1
|
van de Wall BJM, Hoepelman RJ, Michelitsch C, Diwersi N, Sommer C, Babst R, Beeres FJP. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) for scapular fractures. Oper Orthop Traumatol 2023; 35:390-396. [PMID: 37594566 DOI: 10.1007/s00064-023-00819-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2022] [Revised: 02/02/2023] [Accepted: 02/08/2023] [Indexed: 08/19/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Presentation of a minimally invasive surgical approach for the treatment of scapular fractures and the clinical outcome using this technique. INDICATIONS Displaced extra-articular fractures of the scapula body and glenoid neck (AO 14B and 14F) and simple intra-articular fractures of the glenoid. CONTRAINDICATIONS Complex intra-articular fractures and isolated fractures of the coracoid base. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE Make a straight or slightly curved incision along the lateral margin of the scapula leaving the deltoid fascia intact. Identify the interval between the teres minor muscle and infraspinatus to visualize the lateral column, whilst retracting the deltoid to visualize the glenoid neck. Reduce and align the fracture using direct and indirect reduction tools. A second window on the medial border of the scapula can be made to aid reduction and/or to augment stability. Small (2.0-2.7 mm) plates in a 90° configuration on the lateral border and, if required, on the medial border are used. Intra-operative imaging confirms adequate reduction and extra-articular screw placement. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT Direct postoperative free functional nonweight-bearing rehabilitation limited to 90° abduction for the first 6 weeks. Sling for comfort. Free range of motion and permissive weight-bearing after 6 weeks. RESULTS We collected data from 35 patients treated with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) between 2011 and 2021. Average age was 53 ± 15.1 years (range 21-71 years); 17 had a type B and 18 a type F fracture according the AO classification. All patients suffered concomitant injuries of which thoracic (n = 33) and upper extremity (n = 25) injuries were most common. Double plating of the lateral border (n = 30) was most commonly performed as described in the surgical technique section. One patient underwent an additional osteosynthesis 3 months after initial surgery due to pain and lack of radiological signs of healing of a fracture extension into the spine of the scapula. In the same patient, the plate on the spine of scapula was later removed due to plate irritation. In 2 patients postoperative images showed a screw protruding into the glenohumeral joint requiring revision surgery. After standardisation of intra-operative imaging following these two cases, intra-articular screw placement did not occur anymore. No patient suffered from iatrogenic nerve injury and none developed a wound infection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B J M van de Wall
- Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Spitalstrasse, 6000, Luzern, Switzerland
- University of Luzern, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - R J Hoepelman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - C Michelitsch
- Unfallchirurgie, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - N Diwersi
- Klinik für Chirurgie, Kantonsspital Obwalden, Sarnen, Switzerland
| | - C Sommer
- Unfallchirurgie, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - R Babst
- Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Spitalstrasse, 6000, Luzern, Switzerland
- University of Luzern, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - F J P Beeres
- Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Spitalstrasse, 6000, Luzern, Switzerland.
- University of Luzern, Luzern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hoepelman RJ, Driessen MLS, de Jongh MAC, Houwert RM, Marzi I, Lecky F, Lefering R, van de Wall BJM, Beeres FJP, Dijkgraaf MGW, Groenwold RHH, Leenen LPH. Concepts, utilization, and perspectives on the Dutch Nationwide Trauma registry: a position paper. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 2023; 49:1619-1626. [PMID: 36624221 PMCID: PMC10449938 DOI: 10.1007/s00068-022-02206-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2022] [Accepted: 12/17/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
Over the last decades, the Dutch trauma care have seen major improvements. To assess the performance of the Dutch trauma system, in 2007, the Dutch Nationwide Trauma Registry (DNTR) was established, which developed into rich source of information for quality assessment, quality improvement of the trauma system, and for research purposes. The DNTR is one of the most comprehensive trauma registries in the world as it includes 100% of all trauma patients admitted to the hospital through the emergency department. This inclusive trauma registry has shown its benefit over less inclusive systems; however, it comes with a high workload for high-quality data collection and thus more expenses. The comprehensive prospectively collected data in the DNTR allows multiple types of studies to be performed. Recent changes in legislation allow the DNTR to include the citizen service numbers, which enables new possibilities and eases patient follow-up. However, in order to maximally exploit the possibilities of the DNTR, further development is required, for example, regarding data quality improvement and routine incorporation of health-related quality of life questionnaires. This would improve the quality assessment and scientific output from the DNTR. Finally, the DNTR and all other (European) trauma registries should strive to ensure that the trauma registries are eligible for comparisons between countries and healthcare systems, with the goal to improve trauma patient care worldwide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R J Hoepelman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - M L S Driessen
- Dutch Network for Emergency Care (LNAZ), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M A C de Jongh
- Brabant Trauma Registry, Network Emergency Care Brabant, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - R M Houwert
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I Marzi
- Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - F Lecky
- The Trauma Audit and Research Network, The University of Manchester, Salford Royal-Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK
- Centre for Urgent and Emergency Care Research, Health Services Research Section, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - R Lefering
- Faculty of Health, IFOM-Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, University Witten/Herdecke, Cologne, Germany
| | - B J M van de Wall
- Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - F J P Beeres
- Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - M G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Methodology, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R H H Groenwold
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - L P H Leenen
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Dutch Network for Emergency Care (LNAZ), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Graafland M, van de Wall BJM, van Veelen NM, van Leeuwen R, Hoepelman RJ, Knobe M, Link BC, Babst R, Beeres FJP. Long-term follow-up of patients with displaced scapular fractures managed surgically and non-operatively. Injury 2022; 53:2087-2094. [PMID: 35184818 DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.02.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Controversy remains on which patients with displaced scapula fractures benefit from surgery. This retrospective cohort study aims to compare and describe long-term patient-reported outcomes of patients with displaced scapula fractures treated both surgically and conservatively. METHODS This study included patients with intra- and extra-articular scapula fractures, treated between 2010 and 2020 in a Swiss level 1 trauma centre. The decision to operate was based on standardized criteria for fracture displacement. Patients with isolated Bankart lesions (Ideberg 1) and process fractures (AO type 14-A) were excluded. Primary outcomes were functional patient reported measures (DASH score) and quality of life (EQ5D score). Secondary outcomes were complications, radiological union, satisfaction with treatment, pain and range of motion. RESULTS Out of 486 cases, 74 patients had displaced scapula fractures. Forty patients were treated surgically and 34 were treated conservatively. Significantly more patients with intra-articular fractures and high-energy trauma were treated surgically. Fifty percent returned the questionnaires after a mean follow-up of 47 months (± SD 36). The mean DASH score of this group was 12 (SD 15.6), with a mean of 14.7 (SD 15.9) in the surgery group and 9.8 (SD 14.6) in the non-operative group (p = 0.7). Multivariate analysis did not show statistically significant correlating factors. No significant differences in quality of life were observed. Patients rated their treatment with a mean of 8.6/10 (SD 1.8). Among surgically treated patients, 19 underwent a deltoid sparing procedure with significant shorter time to union than those that underwent deltoid release (23 vs. 49 weeks, p<0.01). Complications occurred in 3/28 surgically treated patients and all three required a reoperation. CONCLUSION In this cohort, functional results after conservative and surgical treatment were similar, despite more complex fractures and more intra-articular fractures being treated surgically. Osteosynthesis of both intra- and extra-articular scapula fractures is safe and leads to good functional results, furthermore, new minimal invasive techniques may lead to faster bone healing and return to work and sports.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Graafland
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland; Dept. of Trauma Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - B J M van de Wall
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland; Dept. Health Science and Medicine, University of Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - N M van Veelen
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - R van Leeuwen
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - R J Hoepelman
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - M Knobe
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - B C Link
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland
| | - R Babst
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland; Dept. Health Science and Medicine, University of Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - F J P Beeres
- Dept. of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Lucerne Cantonal Hospital, Luzern, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|