Search

Thromboelastography (TEG) is a point-of-care venipuncture test that measures the elasticity and strength of a clot formed from a patient's blood, providing a more comprehensive analysis of a patient's coagulation status than conventional measures of coagulation. TEG includes four primary markers: R-time, which measures the time to clot initiation and is a proxy for platelet function; K-value, which measures the time for said clot to reach an amplitude of 20 mm and is a proxy for fibrin cross-linking; maximum amplitude (MA), which measures the clot's maximum amplitude and is a proxy for platelet aggregation; and LY30, which measures the percentage of clot lysis 30 minutes after reaching the MA and is a proxy for fibrinolysis. Analysis of TEG-derived coagulation profiles may help surgeons identify patient-related and disease-related factors associated with hypercoagulability. TEG-derived coagulation profiles of patients with musculoskeletal oncology conditions have yet to be characterized.(1) What TEG coagulation profile markers are most frequently aberrant in patients with musculoskeletal oncology conditions presenting for surgery? (2) Among patients with musculoskeletal oncology conditions presenting for surgery, what factors are more common in those with TEG-defined hypercoagulability? (3) Do patients with musculoskeletal oncology conditions with preoperative TEG-defined hypercoagulability have a higher postoperative incidence of clinically symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) than those with a normal TEG profile?In this retrospective, pilot study, we analyzed preoperatively drawn TEG assays on 52 patients with either primary bone sarcoma, soft tissue sarcoma, or metastatic disease to bone who were scheduled to undergo either tumor resection or nail stabilization. Between January 2020 and December 2021, our orthopaedic oncology service treated 410 patients in total. Of these, 13% (53 of 410 patients) had preoperatively drawn TEG assays. TEG assays were collected preincision as part of a division initiative to integrate the assay into a clinical care protocol for patients with primary bone or soft tissue sarcoma or metastatic disease to bone. Unfortunately, failures to adequately communicate this to our anesthesia colleagues on a consistent basis resulted in a low overall rate of assay draws from eligible patients. One patient on therapeutic anticoagulation preoperatively for the treatment of active VTE was excluded, leaving 52 patients eligible for analysis. We did not exclude patients taking prophylactic antiplatelet therapy preoperatively. All patients were followed for a minimum of 6 weeks postoperatively. We analyzed factors (age, sex, tumor location, presence of metastases, and soft tissue versus bony disease) in reference to hypercoagulability, defined as a TEG result indicating supranormal clot formation (for example, reduced R-time, reduced K-value, or increased MA). Patients with clinical concern for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (typically painful swelling of the affected extremity) or pulmonary embolism (typically by dyspnea, tachycardia, and/or chest pain) underwent duplex ultrasonography or chest CT angiography, respectively, to confirm the diagnosis. Categorical variables were analyzed via a Pearson chi-square test and continuous variables were analyzed via t-test, with significance defined at α = 0.05.Overall, 60% (31 of 52) of patients had an abnormal preoperative TEG result. All abnormal TEG assay results demonstrated markers of hypercoagulability. The most frequent aberration was a reduced K-value (40% [21 of 52] of patients), followed by reduced R-time (35% [18 of 52] of patients) and increased MA (17% [9 of 52] of patients). The mean ± SD TEG markers were R-time: 4.3 ± 1.0, K-value: 1.2 ± 0.4, MA: 66.9 ± 7.7, and LY30: 1.0 ± 1.2. There was no association between hypercoagulability and tumor location or metastatic stage. The mean age of patients with TEG-defined hypercoagulability was higher than those with a normal TEG profile (44 ± 23 years versus 59 ± 17 years, mean difference 15 [95% confidence interval (CI) 4 to 26]; p = 0.01). In addition, female patients were more likely than male patients to demonstrate TEG-defined hypercoagulability (75% [18 of 24] of female patients versus 46% [13 of 28] of male patients, OR 3.5 [95% CI 1 to 11]; p = 0.04) as were those with soft tissue disease (as opposed to bony) (77% [20 of 26] of patients with soft tissue versus 42% [11 of 26] of patients with bony disease, OR 4.6 [95% CI 1 to 15]; p = 0.01). Postoperatively, symptomatic DVT developed in 10% (5 of 52; four proximal DVTs, one distal DVT) of patients, and no patients developed symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Patients with preoperative TEG-defined hypercoagulability were more likely to be diagnosed with symptomatic postoperative DVT than patients with normal TEG profiles (16% [5 of 31] of patients with TEG-defined hypercoagulability versus 0% [0 of 21] of patients with normal TEG profiles; p = 0.05). No patients with normal preoperative TEG profiles had clinically symptomatic VTE.Patients with musculoskeletal tumors are at high risk of hypercoagulability as determined by TEG. Patients who were older, female, and had soft tissue disease (as opposed to bony) were more likely to demonstrate TEG-defined hypercoagulability in our cohort. The postoperative VTE incidence was higher among patients with preoperative TEG-defined hypercoagulability. The findings in this pilot study warrant further investigation, perhaps through multicenter collaboration that can provide a sufficient cohort to power a robust, multivariable analysis, better characterizing patient and disease risk factors for hypercoagulability. Patients with TEG-defined hypercoagulability may warrant a higher index of suspicion for VTE and careful thought regarding their chemoprophylaxis regimen. Future work may also evaluate the effectiveness of TEG-guided chemoprophylaxis, as results of the assay may inform selection of antiplatelet versus anticoagulant agent.Level III, therapeutic study.

We present the case of an 81-year-old woman who developed profound hypercalcemia requiring admission to the intensive care unit after calcium sulfate bead use during revision hip arthroplasty. The patient's serum calcium level peaked at 21.0 mg/dL and was associated with acute encephalopathy. After treatment with calcitonin and bisphosphonates, her serum calcium level normalized and her mentation improved.The risk of clinically significant hypercalcemia should be considered when using calcium sulfate during orthopaedic surgery.

The purpose of this study was to examine a level 1 trauma center's 12-year experience treating frontal sinus fractures with regards to patient demographics, management strategies, and treatment outcomes.An institutional review board-approved retrospective review of all facial fractures at a level 1 trauma center was performed for the years 2000 to 2012. Patient demographics, location of fractures, concomitant injuries, use of antibiotics, surgical management strategies and outcomes were collected for all frontal sinus fractures. A significance value of 5% was used.There were 291 frontal sinus fractures treated at our institution. The mean age of patients was 34.4 years with a male predominance (90%). The most common mechanisms of injury were assault in 82 (28.2%) and motor vehicle accidents in 80 (27.5%). Anterior table fractures were seen in 261 patients (89.7%) and posterior table fractures were seen in 181 (62.2%). Treatment included ORIF with sinus preservation in 18 (6.2%), ORIF with sinus obliteration in 20 (6.9%), and cranialization in 18 (6.2%). Antibiotics were started on admission in 152 patients (52.2%). Fatality occurred in 9.3% of patients and complications included meningitis (1%), frontal sinusitis (1%), early wound infection (0.3%), and mucopyelocele (0.3%).Frontal sinus fractures in our center are most often caused by interpersonal violence. Anterior table fractures were more common than posterior table fractures and ORIF with sinus obliteration was the most common surgical intervention. Most frontal sinus fractures at our institution (82%) were treated conservatively with no surgical intervention and we observed a low rate of long term complications.

Case A 30-year-old man presented with progressive lower right extremity pain and swelling, initially diagnosed as a deep venous thrombosis. He returned 18 months later after 2 episodes of gross hemoptysis, with chest computed tomography angiography findings concerning for tumor thrombus in the left pulmonary artery. Subsequent advanced imaging showed a lesion arising from his right femoral vein, which open biopsy revealed to be a primary intravascular mesenchymal chondrosarcoma. He underwent medical therapy, with improvement of pain and swelling and successful return to work. Conclusion Mesenchymal chondrosarcoma is a rare pathology, and its intravascular origin makes this case extraordinarily uncommon.

Limb salvage in the presence of posttraumatic tibial bone loss can be accomplished using the traditional Ilizarov method of distraction osteogenesis with circular external fixation. Internal fixation placed at the beginning of the consolidation phase, so-called integrated fixation, may allow for earlier removal of the external fixator but introduces concerns about cross-contamination from the additional open procedure and maintenance of bone regenerate stability.Among patients deemed eligible for integrated fixation, we sought to determine: (1) Does integrated fixation decrease the time in the external fixator? (2) Is there a difference in the rate of complications between the two groups? (3) Are there differences in functional and radiographic results between integrated fixation and the traditional Ilizarov approach of external fixation alone?Between January 2006 and December 2012, we treated 58 patients (58 tibiae) with posttraumatic tibial bone loss using the Ilizarov method. Of those, 30 patients (52%) were treated with the "classic technique" (external fixator alone) and 28 (48%) were treated with the "integrated technique" (a combination of an external fixator and plating or insertion of an intramedullary nail). During that period, the general indications for use of the integrated technique were closed physes, no active infection, and a healed soft tissue envelope located at the intended internal fixation site; the remainder of the patients were treated with the classic technique. Followup on 30 (100%) and 28 (100%) patients in the classic and integrated techniques, respectively, was achieved at a minimum of 1 year (mean, 3 years; range, 1-8 years). Adverse events were reported as problems, obstacles, and complications according to the publication by Paley. Problems and obstacles are managed by nonoperative and operative means, respectively; in addition, they resolve completely with treatment. Complications, according to the Paley classification, result in permanent sequelae. Functional and radiographic results were reported using the Association for the Study and Application of Methods of Ilizarov scoring system.Overall, there was a mean of four (range, 2-5) surgical procedures to complete the tibial reconstruction with a similar incidence of unplanned surgical procedures (obstacles) between the two groups (p = 0.87). Patients treated with integrated fixation spent less time in the external fixator, 7 months (range, 5-20 months) versus 11 months (range, 1-15 months; p0.001). There were seven problems, 15 obstacles, and zero complications in the classic group. Ten problems, 15 obstacles, and one complication occurred in the integrated fixation group. There was no difference in the severity (p = 0.87) or number (p = 0.40) of complications between both groups. Good to excellent Association for the Study and Application of Methods of Ilizarov function and bone scores were obtained in 100% and 98% of patients, respectively.The integrated fixation method allows for a more efficient limb salvage surgical reconstruction in patients carefully selected for that approach, whereas the frequency of adverse events and ability to restore limb lengths was not different between the groups with the numbers available. Careful placement of external fixation pins is critical to decrease cross-contamination with planned internal fixation constructs. In this study of posttraumatic tibial bone defect reconstruction, good/excellent results were found in all patients after a mean of four surgical procedures; however, a larger multicenter prospective study would allow for more robust and generalizable conclusions.Level III, therapeutic study.

Background:. The impact of left-handedness on orthopaedic surgeons and trainees has not been well described. We investigated the prevalence and perceived impact of left-handedness among orthopaedic surgeons and trainees. Methods:. We distributed a survey regarding handedness to active members of the American Orthopaedic Association and the Council of Orthopaedic Residency Directors affiliates, including department chairs, program directors, and residency and fellowship program coordinators. Program coordinators were asked to distribute the survey to their current residents and fellows. Results:. Of 510 survey respondents, 78 (15%) were identified as left hand dominant (LHD). Regarding scalpel/cautery use, 64% of LHD respondents reported using their left hand primarily and 10% reported using their right hand primarily; 26% of LHD respondents described themselves as ambidextrous in scalpel/cautery use, compared with 4.7% of right hand dominant (RHD) respondents (p < 0.001). Regarding suturing, 53% of LHD respondents reported using their left hand primarily and 38% reported using their right hand primarily; 9.0% of LHD respondents described themselves as ambidextrous when suturing, compared with 1.9% of RHD respondents (p = 0.012). Only 5.1% of LHD respondents reported having received laterality-specific psychomotor training, whereas 17% perceived a need for such training during residency; RHD respondents reported similar rates. Ambidexterity in scalpel/cautery use or suturing among LHD respondents was not associated with the perception that their left-handedness was advantageous. LHD attending surgeons were more likely than LHD trainees to perceive their handedness as advantageous (p = 0.007). Conclusions:. Fifteen percent of orthopaedic surgeons and trainees who responded to our survey were LHD. LHD respondents reported significantly higher rates of ambidexterity in both scalpel/cautery use and suturing compared with RHD respondents. Ambidexterity was not associated with a self-perception that left-handedness was advantageous. LHD-attending surgeons were significantly more likely than LHD residents/fellows to perceive their left-handedness as advantageous. There may be benefits to pairing LHD residents with LHD faculty surgeons early in their training to provide mentorship and insight regarding performing surgical procedures left handed. Level of Evidence:. Level IV.