul> </ul> <div></div> <ul> <li>What neurovascular structures will you encounter in the middle and distal portions of this approach?</li> <ul> <li>Middle: Superficial radial nerve, radial artery</li> <ul> <li><img></img></li> </ul> <li>Distal: palmar cutaneous branch of median nerve, radial artery</li> <ul> <li><img></img></li> </ul> </ul> <li>What 4 muscles must be taken/dissected off or divided to place a plate along the entire length of the volar radius?</li> <ul> <li>PQ, FPL, PT, FDS, supinator</li> <li><img></img></li> </ul> <li>When working in the proximal third of this approach, what nerve will you need to protect?</li> <ul> <li>PIN</li> <ul> <li><img></img></li> </ul> </ul></ul></div></div>”
RC 2018 - RFs for synostosis after BBFA # and tx?
<div>injury: proximal, comminution, same level, large soft tissue injury, disruption of IOM, head injury</div>
<div>surgical: delay in tx >4weeks, single approach (Boyd), disruption of IOM (dissection, hardware, bony fragments), primary bone grafting</div>
<div><br></br></div>
<div>Treatment:</div>
<div>-operative(resection): anconeus or free fat interposition</div>
<div>-post-op: 700cGy radiation, Indomethacin 25 TID</div>
RC 2015 - Which of the following is not normal for distal radius <div> a. Ulnar variance -1mm</div> <div> b. Ulnar variance +1mm</div> <div> c. volar tilt 11 degrees</div> d. radial inclination of 18 degrees
<div>Answer: D</div>
<div><br></br></div>
<div>Normal parameters</div>
AP: radial height 12mm, <i>radial inclination 22 deg</i>, ulnar neutral (range -4 to +2)<div>Lat: volar inclication 11 deg, SL 45 deg</div><div><br></br></div><div><div> <div>View</div> <div>Measurement</div> <div>Normal</div> <div>Acceptable criteria</div> <div>AP</div> <div>Radial height</div> <div>13mm</div> <div>< 5mm shortening</div> <div></div> <div></div> <div>Radial inclination</div> <div>23°</div> <div>change < 5°</div> <div></div> <div></div> <div>Articular stepoff</div> <div>congruous</div> <div>< 2 mm stepoff</div> <div></div> <div>Lateral</div> <div>Volar tilt</div> <div>11°</div> <div>dorsal angulation < 5° or within20° of contralateral distal radius</div> <div></div> </div></div><div><br></br></div>
RC 2018, 2014 - After a distal radius fracture, a patient sustains a rupture of the EPL. What deficit will they have? <ol> <li>Thumb IP extension only</li> <li>Thumb IP extension and pronation</li> <li>Thumb IP extension and abduction</li> <li>Thumb IP extension and adduction</li></ol><div><div></div> <div>RC 2018, 2016 - Wrist 6 months post-ORIF. Patient returns unable to extend thumb DIP. What is the NEXT best step?</div> <ol> <li>Tendon transfer EIP to EPL</li> <li>Tendon transfer FDS to EPL</li> <li>Nerve conduction studies</li> <li>Thumb IP Joint Fusion</li></ol></div>
<div>A. Most common time period after a distal radius fracture for EPL rupture is 8 weeks after injury.</div>
<div>A.EIP is <i>ulnar to EDC</i></div>
RC 2018 -Regarding tension band wiring, all are true EXCEPT? <div>a.The medial malleolus is an example of a dynamic tension band</div> <div>b.Tension band wire can neutralize tensile forces, and in fact can convert them in compression forces with joint flexion</div> <div>c.A plate on the tension side of bone can act as a tension band</div> d.Using it on the tension side of a bone will lead to compression on the opposite cortex
<div>Answer: A</div>
<div><br></br></div>
-TBW can neutralize tensile forces and convert them to compressive forces at joint in flexion<div>-Plate on tension side can act as tension band</div><div>-medial mal tension band is considered <b>static (not dynamic) -</b> forces of fracture after applicaiton remain fairly constant</div><div><b><br></br></b></div>
RC 2018 - A 17 year old male is seen following an injury he sustained. After see his MRI (below), what is the recommended treatment? (the MRI shows root avulsion C8/T1) <div>a.Tendon transfers</div> <div>b.Nerve repair</div> <div>c.Neurotization</div> <div>d.Shoulder arthrodesis</div>
-<b>nerve transfer (neurotization) </b>should be done within 18 months for viability of motor end plate<div>-tendon transfer is back up for c8-t1</div><div>-cant do nerve repair (pre-ganglionic)</div>
RC 2018, 15, 12 - Open Fracture in Water tx?
-<b>delayed wound closure</b><div>-Fresh Water (Tx: FQ -<b>ciproflox)</b>: <b>Staph</b>, Vibrio, Aeromonas Hydrophilia (fresh air), Pseudomonas</div><div>-Salt water (Tx: doxy): mycobacterium marinum, clostridium</div>
- Obturator Internus
- Obturator externus
- Superior gemellus
- Inferior gemellus
- Tornetta Technique (1995): True anteversion angle. Anteversion determined off c-arm angles for perfect lateral of proximal femur and knee of non-injured limb, recreate with rotation of distal femur to match.
- Results in rotational discrepancy under 8 degrees
- Most reliable
- Sharp reamers
- Deeper reaming flutes
- Shallower flutes get clogged and act like a piston
- Complications
- Malunion - rotational, angular
- Non-union - <10%
- LLD - 43% if comminuted
- Infection - 1-3.8%
- Well leg compartment syndrome - hemilithotomy
- HO
- Pudendal Nerve palsy - Most common symptoms are pain, numbness
- Can get incontinence and altered ejaculation
- Femoral Nerve - AP locking screw in retrograde nail (lock prox to LT to prevent)
- Vascular injury
- Erectile dysfunction 40% (mcq 2018)
- Mallet R, Tricoire JL, Rischmann P, Sarramon JP, Puget J, Malavaud B. High prevalence of erectile dysfunction in young male patients after intramedullary femoral nailing. Urology. 2005;65(3):559-563.
- Recommendations : Surgical time and/or traction time should be minimized.When surgical
- Vaselko M (JBJS 2005) Inferior Patellar Pole Avulsion Fractures: Osteosynthesis Compared with Pole Resection
- Retrospective review of 14 vs 11 fractures
- Average patellofemoral score better in internal fixation group than resection with patellar ligament repair (94 vs 81)
- Normal patellar height in 10/11 ORIFs, 3/13 tendon advancements
- JAAOS 2011 - Patellar Fractures in Adults
- Partial Patellectomy and Inferior Pole Fracture
- Saltzman et al, Marder et all found that reattachment of the patellar tendon to the anterior surface of the remaining patella - which most resembles the native anatomy-substantially minimized contact stresses
- Saltzman --> 40 patients with partial patellectomy
- 78% good or excellent, quads strength 85%
- Bostman --> poor outcomes if >40% of patella removed
- Marder --> increased PF contact forces with patellectomy
- Calcium sulfate
- Calcium phosphate
- Iliac crest autograft
- Cancellous allograft
- A spiral pattern tibia fracture
- A distal one-third tibial shaft fracture location,
- Spiral pattern fibula fracture
- JOT 2014 - Predictive Radiographic Markers for Concomitant Ipsilateral Ankle Injuries in Tibial Shaft Fractures
- Thirty-five of 71 (49.3%) tibial shaft fracture patients had a concomitant ipsilateral ankle injury. Of these, 31 (88.6%) ankle injuries occurred in patients with a spiral pattern tibia fracture of the distal third diaphysis (P , 0.001).
- 94% follow up at 2 years (unreamed nail)
- BMP-2 group:
- 44% reduction in risk of failure
- secondary intervention because of delayed union
- Fewer intervention
- Faster fracture healing
- Fewer hardware failures
- Fewer infections (type IIIA/B injuries)
- Faster wound healing
- Aids to reduction:
- Nail in extension
- Blocking screws
- Increase strength and rigidity of fixation
- Place on concave side of deformity
- Lateralize start point
- Increase Herzog angle
- Unicortical Plate at the fracture site
- A. Autoclave and reimplant
- B. Send to the bone bank for later reimplantation
- C. Discard
- D. Clean thoroughly and reimplant
- Medial malleolus
- Fibula
- Calcaneus
- Lisfranc
- It is a radiolucent line underneath the subchondral surface on xray
- It is useful as evaluation for vascularity of the talus
- It usually shows up at 3 weeks post injury
- It is caused by osteopenia from bone resorption.
- Fibular osteotomy
- Medial malleolar osteotomy
- Inline traction
- Femoral Distractor
- Rockwood's:
- Mentions distractor, and no mention of osteotomy
- Additional traction, if needed, can be performed with a Schanz pin or a mini-distractor. Associated osteochondral fragments are debrided.
- JAAOS on talar neck fracture said medial mal osteotomy should be last resort. First step after open reduction should include using shxantz pins and universal distractor)
- Subtalar motion will not be affected
- AP radiograph is best for seeing it
- Varus Malunion
- Osteotomy is contra-indicated
- Tib ant
- FHL
- EHL
- TN capsule
- FHL
- TN capsule
- FDL
- Talar body impaction fracture
- Associated fractures (Bibbo C (FAI 2003))
- Medial:
- Dorsomedial talar head
- Posterior tubercle of talus
- Lateral Navicular
- Lateral:
- Cuboid
- Anterior calcaneus
- Lateral process of talus
- Lateral mal (Fibula)
- Midfoot arthrodesis
- ORIF
- Casting
- CRPP
- Osseous Intrinsic Stability:
- Trapezoidal shape of middle three MT bases and cuneiforms produces a stable arch
- Recessed 2nd MT keystone creating a stable mortise
- Recessed 8 mm proximal to med cuneiform and 4 mm proximal to lateral cuneiform
- Transverse intermetatarsal - D2-D5 base MTs
- Oblique:
- Dorsal, interosseous and plantar ligaments between medial cuneiforms and 2nd MT
- Interosseous > Plantar > Dorsal
- Age <40
- Initial displacement
- Impaction
- Associated femoral head injury
- Indomethacin is important for prevention of HO
- It will increase the non-union risk
- ..
- Treatment with 6 weeks of indomethacin does not appear to have a therapeutic effect for decreasing HO formation after acetabular fracture surgery and appears to increase the incidence of nonunion. Treatment with 1 week of indomethacin may be beneficial for decreasing the volume of HO formation without increasing the incidence of nonunion.
- Sufficient literature indicates NSAIDs are ineffective
- Sufficient literature supports a significant increase in fracture non-union
- Iliofemoral
- Triradiate
- Kocher-Langenbach
- Ilioinguinal/Stoppa
- Braking function returns to normal 4 weeks after knee arthroscopy, 9 weeks after surgical management of ankle fracture, and 6 weeks after the initiation of weight bearing following major lower extremity fracture
- It describes driving 3 weeks after full weightbearing in ankle fractures, so the 9 week mark is because people typically prevent weightbearing until 6 weeks.
- Patients may safely drive 4-6 weeks after right total hip arthroplasty
- Female, >70 y/o, active, independent
- Male, > 70 y/o, active, independent
- Male, <70 y/o, inactive, dependent
- Female, <70 y/o, active, independent
- A. Slow IV to maintenance rate
- B. Start transfusing blood
- C. Give albumin
- D. Rapid bolus with IV crystalloid
- Head should be 0.5-1.5cm above GT
- Uncemented prosthesis should be used
- Prosthesis should be 3.5cm above the pec insertion
- Prosthesis should be in 50 degrees of retroversion
- HTD: head to tuberosity distance should be ~10mm
- B - false--> use cement to maintain humeral component height
- C - false--> should be 5.6cm above pec
- D - false --> should be 20 deg retroverted
- <15 mm of GT displacement considered as positive criterion for an acromioplasty indication
- Arthroplasty with tuberosity osteotomy drastically decreases constant scores post-op
- Most common is hemi with a humeral stem, but now RTSA becoming more common
- Osteotomy often is also indication to allow implantation of the new stem
- Short stem for AVN of HH
- External Rotation
- Adduction
- Abduction
- Internal rotation
- Anterior deltopect (Henry’s)
- Acromion osteotomy
- Modified judet approach between posterior deltoid and infraspinatous (it gave this specific interval)
- Axillary approach utilizing the interval between infraspinatous and teres minor
- Patients with extra-articular fractures do well with non-operative treatment
- Stable injuries if no other fractures or ligamentous injuries
- Usually plated through a deltopectoral approach
- Patients with <1cm medialization should be treated operatively
- Indications for surgery often include such parameters as:
- medialization (>25 mm),
- 25°to 45° angulation on a lateral radiograph,
- GPA <20°, and
- Displaced double lesions of the SSSC.
- Some of the papers described ligamentous injury as part of the double lesions
- Fractures involving the neck and body the staff to make up approximately 80 to 90% of surgical injury patterns. They are addressed or post your approach.
- I didn’t find a good study to look at nonoperative treatment however Herrera et al recorded a mean disability of the arm, shoulder and hand score 14 and 26 month follow-up as well symmetric motion and your complete recovery of strength
- Cover with floroquonolone
- Cipro, levoflox
- Stabilize fracture
- Tetanus
- Explore wound, DO NOT cover primarily, leave it oepen or loosely approximate
- Small wounds, secondary healing
- Large wounds
- Delayed closure 3-7 days
- Freshwater - Flouroquinolone or 3rd or 4th gen cepholosporin
- Saltwater - doxy + ceftazidime or flouroquonolone
- Tendon transfer EIP to EPL
- Tendon transfer FDS to EPL
- Nerve conduction studies
- Thumb IP Joint Fusion
- Articular margin impaction
- Femoral head fracture
- Labral tear
- Cartilage “abrasion”
- JAAOS - Intramedullary Nailing of femoral shaft fractures
- Has a colinear trajectory with the femoral shaft (i.e. it's a more “straight shot”, in line with the shaft”
- Decreased risk of varus malreduction (remember, more lateral start point = varus malreduction, too medial = valgus malreduction)
- Decreased risk of iatrogenic fracture comminution
- Decreased risk of GT fracture (i.e. GT “blow out”)
- Hook plate provide better radiographic and function outcomes
- Hook plate provide better early function
- Non-operative provide better early function
- Non-operative provide better function but higher rate of needing surgery
- Need to view trochlea
- Can fix from an antecubital approach
- MCL is torn
- Represents an Isolated capitellar fracture
- Position: supine with arm over chest, lateral with bolster
- Incision: posterior, then raise lateral fasciocutaneous flap only and do your lateral approach first; may not need a medial approach at all if you can access coronoid fracture through your radial head defect
- Fix RH (or replace)
- Fix Coronoid (cannulated screws, mini plates, suture repair through trans osseous tunnels created with ACL guide)/anterior capsule
- Repair lateral ligs (LCL) at 90 deg flexion with suture anchor
- Evaluate stability of medial side (repair MCL)
- Ex-fix if still unstable
- Radial head implant is too large
- LUCL is avulsed off of lateral epicondyle
- Coronoid fracture that has not been fixed
- MCL rupture that was not recognized
- Too small of radial head will lead to instability è DJ: I don’t know about this…
- JHS Reference points for radial head prosthesis size DOORNBERG
- “A prosthesis that is too large also may contribute to persistent elbow instability after surgical repair”
- Pugh DMW (JBJS 2004) Standard surgical protocol to treat elbow dislocations with radial head and coronoid fracture
- ""protocol included fixation or replacement of the radial head, fixation of the coronoid fracture and repair of associated capsular and lateral ligamentous injuries, in selected cases repair of MCL""
- They will get wrist pain
- 4mm short will have equal functional outcomes
- Increased radiocapitellar contact pressures
- Increased tightness of the IOM
- Doornberg JHS Jan 2006
- an implant that is too large and causes widening of the lateral side of the ulnotrochear joint space and radiocapitellar wear
- Wrist pain
- OA
- PIN palsy
- Myositis ossificans
- JBJSBr 2006 undiagnosed essex-lopresti - wrist scores were worse than elbow scores preop
- ORIF with screws and/or plate
- CRPP
- Replacement
- Resection
- Review of 56 patients at 2 years with type 4 radial head #
- Most patients with Mason III fractures with >3 fragments had poor results (13/14)
- 12 patients with < 3 --> no non-union, early failure or severe loss of ROM
- Greater than 3 fragments should be excised or replaced
- Elbow stiffness
- Radiocapitellar arthrosis
- Loss of pronation/supination
- Longitudinal forearm instability
- Weaker:
- Infection
- PIN injury
- HO/Synostosis
- Elbow Instability
- between the brachialis (musculocutaneous n. and radial n.) and brachioradialis (radial n.)
- Both the MFCA and LFCA come off the profunda
- During capsular exposure, it is protected by staying cephaled to the piriformis
- It anastomoses with the superior gluteal artery
- …something else true
- A. Approximately 5% nonunion rate
- B. 15 degrees varus is poorly tolerated
- C. Radial nerve palsy is a contraindication to conservative management
- D. 2cm of shortening is a contraindication to non-operative treatment
- A. Chronic lung disease with increased PaCO2
- B. Chronic lung disease with decrease PaCO2
- C. Heart disease
- D. No reason to not put O2 on
- DJ: Shit question, you would do an ex fix in BOTH Grade IIIB and IIIC. No one is going to wait for you to plate a forearm before doing the vascular repair
- Previous years argue that IIIB you need soft tissue coverage and therefore you should ex fix and not plate because you will have exposed hardware. In reality, you would plate and get early flap coverage. Based on this logic, IIIC you are more likely to ex fix than IIIB
- AO Surgery Reference
- ""In general, external fixation is only used as a temporary treatment in forearm shaft fractures. It is often indicated in the presence of severe soft-tissue injuries and in poly-trauma patients whose definitive treatment may have to be delayed""
- Another shit question. I would have chosen C
- Really difficult choice --> for a grade IIIC injury in the forearm need disruption of both ulnar and radial arteries therefore would need a big wound….however, in order to get segmental bone loss you also need a big wound
- Some argument that primary shortening is an option in the forearm
- JAAOS - Adult Diaphyseal Forearm Fractures
- The use of external fixation for forearm fractures is indicated in rare cases of severe soft-tissue injury or contamination
- Stable construct
- Sterile technique
- Soft tissue protector
- HA pins
- Sterile bandage
- Impact on decision to amputate limb
- Severe soft tissue injury - Highest impact on decision-making process**
- Absence of plantar sensation
- Second highest impact on surgeon’s decision making process
- Not an absolute contraindication to reconstruction
- Plantar sensation can recover by long-term f/u
- The LEAP study showed that there was no difference in outcomes in ppl with sensate vs insensate foot at time of presentation for amputation vs limb salvage.
- Outcome measures – same 2 and 7 year outcomes in ppl with amputation vs salvage
- Sickness impact profile
- Return to work
- Not significantly different b/w amputation and reconstruction at 2 and 7 years
- JAAOS 2015 - Management of Segmental Bone Defects:
- Autologous bone grafting an option up to 5cm
- Bone transport a good option for infected defects, but usually only used in longer defects
- Acute shortening an option up to 3-5cm (vascular kinking after this), but more common in upper extremity
- Pipitone PS (Orthop Clin NA 2014) Management of Traumatic Bone Loss in the Lower Extremity
- Critically sized defects - defect is 2-3x the diameter of the bone
- Autogenous iliac crest bone graft if <4cm
- Shortening/lengthening with 2-10cm
- Tibia/humerus --> immediate shortening of 3-4cm tolerated
- Femur --> 5-7cm
- If defect is >3cm can get venous congestions and edema --> necrosis/infection
- Defects > 10cm consider vascularized fibular grafting, distraction osteogenesis
- A. More common in diaphyseal fractures
- B. More common in the femur
- C. Should amputate if >10cm
- D. Must plate it to maintain alignment and rotation
- JAAOS 2010 - Open Tibial Fracture
- Early antibiotics shown to reduce infection (<3 hours)
- Smoking and diabetes are risk factors for infection
- Quality of debridement is important for infection risk, but no evidence for timing of debridement
- A. Most common in males <35yo
- B. Open fractures are less likely to have a compartment syndrome
- C. Compartment pressure measurements are necessary for diagnosis
- D. Forearm fractures are not a common cause of compartment syndrome
- Less tension on sciatic nerve (easy to extend hip with cushion under knee, and more under tibia for knee flexion)
- Better reduction (not statistically significant, but gravity doesn't displace fracture)
- Better ability to assess quadrilateral plate through greater sciatic notch
- Can fix ipsilateral symphysis fractures, maybe
- Open Fractures
- Failure of conservative management, inability to brace
- Floating Elbow
- Poly-trauma/early mobilization
- Brachial plexus injury/flail extremity
- Pathologic Fracture
- Vascular Injury
- High energy GSW (low E GSW can be treated non-op)
- JAAOS 2000 - Olecranon Fractures
- ""if the bent end of the Kirschner wire is left superficial to the triceps fibres routine post-operative elbow extension may cause the wire to back out""
- ""The most important factor in preventing wire migration is ensuring that the bent proximal end of the wire is buried beneath the fibres of the triceps""
- 2 mm articular displacement
- “greater than” 5 mm shortening of distal radius
- incongruity of the sigmoid notch
- radial inclination of 10
- Articular displacement does correlate with radiocarpal radiographic arthritic change but has no effect on DRUJ
- Similarly incongruity of sigmoid notch impacts DRUJ but not radiocarpal joint
- Radial inclination impacts lunate contact forces
- 1 mm intra-articular step
- 2mm radial shortening
- Less than 10 degrees radial inclination on PA view
- 5 degrees of dorsal tilt
- Independent risk factors for reoperation (nonunion, infx)
- Patient: diabetes, BMI smoking,
- Injury: open fracture, metaphyseal comminution
- Surgery: Shorter plate length
- Previous smoker that quit 4 years ago
- Shorter plate length
- Oblique fracture extending into metaphysis
- Fracture extending into the diaphysis
- Gardner et al. reported that non-unions of the distal femur occur most often after open and extensively comminuted fractures. According to our review, the most common fracture pattern associated with nonunion is metaphyseal comminution.
- Risk factors for proximal implant failure included open fracture, smoking, increased body mass index, and shorter plate length.
- No significant univariate differences with respect to number of proximal screws (P = 0.50), plate length (P = 0.17), total screw density (P = 0.56), and proximal screw density (P = 0.92) were observed between healed fractures and those with a nonunion
- Better fixation in osteoporotic/comminuted bone (multiple points of fixation)
- Ability to control multiple fracture fragments
- Anatomic contour helps with reduction of joint
- Biomechanically superior in cyclic load and ultimate strength
- Preserves more distal bone stock
- Less soft tissue stripping
- Buckley 2018. A sub-meniscal arthrotomy improves the medium-term patient outcome of tibial plateau fractures
- Prospective ORIF (submeniscal arthrotomy) vs CRIF (x-ray guided)
- Postoperative CT scans showed that reductions were better with the ORIF group especially in the posterolateral quadrant as compared to the CRIF group. The frequency of mal-reductions was higher in the CRIF group. The KOOS, at two years, showed that the CRIF had significantly less good outcomes in the subcategories of SPORT (p = 0.03) and QOL (p = 0.01) measurements.
- Randomized, Prospective Comparison of Plate versus Intramedullary Nail Fixation for Distal Tibia Shaft Fractures. Vallier, Cureton and Patterson. JOT. 2011
- High primary union rates were noted after surgical treatment of distal tibia shaft fractures with both plates and nails
- Rates of infection and secondary procedures were similar when the two groups were compared.
- Open fractures were associated with increased rates of infection, nonunion, and malunion.
- Intramedullary nailing was associated with more malalignment versus plating.
- Fibula fixation may facilitate anatomic reduction of the tibia at the time of surgery, particularly when performing tibial nailing. The effect of retained fibula fixation on tibia healing deserves further study, because we observed a trend for more tibial non-unions with distal fibula fixation.
- In our combined analysis, nonunion of the tibia was more frequent after nails versus plates.
- Ostrum RF (JOT 1996) Posterior Plating of Displaced Weber B Fibular Fractures
- Benefits of posterior plating:
- Bicortical screws --> better fixation
- Stronger and stiffer construct
- Lag screw stronger as it is done through the plate (acts as a stronger cortex)
- A. 5% of spiral tibia fractures extend intra-articularly
- B. Posterior malleolus fixation provides more stability than syndesmosis fixation
- C. 10% involvement results in posterior subluxation
- D. Often starts posterolaterally and extends into the medial malleolus
- PER Stage 4 ankle fracture with a deltoid ligament tear and posterior malleolus fracture
- After fracture creation, five specimens were assigned randomly to receive posterior malleolar fixation…The remaining five specimens received trans-syndesmotic fixation.
- Each specimen first was tested intact to determine its baseline stability for later use as its own internal control.
- Specimens were tested again after fixation to determine the effect of fracture creation and fixation on syndesmotic stability.
- Posterior malleolar fixation provided better rotational stability than syndesmosis fixation.
- Specimens with posterior malleolar fixation had a decrease in stiffness of 30% compared with the intact stiffness of each specimen
- Patients who had traditional syndesmosis stabilization had a 60% (SD, 20%) decrease in stiffness compared with intact rotation (40% of intact stiffness was restored)
- These are confusing statements
- Basically they mean more stiffness was restored with posterior mal fixation
- treat with closed reduction and casting
- volar radiocarpal ligaments not injured
- usually need volar and dorsal approach
- Teardrop angle (TDA) will be ?increased/decreased due to volar impaction
- Lozano-Calderon/Doornberg/Ring (JBJS 2006) Fractures of the dorsal articular margin of the distal part of the radius with dorsal radiocarpal subluxation
- Dorsal Barton = subluxation of the distal radius consequent to a fracture through the articular surface of the carpal extremity of the radius, the fragment, usually is quite small and is broken from the dorsal end of the radius”
- Case series of 19 operative patients
- 11 had dorsal alone, 7 combined, 1 volar alone
- “In conclusion, fractures of the dorsal margin of the articular surface of the distal part of the radius associated with dorsal radiocarpal subluxation or dislocation should be carefully evaluated for the presence of volar ligament injury or volar avulsion fracture, central articular impaction, and impaction of the majority of the articular surface as a large volar fragment. A combined dorsal and volar exposure is often necessary for these injuries because the central articular impaction and the dorsal marginal shearing fracture may be best treated through a dorsal exposure in internal fixation and the volar ligament injuries or avulsion fracture require a volar exposure and fixation. Despite the relative complexity of these injuries, satisfactory wrist function can be achieved in most patients.”
- 2014, 2016, 2018
- Skaggs DL (JBJS 2005) Effect of Surgical Delay on Acute Infection Following 554 Open Fractures in Children
- Analysis of 554 open fractures
- No difference between I&D before 6 hours and after 6 hours
- Patzakis and Wilkins
- 1025 open fractures
- Infection rate 4.7% with abx before 3 hours and 7.4% antibiotics after 4 hours
- Generalized diaphyseal cortical thickening
- Non-comminuted fracture
- Lateralized thickening or beaking
- Complete fracture extending through both cortices, and may be associated with a medial spike
- Major
- No or minimal trauma (fall from standing height or less)
- Fracture line originates at the lateral cortex and is substantially transverse in its orientation, although it may become oblique as it progresses medially
- Complex fractures extend through both cortices and may be associated with a medial spike
- Non-comminuted or minimally comminuted
- Localized periosteal or endosteal thickening of the lateral cortex is present at the fracture site (“lateral beaking” or “flaring”)
- Minor
- Generalized increase in cortical thickness of diaphysis
- Unilateral or bilateral prodromal symptoms
- Bilateral incomplete or complete fractures
- Delayed healing
- High specificity but low sensitivity
- Highly specific
- There is minimal clinical utility to these scores
- Five LE rating scores: MESS, LSI, PSI, NISSSA, HFS-98 are not predictive of outcome and therefore cannot be used to determine limb salvage vs recon
- Conclusion states that currently available injury severity scores are not predictive of functional recovery of patients who undergo successful limb salvage surgery
- 58% of all complications include fem neck/shaft non-union were from single antegrade IM nails
- Concluded that single device had worst results
- Improved outcomes with reamed IM nail/lag screw combo
- Ostrum et al reported a multicenter series of 95 patients who underwent retrograde nailing for the femoral shaft fracture and either cannulated screws or a sliding hip screw for the femoral neck fracture. The authors reported union rates of 98% for the femoral neck fracture and 91.3% for the femoral shaft fracture.
- No difference was noted between cannulated screws and sliding hip screw with regard to femoral neck union.
- In patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture, surgical management typically consists of ORIF of the neck fracture with either a SHS or cannulated screws, followed by retrograde IMN of the femoral shaft.
- Selection of proximal implants is based on the femoral neck fracture pattern, degree of comminution, and bone quality.
- An open reduction of the femoral neck is performed through an anterior approach using joysticks, clamps, and preliminary wire fixation.
- Using a lateral approach, either a SHS with one or two anti-rotational screws or cannulated screws in an inverted triangle pattern are placed. The screws of either construct are placed in the posterior half of the shaft such that the retrograde nail is able to pass anterior to them.
- The femoral shaft fracture is then reduced, and a retrograde IMN is placed with the tip of the nail passing anterior to the screws of the proximal implant.
- On the basis of a biomechanical cadaveric study, Stoffel et al. concluded that use of the lateral (bone hook) stress test or Cotton test. and examination of the tibiofibular clear space on stress radiographs intra-operatively is more reliable, because of the greater displacement when performing this test, than the exorotation stress test.
- The “Hook” or “Cotton” test is more reliable than the exorotation stress test.
- Presented a prospective series of 28 patients undergoing ankle fracture fixation and compared intraoperative testing methods of the syndesmosis.
- They reported that compared with the Cotton test, stress external rotation demonstrated a 35% increase in medial clear space widening.
- Lateral stress produced a significantly greater increase in the tibiofibular clear space than did the external rotation test for Weber C injuries and Weber C plus deltoid ligament injuries.
- For the detection of syndesmotic instability at the site of ankle fractures on stress radiographs, the lateral stress test appeared to be superior to the external rotation stress test in this cadaver model.
- According to the Lauge-Hansen classification system, pronation external rotation, supination external rotation, and pronation abduction fractures hold the highest risk of syndesmotic injury.
- The intraoperative evaluation of syndesmotic stability should occur after all other points of instability have been addressed.
- It should be noted that, on radiography, the syndesmosis may have a nonpathologic appearance because of the variability of the incisura contour (eg, flat or cupped). Specifically, a tibiofibular overlap of 0 mm, which has traditionally been considered to be indicative of an injured syndesmosis, may be a normal finding in a patient with a flat incisura; however, it may rep- resent pathology in a patient with a cupped incisura.
- The position of the ankle should be standardized during testing, and the tibiofibular clear space on the AP view reveals the least amount of variability attributable to rotation
- If the contralateral ankle is uninjured, comparison radiographic views should be obtained
- Standard intraoperative stress mechanisms include an external rotation stress test of the dorsiflexed ankle or direct translation of the fibula via a clamp or hook (modified Cotton test)
- The absolute increase in tibiofibular clear space is greater for the same injury pattern when using a laterally directed translational force with a hook than with an ER stress test.
- RF for development of LE acute compartment syndrome:
- Younger patients
- Not associated with compartment syndrome
- Male
- Open fracture
- IM nail fixation
- Segmental tibias less likely
- Cadaveric study
- Increase of 2.5 mm in length significantly increases contact pressures
- Decrease of 5 mm decreased contact pressures substantially
- Ultimately increases contact pressures and leads to early development of OA
- Loss of flexion
- Terrible triad are not always operative.
- Indications for non-op management (rare):
- UH and RC joints must be concentrically reduced
- Radial head fracture must not meet surgical indications
- Coronoid fracture must be small
- Elbow must be stable enough to allow early ROM
- Coronoid tip fractures (O’Driscoll Type I) are most frequently seen in association with terrible triad injuries.
- Coronoid fracture classification according to O’Driscoll et al.: The three types are tip (A), anteromedial facet (B), and basal (C) fractures.
- Tip fractures are subclassified into two groups, either ≤2 mm or >2 mm in size.
- Anteromedial facet fractures are subclassified into three subtypes (anteromedial rim, rim plus tip, and rim and tip plus the sublime tubercle).
- Basal fractures are subclassified into two groups (coronoid body and base, and transolecranon basal coronoid fractures).
- The anterior bundle of the MCL is postulated to be the last to fail.
- Specific term for inferior dislocation of the GH joint trapped underneath the coracoid and glenoid.
- Has greatest incidence of neurovascular injury of all types of shoulder dislocations.
- Vascular injury 40%, neurologic injury 60% (axillary)
- Hyperabduction force applied to arm, levering the proximal humerus onto the acromion, injuring inferior capsule/labrum, which subsequently allows for disengagement of HH inferiorly from glenoid.
- A high velocity weapon at long range is worse than a low velocity weapon at close range
- Increased yaw results in increased damage
- Decreased damage if hits lung tissue first, compared to muscle
- Solid bullets are worse than Hollow points
- At a yaw of 90° (sideways), maximal energy transfer is achieved.
- Yaw tends to decrease over longer distances, allowing the bullet to hit its target nose on; at impact, however, wobbling and then tumbling occurs.
- Penetrating (not exiting) missiles deliver their total contained kinetic energy.
- Perforating (exiting) missiles transfer significantly less.
- Dense organs, such as bone and liver, absorb more energy resulting in more injury. Lungs, which have a much lower density, absorb less energy and fortunately suffer less of an injury.
- Increase risk of nonunion
- Less HO
- Increases AVN risk
- The incidence of clinically significant HO after acetabular fracture surgery has been reported to be as high as 40% depending on the surgical approach and various patient/fracture characteristics.
- Patients who consented to take part in the study preoperatively were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 postoperative treatment groups:
- placebo for 6 weeks
- 3 days of indomethacin 75 mg PO daily followed by placebo for a total of 5.5 weeks
- 1 week of indomethacin 75 mg PO daily, followed by 5 weeks of placebo
- 6 weeks of indomethacin 75 mg PO daily
- Patients were followed clinically and radiographically at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year.
- While there were no statistically significant differences between placebo and 6 weeks of indomethacin with respect to the total number of patients with HO, Brooker classes of HO, or the volume of HO, patients in the 6 week treatment group demonstrated a significantly higher rate of radiographic nonunion (62%) of either the posterior wall or one of the columns.
- Patients in group 3 (1 week of IM) demonstrated a statistically significant lower incidence and volume of HO when compared to placebo, without a higher incidence in radiographic nonunion.
- Nerve injury is not an indication for open reduction
- Is more common with pure dislocation vs fracture dislocation.
- EMG at 3 months can influence management
- No return of function at 6 months requires surgery
- Letournel and Judet noted that highest incidence of sciatic nerve palsy was in association with a posterior fracture dislocation.
- Sciatic nerve injury seen in 10-15% of dislocations
- Peroneal branch more commonly involved
- At least partial return of function in 60-70%
- Sciatic nerve injury caused by a reduction attempt warrants open reduction