Background

Percutaneous iliosacral screw placement can successfully stabilize unstable posterior pelvic ring injuries. Intraoperative fluoroscopic imaging is a vital component needed in safely placing iliosacral screws. Obtaining and appropriately interpreting fluoroscopic views can be challenging in certain clinical scenarios. We report on a series of patients to demonstrate how preoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging can be used to anticipate the appropriate intraoperative inlet and outlet fluoroscopic views.

Materials and methods

24 patients were retrospectively identified with unstable pelvic ring injuries requiring operative fixation using percutaneous iliosacral screws. Utilizing the sagittal reconstructions of the preoperative CT scans, anticipated inlet and outlet angle measurements were calculated. The operative reports were reviewed to determine the angles used intraoperatively. Postoperative CT scans were reviewed for repeat measurements and to determine the location and safety of each screw.

Results

Preoperative CT scans showed an average inlet of 20.5° (7°-37°) and an average outlet of 42.8° (30°-59°). Intraoperative views showed an average inlet of 24.9° (12°-38°) and an average outlet of 42.4° (29°-52°). Postoperative CT scans showed an average inlet of 19.4° (8°-31°) and an average outlet of 43.2° (31°-56°). The average difference from preoperative to intraoperative was 4.4° (-21° to 5°) for the inlet and 0.45° (-9° to 7°) for the outlet. The average difference between the preoperative and postoperative CT was 2.04° (0°-6°) for the inlet and 2.54° (0°-7°) for the outlet.

Conclusion

There is significant anatomic variation of the posterior pelvic ring. The preoperative CT sagittal reconstruction images allow for appropriate preoperative planning for anticipated intraoperative fluoroscopic inlet and outlet views within 5°. Having knowledge of the desired intraoperative views preoperatively prepares the surgeon, aids in efficiently obtaining correct intraoperative views, and ultimately assists in safe iliosacral screw placement.

BACKGROUND: Femoral head fractures are uncommon injuries. Small series constitute the majority of the available literature. Surgical approach and fracture management is variable. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence, method of treatment, and outcomes of consecutive femoral head fractures at a regional academic Level I trauma center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective database was performed over a 13-year period. All AO/OTA 31C femoral head fractures were identified. A surgical approach and fixation method was recorded. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed for patients with 6 months or greater follow-up. Radiographs were evaluated for fixation failure, heterotopic ossification (HO), avascular necrosis (AVN) and post-traumatic arthritis. RESULTS: We identified 164 fractures in 163 patients; 147 fractures were available for review. Treatment was operative reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in 78 (53.1%), fragment excision in 37 (25.1%) and non-operative in 28 (19%). An anterior approach and mini-fragment screws were used in the majority of patients treated with fixation. Sixty-nine fractures had follow-up greater than 6 months. Sixty-two fractures (89.9%) proceeded to uneventful union. All Pipkin III fractures failed operative fixation. Six patients developed AVN, seven patients had a known conversion to hip arthroplasty; HO developed in 28 (40.6%) patients and rarely required excision. CONCLUSIONS: Fractures of the femoral head are rare. An anterior approach can be used for fragment excision or fixation using mini-fragment screws. Pipkin III fractures represent catastrophic injuries. Non-bridging, asymptomatic HO is common. AVN and posttraumatic degenerative disease of the hip occur but are uncommon. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV-prognostic.

Background

Femoral head fractures are uncommon injuries. Small series constitute the majority of the available literature. Surgical approach and fracture management is variable. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence, method of treatment, and outcomes of consecutive femoral head fractures at a regional academic Level I trauma center.

Materials and methods

A retrospective review of a prospective database was performed over a 13-year period. All AO/OTA 31C femoral head fractures were identified. A surgical approach and fixation method was recorded. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed for patients with 6 months or greater follow-up. Radiographs were evaluated for fixation failure, heterotopic ossification (HO), avascular necrosis (AVN) and post-traumatic arthritis.

Results

We identified 164 fractures in 163 patients; 147 fractures were available for review. Treatment was operative reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in 78 (53.1%), fragment excision in 37 (25.1%) and non-operative in 28 (19%). An anterior approach and mini-fragment screws were used in the majority of patients treated with fixation. Sixty-nine fractures had follow-up greater than 6 months. Sixty-two fractures (89.9%) proceeded to uneventful union. All Pipkin III fractures failed operative fixation. Six patients developed AVN, seven patients had a known conversion to hip arthroplasty; HO developed in 28 (40.6%) patients and rarely required excision.

Conclusions

Fractures of the femoral head are rare. An anterior approach can be used for fragment excision or fixation using mini-fragment screws. Pipkin III fractures represent catastrophic injuries. Non-bridging, asymptomatic HO is common. AVN and posttraumatic degenerative disease of the hip occur but are uncommon.

Level of evidence

IV-prognostic.

PURPOSE: To describe U-type sacral fracture characteristics amenable to percutaneous sacral screw fixation. METHODS: U-type sacral fractures were identified from a trauma registry at a level 1 trauma center from 2014 to 2020. Patient demographics, injury mechanism, fracture characteristics, and fixation construct were retrospectively retrieved. Associations between fracture pattern and surgical fixation were identified. RESULTS: 82 U-type sacral fractures were reviewed. Six treated with lumbopelvic fixation (LPF) and 76 were treated with percutaneous sacral screws (PSS) alone. Patients receiving LBF had greater sacral fracture displacement in coronal, sagittal, and axial planes compared to patients receiving PSS alone (P < 0.05), negating osseous fixation pathways. All patients went onto sacral union and there were no implant failures or unplanned reoperations for either group. CONCLUSION: If osseous fixation pathways are present, U-type sacral fractures can be successfully treated with percutaneous sacral screws. LPF may be indicated in more displaced fractures with loss of spinopelvic alignment. Both techniques for U-type sacral fractures result in reliable fixation and healing without reoperations.

Introduction

Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience of engaging patient advisors to identify an optimal model of consent for the PREP-IT trials. This paper also examines surrogate measures of success for the selected model of consent.

Methods

The PREP-IT program consists of two multi-center cluster randomized crossover trials that engaged patient advisors to determine an optimal model of consent. Patient advisors and stakeholders met regularly and reached consensus on decisions related to the trial design including the model for consent. Patient advisors provided valuable insight on how key decisions on trial design and conduct would be received by participants and the impact these decisions will have.

Results

Patient advisors, together with stakeholders, reviewed the pros and cons and the requirements for the traditional model of consent, deferred consent, and waiver of consent. Collectively, they agreed upon a deferred consent model, in which patients may be approached for consent after their fracture surgery and prior to data collection. The consent rate in PREP-IT is 80.7%, and 0.67% of participants have withdrawn consent for participation.

Discussion

Involvement of patient advisors in the development of an optimal model of consent has been successful. Engagement of patient advisors is recommended for other large trials where the traditional model of consent may not be optimal.

Introduction

Pragmatic trials in comparative effectiveness research assess the effects of different treatment, therapeutic, or healthcare options in clinical practice. They are characterized by broad eligibility criteria and large sample sizes, which can lead to an unmanageable number of participants, increasing the risk of bias and affecting the integrity of the trial. We describe the development of a sampling strategy tool and its use in the PREPARE trial to circumvent the challenge of unmanageable work flow.

Methods

Given the broad eligibility criteria and high fracture volume at participating clinical sites in the PREPARE trial, a pragmatic sampling strategy was needed. Using data from PREPARE, descriptive statistics were used to describe the use of the sampling strategy across clinical sites. A Chi-square test was performed to explore whether use of the sampling strategy was associated with a reduction in the number of missed eligible patients.

Results

7 of 20 clinical sites (35%) elected to adopt a sampling strategy. There were 1539 patients excluded due to the use of the sampling strategy, which represents 30% of all excluded patients and 20% of all patients screened for participation. Use of the sampling strategy was associated with lower odds of missed eligible patients (297/4545 (6.5%) versus 341/3200 (10.7%) p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Implementing a sampling strategy in the PREPARE trial has helped to limit the number of missed eligible patients. This sampling strategy represents a simple, easy to use tool for managing work flow at clinical sites and maintaining the integrity of a large trial.