Despite the routine use of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, postoperative infection following fracture surgery remains a persistent issue with substantial morbidity. The use of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis may have a protective effect and some orthopaedic surgeons have adopted their use in recent years, despite limited evidence of its beneficial effect. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the current literature regarding the effect of prophylactic local antibiotics on the rate of infection in fracture surgery in both open and closed fractures.

A comprehensive search of Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed was performed. Cohort studies were eligible if they investigated the effect on infection rate of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis compared with systemic prophylaxis alone following fracture surgery. The data were pooled in a meta-analysis.

In total, four randomized controlled trials and 11 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 6161 fractures from various anatomical locations were eligible for inclusion. The majority of the included studies were Level 3 evidence and had a moderate risk of bias. When all fractures were pooled, the risk of infection was significantly reduced when local antibiotics were applied compared with the control group receiving systemic prophylaxis only (OR = 0.39; 95%CI: 0.26 to 0.53, P < 0.001). In particular, there was a significant reduction in deep infections (OR = 0.59; 95%CI: 0.38 to 0.91, P = 0.017). The beneficial effect of local antibiotics for preventing total infection was seen in both open fractures (OR = 0.35; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.53, P < 0.001) and closed fractures (OR = 0.58; 95%CI: 0.35 to 0.95, P = 0.029) when analyzed separately.

This meta-analysis suggests a significant risk reduction for postoperative infection following fracture surgery when local antibiotics were added to standard systemic prophylaxis, with a protective effect present in both open and closed fractures.

The optimal management of rotationally-unstable ankle fractures involving the posterior malleolus remains controversial. Standard practice involves trans-syndesmotic fixation (TSF), however, recent attention has been paid to the indirect reduction of the syndesmosis by repairing small posterior malleolar fracture avulsion fragments, if present, using open reduction internal fixation. Posterior malleolus fixation (PMF) may obviate the need for TSF. Given the limited evidence and diversity in surgical treatment options for rotationally-unstable ankle fractures with ankle syndesmosis and posterior malleolar involvement, we sought to assess the research landscape and identify knowledge gaps to address with future clinical trials.

We performed a scoping review to investigate rotational ankle fractures with posterior malleolar involvement, utilizing the framework originally described by Arksey and O'Malley. We searched the English language literature using the Ovid Medline and Embase databases. All study types investigating rotationally-unstable ankle fractures with posterior malleolus involvement were categorized into defined themes and descriptive statistics were used to summarize methods and results of each study.

A total of 279 articles published from 1988 to 2018 were reviewed, and 70 articles were included in the final analysis. The literature consists of studies examining the surgical treatment strategies for PMF (n=21 studies, 30%), prognosis of rotational ankle fractures with posterior malleolar involvement (n=16 studies, 23%), biomechanics and fracture pattern of these injuries (n=13 studies, 19%), surgical approach and pertinent anatomy for fixation of posterior malleolus fractures (n=12 studies, 17%), and lastly surgical treatment of syndesmotic injuries with PMF compared to TSF (n=4 studies, 6%). Uncontrolled case series of single treatment made up the majority of all clinical studies (n=44 studies, 63%), whereas controlled study designs were the next most common (n=16 studies, 23%). Majority of research in this field has been conducted in the past eight years (n=52 studies, 74%).

Despite increasing concern and debate among the global orthopaedic community regarding rotationally-unstable ankle fractures with syndesmosis and posterior malleolar involvement, and an increasing trend towards PMF, optimal treatment remains unclear when comparing TSF to PMF. Current research priorities are to (1) define the specific injury pattern for which PMF adequately stabilizes the syndesmosis, and (2) conduct a randomized clinical trial comparing PMF to TSF with the assistance of the orthopaedic community at large with well-defined clinical outcomes.

Distracted driving is now the number one cause of death among teenagers in the United States of America according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. However, the risks and consequences of driving while distracted spans all ages, gender, and ethnicity. The Distractions on the Road: Injury eValuation in Surgery And FracturE Clinics (DRIVSAFE) Study aimed to examine the prevalence of distracted driving among patients attending hospital-based orthopaedic surgery fracture clinics. We further aimed to explore factors associated with distracted driving.

In a large, multi-center prospective observational study, we recruited 1378 adult patients with injuries treated across four clinics (Hamilton, Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Calgary, Alberta, Halifax, Nova Scotia) across Canada. Eligible patients included those who held a valid driver's license and were able to communicate and understand written english. Patients were administered questions about distracted driving. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.

Patients average age was 45.8 years old (range 16 – 87), 54.3% male, and 44.6% female (1.1% not disclosed). Of 1361 patients, 1358 self-reported distracted driving (99.8%). Common sources of distractions included talking to passengers (98.7%), outer-vehicle distractions (95.5%), eating/drinking (90.4%), music listening/adjusting the radio (97.6%/93.8%), singing (83.2%), accepting phone calls (65.6%) and daydreaming (61.2%). Seventy-nine patients (6.3%), reported having been stopped by police for using a handheld device in the past. Among 113 drivers who disclosed the cause of their injury as a motor vehicle crash (MVC), 20 of them (17%) acknowledged being distracted at the time of the crash. Of the participants surveyed, 729 reported that during their lifetime they had been the driver in a MVC, with 226 (31.1%) acknowledging they were distracted at the time of the crash.

Approximately, 1 in 6 participants in this study had a MVC where they reported to be distracted. Despite the overwhelming knowledge that distracted driving is dangerous and the recognition by participants that it can be dangerous, a staggering amount of drivers engage in distracted driving on a fairly routine basis. This study demonstrates an ongoing need for research and driver education to reduce distracted driving and its devastating consequences.

The purpose of this project was to evaluate North American trauma surgeon preferences regarding patient positioning for antegrade fixation of mid shaft femoral shaft fractures.

This project was a cross sectional survey taken of orthopaedic fellows and staff surgeons, belonging to three organizations across North America. An estimated sample size was calculated a priori, while various online techniques were utilized to reduce non responder and fatigue bias. The survey was distributed multiple times to optimize yield.

Two hundred twelve (212) participants responded in full, 134 (56%) of whom practiced in Canada. The majority of surgeons worked in level one trauma centres (74%), while 72% treated more than one femoral shaft fracture per week. The most common patient position for mid shaft fixation amongst all surgeons was lateral positioning with manual traction (68%), however community surgeons were significantly more likely to use a fracture table. The most common difficulties faced with using a fracture table were inability to achieve fracture reduction and peroneal nerve palsies. The majority (64%) of surgeons quoted a complication rate with fracture tables of greater than 1 per 100 cases.

Lateral position with use of manual traction is the preferred set up for antegrade fixation of femoral shaft fracture in this large North American cohort of trauma surgeons. However, a large subset of community and non academic surgeons still prefer use of the fracture table. Amongst all respondents, a high rate of fracture table complications, including malreduction, were quoted. To date, there is no prospective data comparing these two options for patient positioning, and a randomized controlled trial may be an appropriate next step.

Despite long-standing dogma, a clear relationship between the timing of surgical irrigation and the development of subsequent deep infection has not been established in the literature. Traditionally, irrigation of an open fracture has been recommended within six-hours of injury based on animal studies from the 1970s, however the clinical basis for this remains unclear. Using data from a multi-centre randomized controlled trial of 2,447 open fracture patients, the primary objective of this secondary analysis is to determine if a relationship exists between timing of wound irrigation (within six hours of injury versus beyond six hours) and subsequent reoperation rate for infection or healing complications within one year for patients with open extremity fractures requiring surgical treatment.

To adjust for the influence of patient and injury characteristics on the timing of irrigation, a propensity score was developed from the data set. Propensity-adjusted regression allowed for a matched cohort analysis within the study population to determine if early irrigation put patients independently at risk for reoperation, while controlling for confounding factors. Results were reported as odds ratios (ORs), 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs), and p-values. All analyses were conducted using STATA 14 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).

Two thousand, two hundred eighty-six of 2,447 patients randomized to the trial from 41 orthopaedic trauma centers across five countries had complete data regarding time to irrigation. Prior to matching, the patients managed with early irrigation had a higher proportion requiring reoperation for infection or healing complications (17% versus 12.8%, p=0.02), however this does not account for selection bias of more severe injuries preferentially being treated earlier. After the propensity score-matching algorithm was applied, there were 373 matched pairs of patients available for comparison. In the matched cohort, reoperation rates did not differ between early and late groups (16.1% vs 16.6%, p=0.84). When accounting for propensity matching in a logistic regression analysis, early irrigation was not associated with reoperation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.40, p=0.73).

When accounting for other variables, late irrigation does not independently increase risk of reoperation.

It is estimated that a quarter to half of all hospital waste is produced in the operating room. Recycling of surgical waste in the perioperative setting is largely underutilized, despite the fact that many of the materials being discarded can be potentially recycled safely and easily. Given this mounting waste production, recycling programs have become increasingly popular. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is assess the effect of these recent eco-friendly polices by determining the amount of waste and recycling produced in the pre-operative and operative time period for several orthopaedic subspecialties.

Surgical cases were prospectively chosen and assigned to an orthopaedic subspecialty category, which included trauma, arthroplasty, sports, foot and ankle, upper extremity, and paediatrics. The preoperative phase began with the opening of the surgical case carts and concluded with the end of skin preparation. The intraoperative period began after skin preparation was complete, and concluded after the operating room was cleaned. At the end of the preoperative period all surgical waste was weighed and divided into recyclables and non-recyclables. Following the intraoperative period, surgical waste was divided into recyclables, non-recyclables, linens, and biohazardous waste streams. All bags were weighed in a standardized fashion using a portable hand held scale. The primary outcome of interest was the amount of recyclable waste produced per case. Secondary outcomes included the amount of nonrecyclable, biohazardous and total waste produced during the same time intervals. Statistical analysis was then completed using (ANOVA) to detect differences between specialties.

This study included 55 procedures collected over a 1-month period at two hospitals from October 2017 to November 2017. A total of 341 kg of waste was collected with a mean mass of 6.2 kg per case. In terms of primary outcomes, arthroplasty surgery produced a significantly greater amount of recyclable waste per case in the preoperative (2327.9 g)and intraoperative (938.6 g)period. It also produced the greatest amount of total recyclable waste per case, resulting in a significantly greater ratio of waste recycling per case then nearly all other specialties in the preoperative (86.2%) and intraoperative period (14.5%). In terms of secondary outcomes, arthroplasty surgery similarly produced a significantly greater amount of nonrecyclable waste per case then all other specialties (5823.6 g), the majority of which was produced during the intraoperative period (5512.9 g). Arthroplasty surgery also produced a significantly greater amount of biohazardous waste then all other specialties (409.3 g). The majority of surgical waste was produced in the intraoperative period compared to the preoperative period. In the preoperative period an average of 74.4% of waste was recyclable, compared to 7.6% of waste produced during the intraoperative period. In total, the average amount of waste recycled per case was 25.6%. Biohazardous waste only constituted 1.8% of the total waste mass.

Orthopaedic surgery is a significant source of waste production in our hospital system. Among orthopaedic subspecialties, arthroplasty is one of the largest waste producers, but also has the highest potential for recycling of materials. Effective OR recycling programs can significantly reduce our ecological footprint by diverting waste from landfills. In particular, the preoperative period has significant potential for landfill diversion as our study showed that nearly three quarters of all waste in this period can be effectively recycled.

We aimed to demonstrate the clinical safety of a novel anatomic cementless ceramic hip resurfacing device. Concerns around the safety of metal on metal arthroplasty have made resurfacing less attractive, while long term function continues to make the concept appealing. Biolox Delta ceramic is now used in more than 50% of all hip arthroplasties, suggesting that it's safety profile is acceptable. We wondered if a combination of these concepts might work?

The preclinical testing of anatomic hip resurfacing device developed by our group was presented last year. A twenty patient safety study was designed. Patients had to be between the ages of 18 and 70. The initial size range was restricted to femoral heads between 46 and 54, representing the common sizes of hip resurfacing. The primary outcomes were clinical safety, PROMs and radiological control. Secondary outcomes include CTRSA and metal ion levels.

20 patients were recruited, aged 30–69. 7 were women and 13 were men. There were no operative adverse events in their operations undertaken between September 2017 and February 2018. One patient had a short episode of atrial fibrillation on the second postoperative day, and no other complications. At three months the median oxford hip score had risen from 27 (range 14–38) to 46 (31–48). Cobalt and chromium levels were almost undetectable at 3 months. Fixation appeared satisfactory in all patients, with no migration detected in either component. CTRSA is in process.

The initial safety of a novel cementless ceramic resurfacing device is demonstrated by this data. The 10 year, 250 case efficacy study will continue in 5 other European centres.

Introduction

Financial and human cost effectiveness is an increasing evident outcome measure of surgical innovation. Considering the human element, the aim is to restore the individual to their “normal” state by sparing anatomy without compromising implant performance. Gait lab studies have shown differences between different implants at top walking speed, but none to our knowledge have analysed differing total hip replacement patients through the entire range of gait speed and incline to show differences. The purpose of this gait study was to 1) determine if a new short stem femoral implant would return patients back to normal 2) compare its performance to established hip resurfacing and long stem total hip replacement (THR) implants.

Financial and human cost effectiveness is an increasing evident outcome measure of surgical innovation. Considering the human element, the aim is to restore the individual to their “normal” state by sparing anatomy without compromising implant performance. Gait lab studies have shown differences between different implants at top walking speed, but none to our knowledge have analysed differing total hip replacement patients through the entire range of gait speed and incline to show differences. The purpose of this gait study was to 1) determine if a new short stem femoral implant would return patients back to normal 2) compare its performance to established hip resurfacing and long stem total hip replacement (THR) implants.

110 subjects were tested on an instrumented treadmill (Kistler Gaitway, Amherst, NY), 4 groups (short-stem THR, long-stem THR, hip resurfacing and healthy controls) of 28, 29, 27, and 26 respectively. The new short femoral stem patients (Furlong Evolution, JRI) were taken from the ongoing Evolution Hip trial that have been tested on the treadmill with minimum 12months postop. The long stem total hip replacements and hip resurfacing groups were identified from out 800 patient gait database. They were only chosen if they were 12 months postop and had no other joint disease or medical comorbidities which would affect gait performance.

All subjects were tested through their entire range of gait speeds and incline after having a 5 minute habituation period. Speed intervals were at 0.5kms increments until maximum walking speed achieved and inclines at 4kms for 5, 10, 15%. At all incremental intervals of speed, the vertical component of the ground reaction forces, center of pressure and temporal measurements were collected for both limbs with a sampling frequency of 100Hz. Body weight scaling was applied to correct for mass differences and a symmetry index to compare the implanted hip to the contralateral normal hip. All variables for each subject group were compared to each other using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey post hoc test with significance set at α=0.05.

The four experimental groups were reasonably matched for demographics and the implant groups for PROMs. Hip resurfacing had a clear top walking speed advantage, but when assessing the symmetry index on all speeds and incline, all groups were not significantly different. Push-off and step length was statistically less favourable for the short/long THR group (p=0.005–0.05) depending on speed/incline.

The primary aim of this study was determine if implant design affected gait symmetry and performance. Interestingly, irrespective of implant design, symmetry with regards to weight acceptance, impulse, push-off and step length was returned to normal when comparing to healthy controls. However individual implant performance on the flat and incline, showed inferior (p<0.05) push-off force and step length in the short stem and long stem THR groups when compared to controls. Age and gender may have played a part for the short stem group. It appears that the early gait outcomes for the short stem device are promising. Assessment at the 3 year mark should be conclusive.