Negligence claims following non-union and malunion of long bone fractures: An analysis of 15 years of data

Effect of concomitant deformity correction on patient outcomes following femoral (OTA type 32) nonunion repair

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to determine what effect, if any, concomitant deformity correction has on outcomes following femoral nonunion repair.

METHODS

605 consecutive patients who presented to our center with a long bone nonunion treated by one of 3 surgeons was queried. Sixty-two patients (10 %) with complete follow up were treated for a fracture nonunion following a Type 32 femur fracture (subtrochanteric, femoral shaft or distal third metaphysis) over an 11-year period. Twenty of these patients underwent a deformity correction (DC)-angular, rotational, or a combination of both-as part of their femoral reconstruction. Patient demographics and initial injury information was reviewed and compared. Outcomes including radiographic healing, time to union, postoperative complications, patient reported pain scores, and functional outcome scores using the Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA) were recorded. Patients with and without deformity correction were analyzed and compared using independent T-tests and Chi-Square tests.

RESULTS

Compared to the non-deformity correction (NDC) cohort, the DC cohort demonstrated a worse complication profile. Notably, the DC cohort had longer time to union (11.6 ± 7.3 months vs 7.6 ± 8.5 months, P = 0.042), reported significantly higher VAS pain scores at 1-year post-op (4.2 ± 2.8 vs 2.3 ± 2.6, P = 0.007), experienced more complications (25 % vs 4.8 %, P = 0.019), and had a higher rate of secondary procedures (30 % vs 4.8 %, P = 0.006). The DC patients reported less improvement in functional capability as displayed by a smaller average improvement in initial and final SMFA scores (P = 0.042) There was no difference in ultimate bone healing (P = 0.585), baseline SMFA (P = 0.294), and latest SMFA (P = 0.066).

CONCLUSION

Deformity correction, if needed as part of femoral nonunion repair, is associated with an increased time to heal, greater rate of complications and diminished improvement of functionality. Eventual healing and patient reported outcomes were similar whether a deformity correction is necessary or not.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Intraoperative Measurement of Tibial Rotation With Lateral Axis Views Using C-arm for Tibial Fractures

Malrotation of tibial fractures after intramedullary nailing remains an unsolved problem. The incidence of malrotation >10° on computer tomography (CT) measurements has been high in cases of tibial shaft fractures. We aimed to assess the accuracy of a novel method for the measurement of tibial rotation using lateral axis views of the C-arm, to prevent postoperative malrotation. Consecutive patients with fresh tibial fractures treated by intramedullary nailing between January 2021 and December 2022 were included prospectively. Baseline tibial external rotation (TER) was measured preoperatively on the non-injured normal side with CT. After proximal or distal screw fixation, the C-arm TER was measured based on lateral axis views (tibial posterior condylar axis and bimalleolar axis views). The C-arm TER was compared with the normal-side CT TER; when the difference was ≤5°, the procedure progressed, and screw fixation was carried out. The fractured-side CT TER was measured one week post-operatively. Twenty patients (13 males and seven females) were included. The mean age was 52.4 years. The Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) classification was 42A in five patients, 42B in twelve patients, and 42C in three patients. The mean difference between C-arm TER and fractured-side CT TER was 2.3°±1.7°, with Pearson correlation coefficient r=0.968. The mean difference between normal-side CT TER and fractured-side CT TER was 4.8°±2.8°, and there was no incidence of malrotation >10°. The C-arm method was highly accurate in estimating CT measurements and preventing tibial malrotation.

An Analysis of Formal Patient Complaints, Risk, and Malpractice Events Involving Orthopedic Trauma Surgeons During a 10-Year Period

Formal patient complaints and malpractice events involving orthopedic trauma surgeons (OTSs) can have substantial career implications. Our purpose was to analyze formal patient complaints, risk events, and malpractice events against OTSs during a 10-year period. We reviewed all formal patient complaints within our institution's patient advocacy database involving 9 fellowship-trained OTSs throughout a decade. Complaints were categorized using the Patient Complaint Analysis System. Potential risk and malpractice events involving the OTSs were recorded. A control group of all patients seen by the surgeons during the study period was created. Demographics between patients with complaints and the control group were analyzed, as were malpractice, risk, and complaint rates between the surgeons. Of 33,770 patients, 136 filed a formal complaint (0.40%). There were 29 malpractice claims and 2 malpractice lawsuits. The care and treatment domain accounted for the highest percentage of complaints (36%), followed by the access and availability domain (26%). Results of the logistic regression analysis indicated that private insurance (odds ratio, 1.58) and operative treatment (odds ratio, 3.65) were significantly associated with complaints. Despite statistically significant differences in the rates of complaint and risk events between surgeons, malpractice events did not differ. The rate of patient complaints within a large orthopedic trauma practice during a 10-year period was 0.40%. Patients with private insurance and those treated operatively were more likely to file a complaint. Whereas complaint rates among surgeons varied, there was no significant difference in the rate of malpractice events. Understanding patient complaint rates and categorizations may allow surgeons to target areas for improvement. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(2):121-127.].

Clinical assessment of tibial torsion differences. Do we always need a computed tomography?

Background

Tibial torsional malalignment presents a well-known complication of intramedullary nailing for tibial shaft fractures.

Purpose

Objective of this study was to investigate the ability to clinically assess tibial torsion differences. Computed Tomography (CT) was used here as the gold standard. Further, intra- and inter-observer reliability of the clinical examination, and radiological measurements were calculated.

Methods

Fifty-one patients with torsion-difference CTs, obtained for various reasons, were asked to kneel on an examination couch with free hanging feet. All patients are positioned with 90° flexed knee and neutral ankle. A picture of the lower extremities was obtained from the back of the patient. Two blinded orthopedic surgeons were asked to look at the pictures and measure the tibial torsion with a digital goniometer, based on the axis of the femur in relation to the second ray of the foot. To determine the intra-observer variation, the torsional angles were calculated again after 4 weeks. To be able to compare values, two blinded radiologists calculated torsional differences based on computed tomography.

Results

All patients were able to be positioned for clinical assessment (n = 51). Clinical assessment of torsional difference revealed 4.55° ± 6.85 for the first, respectively, 4.55° ± 7.41 for the second investigator. The second measurement of the first investigator revealed a value of 4.57° ± 6.9. There was a good intra-observer agreement for clinical assessment (ICC 0.993, p < 0.001). Also, the inter-observer agreement showed a good inter-observer agreement (ICC 0.949, p < 0.001). Evaluation of radiological inter-observer assessment could also show a good inter-observer agreement (ICC 0.922, p < 0.001). The clinical method showed a good correlation to the CT method (0.839, p < 0.001). Additionally, the Bland–Altman plot was used to compare graphically both measurement techniques, which proved the agreement.

Conclusion

In summary, computed tomography-assisted measurement of tibial torsion and clinical assessment correlated significantly good. In addition to that, clinical measurement has a good intra- and inter-observer reliability. Clinical examination is a reliable and cost-effective tool to detect mal-torsion and should be part of the repertoire of every surgeon.

Prevalence of Individual Differences in Tibial Torsion: A CT-Based Study

OBJECTIVES

To measure baseline bilateral tibial torsion in a cohort of uninjured patients to assess for a difference in torsion between sides.

METHODS

Consecutive bilateral lower extremity CT angiography scans from 229 patients without tibial or fibular pathology were collected and reviewed. Torsion of each tibia was measured by two independent reviewers, and individual differences in torsion were calculated.

RESULTS

On average, patients have a 6.0° difference in tibial torsion between sides. A difference of greater than 10° was present in 18% of patients. Across the cohort of patients, the right tibia was on average 4.4° more externally rotated than the left. In patients with a greater than 5° difference, the right tibia was more externally rotated than the left in 85% of cases. Tibial torsion did not correlate with age or sex.

DISCUSSION

Differences in tibial torsion are common and should be considered during intramedullary nailing of tibial fractures. When a difference in torsion is present, external torsion of the right tibia when compared with the left occurs predominantly.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic level IV.

Complications and subsequent surgery after intra-medullary nailing for tibial shaft fractures: Review of 8110 patients

BACKGROUND

Intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures has been common practice for decades. Nevertheless, complications occur frequently, and subsequent surgery is often required. To improve our understanding on how we may improve trauma care for patients with tibial shaft fractures, this study systematically reviewed all currently available evidence to assess the incidence of complications and rate of re-operations following intramedullary nailing of traumatic tibial fractures.

METHODS

Trip Database, Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Library were searched on September 7th, 2018. Searches were limited to English studies published after January 1st, 1998. Studies were included if authors included more than 50 patients treated with intramedullary nailing for traumatic tibial fractures. Inclusion of studies and critical appraisal of the evidence was performed by two independent authors. Incidence of complications and rate of re-operations were reported with descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies involving 8110 patients treated with intramedullary nailing for traumatic tibial fractures were included. Mean age of patients was 37.5 years. The most frequent complication was anterior knee pain (23%), followed by non-union (11%). Eighteen percent of patients required at least one subsequent surgery. The most frequent indication of subsequent surgery was screw removal due to pain or discomfort (9%). Dynamization of the nail to promote union was reported in 8% of the cases. Nail revision and bone-grafting to promote union were applied in 4% and 2% respectively.

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

Patients treated with intramedullary nailing for tibial fractures need to be consented for high probability of adverse events as anterior knee pain, subsequent surgical procedures and bone healing problems are relatively common. However, based on current data it remains difficult to identify specifiers and determinants of an individual patient with specific fracture characteristics at risk for complications. Future studies should aim to establish patient specific risks models for complications and re-operations, such that clinicians can anticipate them and adjust and individualize treatment strategies.

Agonizing and Expensive: A Review of Institutional Costs of Ankle Fusion Nonunions

Nonunion after ankle arthrodesis requiring revision is a challenging operative complication, and bone graft substitutes are costly. This study sought to summarize all institutional expenditures related to the revision of an ankle fusion nonunion, presuming that cost and skin-to-skin time would exceed those of the index surgery. The electronic records from 2 foot and ankle centers were reviewed, leading to a list of patients with 2 or more entries for tibiotalar fusions being generated. A total of 24 cases were found to match the criteria. Demographic factors and skin-to-skin time of the remaining patients were compiled. This cohort included 24 patients (6 female and 18 male) with a mean age of 64 years and body mass index of 30.4 kg/m². Supplemental clinic visits and investigations were included either after computed tomography to assess union or 365 days after index surgery. Total cost of the revision was calculated from billing codes, length of operation, and period of hospitalization. Postrevision outpatient fees were included as well. The revisions were performed open in all cases, and 21 patients received autograft and/or bone substitute. Mean postoperative hospitalization was 3 days. The additional costs (in US dollars) associated with nonunion were $1061 for imaging, $627 for prerevision visits, $3026 for the revision, $3432 for the hospital stay, and $1754 for postrevision follow-up. The total mean amount was $9683, equivalent to 9 nights of acute inpatient stay. Mean index skin-to-skin time was 114 minutes, being 126 minutes for revisions (P=.26). Additional care related to ankle fusion nonunion represents a financial burden equivalent to 9 nights of acute inpatient stay. The use of an orthobiologic would need to be less than $436 to be cost saving. Revision surgery is not significantly longer intraoperatively than index surgery. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(4):e219-e224.].

Prevalence of Rotational Malalignment After Intramedullary Nailing of Tibial Shaft Fractures: Can We Reliably Use the Contralateral Uninjured Side as the Reference Standard?

BACKGROUND

Intramedullary (IM) nailing is the treatment of choice for most tibial shaft fractures. However, an iatrogenic pitfall may be rotational malalignment. The aims of this retrospective analysis were to determine (1) the prevalence of rotational malalignment using postoperative computed tomography (CT) as the reference standard; (2) the average baseline tibial torsion of uninjured limbs; and (3) based on that normal torsion, whether the contralateral, uninjured limb can be reliably used as the reference standard.

METHODS

The study included 154 patients (71% male and 29% female) with a median age of 37 years. All patients were treated for a unilateral tibial shaft fracture with an IM nail and underwent low-dose bilateral postoperative CT to assess rotational malalignment.

RESULTS

More than one-third of the patients (n = 55; 36%) had postoperative rotational malalignment of ≥10°. Right-sided tibial shaft fractures were significantly more likely to display external rotational malalignment whereas left-sided fractures were predisposed to internal rotational malalignment. The uninjured right tibiae were an average of 4° more externally rotated than the left (mean rotation and standard deviation, 41.1° ± 8.0° [right] versus 37.0° ± 8.2° [left]; p < 0.01). Applying this 4° correction to our cohort not only reduced the prevalence of rotational malalignment (n = 45; 29%), it also equalized the distribution of internal and external rotational malalignment between the left and right tibiae.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms a high prevalence of rotational malalignment following IM nailing of tibial shaft fractures (36%). There was a preexisting 4° left-right difference in tibial torsion, which sheds a different light on previous studies and current clinical practice and could have important implications for the diagnosis and management of tibial rotational malalignment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Malpractice Litigation Following Traumatic Fracture

BACKGROUND

Poor clinical outcomes and adverse events following orthopaedic trauma are common, which may lead to litigation. To our knowledge, factors associated with litigation following fracture care have not previously been evaluated.

METHODS

A retrospective review of fracture-related malpractice lawsuits from 1988 to 2015 was completed utilizing VerdictSearch (ALM Media Properties), a medicolegal database. Defendant and plaintiff characteristics along with fracture type, allegations, litigation outcomes, and the association of case characteristics with outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 561 cases were evaluated; 360 cases were excluded, resulting in a total of 201 cases that were analyzed in detail. The mean age of the plaintiff was 43.1 years (standard deviation [SD],19.4 years). Twenty-four fracture types were represented among the analyzed cases. The most common fractures were of the radius (44), the femur (32), the tibia (30), the ulna (29), the humerus (26), the spine (24), the hip (17), and the fibula (15). Overall, 129 (64.2%) cases resulted in a defense verdict, 41 (20.4%) cases resulted in a plaintiff verdict, and 31 (15.4%) cases resulted in a settlement. For plaintiff verdicts, the mean indemnity payment was $3,778,657 (median, $753,057; range, $89,943 to $27,926,311). For settlements, the mean indemnity payment was $1,097,439 (median, $547,935; range, $103,541 to $9,445,113). The mean indemnity for plaintiff verdicts was significantly greater than the mean indemnity for settlements (p = 0.03). The presence of a neurological deficit was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of a favorable outcome for the plaintiff (52.8% for plaintiffs with neurological deficit versus 32.1% for plaintiffs without neurological deficit; p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

This study examined malpractice litigation following traumatic orthopaedic injuries. In cases with decisions for the plaintiff, indemnity payments were on average more than $2.5 million larger than payments for settlements. In fracture cases with neurological deficit, malpractice cases were more likely to result in a favorable outcome for the plaintiff.

The treatment of segmental tibial fractures: does patient preference differ from surgeon choice?

INTRODUCTION

Segmental tibial fractures are complex injuries with a prolonged recovery time. Current definitive treatment options include intramedullary fixation or a circular external fixator. However, there is uncertainty as to which surgical option is preferable and there are no sufficiently rigorous multi-centre trials that have answered this question. The objective of this study was to determine whether patient and surgeon opinion was permissive for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing intramedullary nailing to the application of a circular external fixator.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A convenience questionnaire survey of attending surgeons was conducted during the United Kingdom's Orthopaedic Trauma Society annual meeting 2017 to determine the treatment modalities used for a segmental tibial fracture (n=63). Patient opinion was obtained from clinical patients who had been treated for a segmental tibial fracture as part of a patient and public involvement focus group with questions covering the domains of surgical preference, treatment expectations, outcome, the consent process and follow-up regime (n=5).

RESULTS

Based on the surgeon survey, 39% routinely use circular frame fixation following segmental tibial fracture compared to 61% who use nail fixation. Nail fixation was reported as the treatment of choice for a closed injury in a healthy patient in 81% of surgeons, and by 86% for a patient with a closed fracture who was obese. Twenty-one percent reported that they would use a nail for an open segmental tibia fracture in diabetics who smoked, whilst 57% would opt for a nail for a closed injury with compartment syndrome, and only 27% would use a nail for an open segmental injury in a young fit sports person. The patient and public preference exercise identified that sleep, early functional outcomes and psychosocial measures of outcomes are important.

CONCLUSION

We concluded that a RCT comparing definitive fixation with an intramedullary nail and a circular external fixator is justified as there remains uncertainty on the optimal surgical management for segmental tibial fractures. Furthermore, psychosocial factors and early post-operative outcomes should be reported as core outcome measures as part of such a trial.

Technical considerations to avoid delayed and non-union

For many years intramedullary nails have been a well accepted and successful method of diaphyseal fracture fixation. However, delayed and non unions with this technique do still occur and are associated with significant patient morbidity. The reason for this can be multi-factorial. We discuss a number of technical considerations to maximise fracture reduction, fracture stability and fracture vascularity in order to achieve bony union.