Search

Introduction: Firearms are the leading cause of death in the pediatric population, and the incidence of firearm injury is on the rise in the United States. The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of pediatric gunshot wounds (GSWs) in New Orleans from 2012 to 2023 and evaluate factors that contribute to mortality., Methods: A retrospective analysis of pediatric GSWs was conducted using the trauma database at a Level I trauma center in New Orleans, Louisiana. All patients aged 0 to 18 years with a GSW between January 1, 2012, and January 1, 2023, were evaluated. Demographic data, Injury Severity Score (ISS), hospital length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, intent of injury, mortality, firearm type, orthopaedic injuries, and related surgical procedures were extracted from the database. Linear regression was used to assess the trend of GSWs over time, and logistic regression was used to identify variables that predicted mortality. Statistical significance was defined as α = 0.05. Geographic information system (GIS) mapping was conducted using the ZIP code location of injury to identify geographic areas with the greatest number of GSWs., Results: A significant increasing trend was observed in the number of pediatric GSWs when adjusted for changes in population ( P = 0.014), and the number of GSWs increased 43.2% over the duration of the study. Higher ISS, shorter length of stay, and self-inflicted intent of injury were notable predictors of mortality. Three hundred fifty-four patients (31.4%) had at least one orthopaedic injury, and of the survivors, 365 patients (35.6%) required at least one surgical procedure in the operating room during their admission., Discussion: The number of GSWs in the pediatric population in New Orleans presenting at a large level 1 trauma center demonstrated a statistically significant increasing trend over the past 11 years. ISS and self-inflicted intent were predictive of mortality within this pediatric patient population., (Copyright © 2024 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Study Design: Retrospective Comparative Study., Objective: The purpose of this study was to characterize trends in surgical approach for single-level lumbar fusion over the past decade., Summary of Background Data: The number of elective lumbar fusion cases performed is increasing annually. Several different surgical approaches exist for lumbar spinal fusion including novel anterior approaches developed in recent years. With ongoing innovation, trends in the utilization of common surgical approaches in recent years are unclear., Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the PearlDiver database (Fort Wayne, IN). Patients undergoing single-level lumbar fusion between 2010 and 2019 were identified using Current Procedural Technology codes and divided into 4 mutually exclusive cohorts based on surgical approach: (1) anterior-only, (2) anterior approach with posterior instrumentation, (3) posterolateral, and (4) posterior-only interbody. Trend analyses of surgical approach utilization over the last decade were performed with the Cochran-Armitage test to evaluate the 2-tailed null hypothesis that utilization of each surgical approach for single-level lumbar fusion remained constant., Results: A total of 53,234 patients met inclusion criteria and were stratified into 4 cohorts: anterior-only (n=5104), anterior with posterior instrumentation (n=23,515), posterolateral (n=5525), and posterior-only interbody (n=19,090). Trend analysis revealed the utilization of a posterior-only interbody approach significantly decreased from 36.7% to 29.2% ( P <0.001), whereas the utilization of a combined anterior and posterior approach significantly increased from 45.8% to 50.4% ( P <0.001). The utilization of an anterior-only approach also significantly increased from 7.9% to 10.5% ( P <0.001)., Conclusions: Utilization of anterior-only and anterior with posterior instrumentation approaches for single-level lumbar fusion have been significantly increasing over the past decade while use of posterior-only interbody approach trended significantly downward. These data may be particularly useful for trainees and spine surgeons as new techniques and technology become available., Level of Evidence: Level III-retrospective cohort study., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Retrospective study., Objective: This study evaluated the impact of chewing tobacco on both medical and spine-related complication rates after spinal lumbar fusions in comparison to both a control cohort and a smoking cohort., Summary of Background Data: Smoking is a prevalent modifiable risk factor that has been demonstrated to be associated with increased complications after lumbar fusion. Although smoking rates have decreased in the United States, chewing tobacco use has not similarly reduced. Despite chewing tobacco delivering up to 4 times the dose of smoking, the impact of chewing tobacco is incompletely understood., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the PearlDiver database. Patients who underwent lumbar spine fusion and used chewing tobacco were matched with a control cohort and a smoking cohort. Medical complications within 90 days after primary lumbar fusion were evaluated, including deep venous thrombosis, acute kidney injury, pulmonary embolism, transfusion, acute myocardial infarction, and inpatient readmission. Spine-related complications were evaluated at 2 years postoperatively, including pseudoarthrosis, incision and drainage (I&D), instrument failure, revision, and infection., Results: After primary lumbar fusion, the chewing tobacco cohort demonstrated significantly higher rates of pseudoarthrosis [odds ratio (OR): 1.41], revision (OR: 1.57), and any spine-related complication (OR: 1.32) compared with controls. The smoking cohort demonstrated significantly higher rates of pseudoarthrosis (OR: 1.88), I&D (OR: 1.27), instrument failure (OR: 1.39), revision (OR: 1.54), infection (OR: 1.34), and any spine-related complication (OR: 1.77) compared with controls. The chewing tobacco cohort demonstrated significantly lower rates of pseudoarthrosis (OR: 0.84), I&D (OR: 0.49), infection (OR: 0.70), and any spine-related complication (OR: 0.81) compared with the smoking cohort., Conclusions: This study demonstrated that chewing tobacco is associated with higher rates of both spine-related and medical complications after primary lumbar fusion. However, chewing tobacco use is associated with less risk of complications compared with smoking., Level of Evidence: Level III., Competing Interests: M.C. is a paid speaker for Medtronic, Stryker and ATEC. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Smoking has been demonstrated to be a risk factor for nonunion of scaphoid fractures, but it is unclear if chewing tobacco confers similar risk. The purpose of this study was to evaluate rates of bone-related complications after nonsurgical management of scaphoid fractures in smokeless tobacco users compared with matched control subjects and compared with smokers., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the PearlDiver database. For patients who underwent nonsurgical management of scaphoid fractures, 212 smokeless tobacco users and 6,048 smokers were matched 1:4 with control subjects (n = 848 and 24,192, respectively) and 212 smokeless tobacco users were matched 1:4 with 848 smokers. Rates of bone-related complications within 2 years of initial injury were compared using multivariable logistic regression., Results: From weeks 12 through 104 after initial injury, compared with control subjects who do not use tobacco, the smokeless tobacco cohort demonstrated markedly higher rates of nonunion (5.7% vs 2.7%, OR: 2.07). Compared with control subjects who do not use tobacco, the smoking cohort demonstrated markedly higher rates of nonunion (4.3% vs 2.6%, OR: 1.91), repair of nonunion (1.5% vs 0.9%, OR: 1.87), and four corner fusion and proximal row carpectomy (0.3% vs 0.1%, OR: 3.17). Smokeless tobacco use was markedly underdiagnosed in the adult male cohort of unilateral scaphoid fractures with 2 years of follow-up found in the database (372 of 25,704, 1.45%) relative to Centers for Disease Control estimates for adult male smokeless tobacco use (4.5%) ( P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Given the higher rates of nonunion diagnoses after nonsurgical management in this cohort, surgeons should consider asking all patients with scaphoid fractures if they use smokeless tobacco or smoke and consider adding this to the patient's intake history to further identify patients at risk for nonunions. Tobacco cessation counseling is indicated for all tobacco users, including smokeless with scaphoid fractures., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Introduction: Rates of osteoporosis evaluation and management after primary fragility fractures have remained low in recent years. The extent to which this treatment gap affects patients with diabetes is unclear. This study aimed to compare the risk of secondary fractures and rates of osteoporosis diagnosis and management after sentinel fractures in patients with and without diabetes., Methods: A propensity score-matched cohort study was conducted using the PearlDiver database. Patients aged 50 years and older with primary fragility fractures of the hip, wrist, spine, pelvis, humerus, and other locations were identified. Rates of secondary fractures, dual radiograph absorptiometry (DXA) scans, charted osteoporosis diagnoses (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions), and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy within 2 years were compared for patients with and without diabetes using multivariable logistic regression., Results: Matching yielded 27,052 patients in each cohort. Index humerus fractures were more common in the diabetic cohort (15.0% versus 11.6%, P < 0.001), whereas wrist fractures were more prevalent among the nondiabetic cohort (15.2% versus 19.3%, P < 0.001). Incidence of secondary fractures at 2 years was higher for diabetic patients than nondiabetic patients (5.2% versus 4.7%; odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.17). Diabetic patients were significantly less likely to receive a DXA scan (13.2% versus 13.5%; OR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88 to 0.98), be diagnosed with osteoporosis (9.3% versus 11.9%; OR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.82), or start pharmacotherapy (8.1% versus 8.7; OR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87 to 0.99)., Conclusion: Despite diabetes being a well-established risk factor for fragility fractures, diabetic patients were significantly less likely to receive DXA scan evaluation, be formally diagnosed with osteoporosis, or be treated with osteoporosis pharmacotherapy after a sentinel fragility fracture. Incidence of secondary fractures within 2 years was also higher among diabetic patients., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Introduction: The United States is experiencing a national opioid epidemic. This study seeks to analyze recent trends in opioid claims after elective total joint arthroplasty and quantify the effect of preoperative opioid use on risk of prolonged postoperative claim rates., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the PearlDiver database to track annual trends in opioid claims after elective total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Trend analysis of opioid claim rates was done with the Cochran-Armitage test. Rates of postoperative opioid claims were compared between opioid-naïve patients versus patients with opioid claims in the preoperative year through multivariable logistic regression., Results: In total, 105,860 procedures were included. For all procedures, the proportion of patients filing an opioid claim within 30 days postoperatively trended upward from 2011 to 2017 (all P < 0.001). Patients with one to three opioid claims in the year before arthroplasty were more likely to file an opioid claim within 30 days after arthroplasty (THA: odds ratio [OR], 2.61; TKA: OR, 3.04; and TSA: OR, 4.83), between 31 and 90 days (THA: OR, 2.76; TKA: OR, 2.87; and TSA: OR, 3.22), and between 91 days and 6 months (THA: OR, 4.83; TKA: OR, 4.07; and TSA: OR, 3.77). Patients with more than three prior opioid claims were more likely to file an opioid claim within 30 days (THA: OR, 6.15; TKA: OR, 6.79; and TSA: OR, 8.68), between 31 and 90 days (THA: OR, 20.99; TKA: OR, 14.00; and TSA: OR, 28.40), and between 91 days and 6 months (THA: OR, 46.31; TKA: OR, 33.93; and TSA: OR, 59.06)., Conclusion: Opioid claims in the preoperative year markedly increase risk of prolonged postoperative opioid claims after arthroplasty. Surgeons should look further before the acute preoperative period when evaluating opioid exposure and assessing risk of chronic opioid dependence after elective arthroplasty., Level of Evidence: Level III., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Background: During a pandemic, it is paramount to understand volume changes in Level I trauma so that with appropriate planning and reallocation of resources, these facilities can maintain and even improve life-saving capabilities. Evaluating nonaccidental and accidental trauma can highlight potential areas of improvement in societal behavior and hospital preparedness. These critical questions were proposed to better understand how healthcare leaders might adjust surgeon and team coverage of trauma services as well as prepare from a system standpoint what resources will be needed during a pandemic or similar crisis to maintain services., Questions/purposes: (1) How did the total observed number of trauma activations, defined as patients who meet mechanism of injury requirements which trigger the notification and aggregation of the trauma team upon entering the emergency department, change during a pandemic and stay-at-home order? (2) How did the proportion of major mechanisms of traumatic injury change during this time period? (3) How did the proportion and absolute numbers of accidental versus nonaccidental traumatic injury in children and adults change during this time period?, Methods: This was a retrospective study of trauma activations at a Level I trauma center in New Orleans, LA, USA, using trauma registry data of all patients presenting to the trauma center from 2017 to 2020. The number of trauma activations during a government mandated coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) stay-at-home order (from March 20, 2020 to May 14, 2020) was compared with the expected number of activations for the same time period from 2017 to 2019, called "predicted period". The expected number (predicted period) was assumed based on the linear trend of trauma activations seen in the prior 3 years (2017 to 2019) for the same date range (March 20, 2020 to May 14, 2020). To define the total number of traumatic injuries, account for proportion changes, and evaluate fluctuation in accidental verses nonaccidental trauma, variables including type of traumatic injury (blunt, penetrating, and thermal), and mechanism of injury (gunshot wound, fall, knife wound, motor vehicle collision, assault, burns) were collected for each patient., Results: There were fewer total trauma activations during the stay-at-home period than during the predicted period (372 versus 532 [95% CI 77 to 122]; p = 0.016). The proportion of penetrating trauma among total activations was greater during the stay-at-home period than during the predicted period (35% [129 of 372] versus 26% [141 of 532]; p = 0.01), while the proportion of blunt trauma was lower during the stay-at-home period than during the predicted period (63 % [236 of 372] versus 71% [376 of 532]; p = 0.02). The proportion of gunshot wounds in relation to total activations was greater during the stay-at-home period than expected (26% [97 of 372] versus 18% [96 of 532]; p = 0.004). There were fewer motor vehicle collisions in relation to total activations during the stay-at-home period than expected (42% [156 of 372] versus 49% [263 of 532]; p = 0.03). Among total trauma activations, the stay-at-home period had a lower proportion of accidental injuries than the predicted period (55% [203 of 372] versus 61% [326 of 532]; p = 0.05), and there was a greater proportion of nonaccidental injuries than the predicted period (37% [137 of 372] versus 27% [143 of 532]; p < 0.001). In adults, the stay-at-home period had a greater proportion of nonaccidental injuries than the predicted period (38% [123 of 328] versus 26% [123 of 466]; p < 0.001). There was no difference between the stay-at-home period and predicted period in nonaccidental and accidental injuries among children., Conclusion: Data from the trauma registry at our region's only Level I trauma center indicate that a stay-at-home order during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a 70% reduction in the number of traumatic injuries, and the types of injuries shifted from more accidental blunt trauma to more nonaccidental penetrating trauma. Non-accidental trauma, including gunshot wounds, increased during this period, which suggest community awareness, crisis de-escalation strategies, and programs need to be created to address violence in the community. Understanding these changes allows for adjustments in staffing schedules. Surgeons and trauma teams could allow for longer shifts between changeover, decreasing viral exposure because the volume of work would be lower. Understanding the shift in injury could also lead to a change in specialists covering call. With the often limited availability of orthopaedic trauma-trained surgeons who can perform life-saving pelvis and acetabular surgery, this data may be used to mitigate exposure of these surgeons during pandemic situations., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study., Competing Interests: Each author certifies that neither he nor she, nor any members of his or her immeidate family, has funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request., (Copyright © 2020 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

Background: Patients with a patient-reported penicillin allergy may be at greater risk for postoperative prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total joint arthroplasty of the hip, knee, or shoulder. The increased risk of PJI in these patients has been attributed to these patients receiving a less-effective perioperative antibiotic. However, prior reports did not fully address the clinical characteristics of these unique patients, who may inherently be at greater risk of having a PJI, which may confound prior findings., Questions/purposes: After controlling for risk factors for PJI such as BMI, anxiety, depression, and other comorbidities, we asked: Are patients with a patient-reported penicillin allergy more likely to have a PJI after THA, TKA, or total shoulder arthroplasty than patients without such a reported allergy?, Methods: We queried patient records from 2010 to 2017 from a nationwide administrative claims database of 122 million patients to adequately power an investigation comparing the 1-year incidence of PJI after TKA, total shoulder arthroplasty, and THA in patients with patient-reported penicillin allergy versus patients without a patient-reported penicillin allergy. Operative treatments for deep joint infection, identified by Current Procedural Terminology and ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes were used as a surrogate for PJI. Clinical characteristics such as age, sex, BMI, length of stay, and Charlson comorbidity index and specific comorbidities including alcohol abuse, anemia, anxiety, cardiac disease, diabetes, immunocompromised status, rheumatoid arthritis, depression, liver disease, chronic kidney disease, tobacco use, and peripheral vascular disease were queried for each study group. The odds of PJI within 1 year of THA, TKA, or total shoulder arthroplasty were compared using multiple logistic regression after adjusting for potential confounders., Results: After adjusting for potential confounding factors such as BMI, anxiety, depression and other comorbidities, we found that patient-reported penicillin allergy was independently associated with an increased odds of PJI after TKA (odds ratio 1.3 [95% confidence interval 1.1 to 1.4]; p < 0.01) and total shoulder arthroplasty (OR 3.9 [95% CI 2.7 to 5.4]; p < 0.01). However, patient-reported penicillin allergy was not independently associated with an increased odds of PJI after THA (OR 1.1 [95% CI 0.9 to 1.3]; p = 0.36) after controlling for the same risk factors., Conclusions: In this study, we found that patients with patient-reported penicillin allergy were at an increased risk for PJI after TKA and total shoulder arthroplasty, which we suspect-but cannot prove-is likely a function of those patients receiving a second-line antibiotic for presurgical prophylaxis. Since prior research has found that many patients listed in medical records as having a penicillin allergy are in fact not allergic to penicillin, we suggest that surgeons consider preoperative allergy testing, such as using an intraoperative test dose, to aid in choosing the most appropriate antibiotic choice before knee or shoulder arthroplasty and to amend patient medical records based on testing results. Future studies should determine whether this additional diagnostic maneuver is cost-effective., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Case: A 58-year-old man presented with acute respiratory distress syndrome and coagulopathy secondary to COVID-19. He developed acute compartment syndrome (ACS) of the left hand. He underwent a bedside 10-compartment decompression of the hand with volar forearm and carpal tunnel release while in the ICU. This report adds to the scarce body of literature regarding orthopaedic complications related to COVID-19., Conclusion: Coagulopathy secondary to COVID-19 can be a risk factor for the development of ACS. Frequent examinations of lines, restraints, and extremities are recommended. The COVID-19 pandemic presents unique challenges, necessitating clinical adjustments to best care for patients.