Search

Introduction: External fixation is widely accepted as a provisional or sometimes definitive treatment for long-bone fractures. Indications include but are not limited to damage control surgery in poly-traumatized patients as well as provisional bridging to definite treatment with soft tissue at risk. As little is known about surgeon's habits in applying this treatment strategy, we performed a national survey., Methods: We utilized the member database of the German Trauma Society (DGU). The questionnaire encompassed 15 questions that addresses topics including participants' position, experience, workplace, and questions regarding specifics of external fixation application in different anatomical regions. Furthermore, we compared differences between trauma centre levels and surgeon-related factors., Results: The participants predominantly worked in level 1 trauma centres (42.7%) and were employed as attendings (54.7%). There was widespread consensus for planning and intra-operative radiographical control of external fixation. Surgeons appointed at a level I trauma centre preferred significantly more often supra-acetabular pin placement in external fixation of the pelvis rather than the utilization of iliac pins (75.8%, p = 0.0001). Moreover, they were more likely to favor a mini-open approach to insert humeral pins (42.4%, p = 0.003). Overall, blunt dissection and mini-open approaches seemed equally popular (38.2 and 34.1%). Department chairmen indicated more often than their colleagues to follow written pin-care protocols for minimization of infection (16.7%, p = 0.003)., Conclusion: Despite the fact that external fixation usage is widespread and well established among trauma surgeons in Germany, there are substantial differences in the method of application.

External fixation has become an important tool in orthopedic surgery. Technology has improved the design and material as well as the construct of the fixator. As most patients are converted from external fixation to definite stabilization during later clinical course, prevention of complications such as infection is of high importance. Based on the current literature, principles of temporary external fixation were summarized. We focused on minimizing the risk of infection and introduce a standardized algorithm how to proceed when converting from external to internal fixation, which also was examined for effectiveness., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: External fixators are easy to apply and maximize soft tissue preservation. However, frames need providing an adequate stiffness in order to avoid excessive interfragmentary movement during the healing period. We characterized the stiffness of four different configurations of the newly developed Hoffmann 3 external fixation system., Methods: A synthetic fracture gap model was stabilized using four different frame configurations: a double-∅ 11 mm rod configuration (group DR), a hybrid double-∅ 8 mm rod configuration (group H), a single ∅ 11 mm rod direct link configuration (group DL) and a single ∅ 11 mm rod side arm configuration (group SA). The stiffness of each configuration was measured under anterior-posterior bending, medial-lateral bending and axial torsion loading directions and the results statistically compared., Results: The basic frame construct (group DR) showed the highest bending and torsional stiffness properties while the single rod side arm configuration (group SA) the lowest., Conclusions: The diameter and the amount of used connecting rods as well as the adequate placement of these rods towards the main loading directions determine the construct stiffness. These results could help the surgeons estimating how different frames can potentially affect the interfragmentary motion. This information might help in choosing specific configuration when treating different fracture types on given patients.

Background: Increases in C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) counts after orthopedic surgical procedures can give evidence of postoperative infection. However, there is a lack of knowledge about the kinetics of these biomarkers in cases with an uneventful clinical course after osteosynthesis of upper limb fractures. This study investigated CRP and WBC serum levels after osteosynthesis or hemiarthroplasty of humeral head fractures., Methods: A retrospective study on patients with humeral head fractures who had open reduction and internal fixation via plate osteosynthesis (PO) (n = 64) or hemiarthroplasty (HA) (n = 28) without any complications in the postoperative clinical course. C-reactive protein serum levels (mg/l) and leukocyte counts (g/l) were assayed at several time points. Multiple regression analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of several confounding variables (the surgical procedure, duration of surgery, patient's health status, and comorbidities) on the kinetics of CRP and WBC., Results: Our data showed that CRP levels were statistically significantly higher in the HA cohort when compared to the PO cohort (p = 0.003). Moreover, daily measurement of CRP levels during the postoperative course showed that CRP peaked on the 2nd and 3rd days postoperatively in both cohorts and started to decrease afterward, reaching normal values on day 8 to 10. However, WBCs did not show any significant differences between the HA and PO cohorts. Finally, the choice of surgical procedure and the patient's health status were associated with higher peak levels of CRP., Conclusions: After osteosynthesis or hemiarthroplasty of humeral head fractures, CRP is a responsive serum parameter in the postoperative course of an uneventful inflammatory response. Abnormalities from these values should be interpreted carefully as they may give a hint as to postoperative complications such as infection.

Background: In multiply injured patients, definitive stabilization of major fractures is performed whenever feasible, depending on the clinical condition., Questions/purposes: We therefore asked whether (1) any preoperative indicators predict major complications after major extremity surgery; (2) perioperative routine parameters other than those indicative of hemorrhagic shock predict postoperative complications; and (3) any postoperative clinical findings can predict major complications in the further course of the patient., Methods: We prospectively followed patients with femoral midshaft fracture, Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 16 points, or three fractures and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) ≥ 2 points and another injury (AIS ≥ 2 points), and age 18 to 65 years. We recorded multiple clinical parameters. End points were pneumonia, sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute lung injury, and multiple organ failure., Results: Forty-three of 165 patients developed complications. (1) Patients with complications had a decreased initial Glasgow Coma Scale and tended to have a lower ISS. (2) None of the assessed perioperative parameters was able to sufficiently predict postoperative complications. (3) The presence of a lung contusion and ventilation > 48 hours were associated with complications in the further course., Conclusions: In stable multiply injured patients, none of the individual routine clinical parameters was able to predict complications. Severe head and thoracic injuries seem to be important drivers for the development postoperative complications.