Search

Aims To compare results of institutional preferences with regard to treatment of soft tissues in the setting of open tibial shaft fractures. Methods We present a retrospective review of open tibial shaft fractures at two high-volume level 1 trauma centres with differing practices with regard to the acute management of soft tissues. Site 1 attempts acute primary closure, while site 2 prefers delayed closure/coverage. Comparisons include percentage of primary closure, number of surgical procedures until definitive closure, percentage requiring soft tissue coverage, and percentage of 90-day wound complication. Results Overall, there were 219 patients at site 1 and 282 patients at site 2. Differences in rates of acute wound closure were seen (168 (78%) at site 1 vs 101 (36%) at site 2). A mean of 1.5 procedures for definitive closure was seen at site 1 compared to 3.4 at site 2. No differences were seen in complication, nonunion, or amputation rates. Similar results were seen in a sub-analysis of type III injuries. Conclusion Comparing outcomes of open tibial shaft fractures at two institutions with different rates initial wound management, no differences were seen in 90-day wound complications, nonunion rates, or need for amputation. Attempted acute closure resulted in a lower number of planned secondary procedures when compared with planned delayed closure. Providers should consider either acute closure or delayed coverage based on the injury characteristics, surgeon preference and institutional resources without concern that the decision at the time of index surgery will lead to an increased risk of complication. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-8:481–487.

Aims Open fractures of the tibia are a heterogeneous group of injuries that can present a number of challenges to the treating surgeon. Consequently, few surgeons can reliably advise patients and relatives about the expected outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine whether these outcomes are predictable by using the Ganga Hospital Score (GHS). This has been shown to be a useful method of scoring open injuries to inform wound management and decide between limb salvage and amputation. Methods We collected data on 182 consecutive patients with a type II, IIIA, or IIIB open fracture of the tibia who presented to our hospital between July and December 2016. For the purposes of the study, the patients were jointly treated by experienced consultant orthopaedic and plastic surgeons who determined the type of treatment. Separately, the study team (SP, HS, AD, JD) independently calculated the GHS and prospectively collected data on six outcomes for each patient. These included time to bony union, number of admissions, length of hospital stay, total length of treatment, final functional score, and number of operations. Spearman’s correlation was used to compare GHS with each outcome. Forward stepwise linear regression was used to generate predictive models based on components of the GHS. Five-fold cross-validation was used to prevent models from over-fitting. Results The mean follow-up was 11.4 months (3 to 31). The mean time to union was 9.7 months (3 to 21), the mean number of operations was 2.8 (1 to 11), the mean time in hospital was 17.7 days (5 to 84), the mean length of treatment was 92.7 days (5 to 730), the mean number of admissions was 1.7 (1 to 6), and the mean functional score (Lower Extremity Functional Score (LEFS)) was 60.13 (33 to 80). There was a significant correlation between the GHS and each of the outcome measures. A predictive model was generated from which the GHS could be used to predict the various outcome measures. Conclusion The GHS can be used to predict the outcome of patients who present with an open fracture of the tibia. Our model generates a numerical value for each outcome measure that can be used in clinical practice to inform the treating team and to advise patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(1):26–32