Subtrochanteric missile fractures of the femur

External fixators in austere environments under surge capacity conditions: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

High-energy trauma causing open fractures can take place in low-resource settings ("austere" environment) and mainly affects the lower limbs. In these environments, external fixators often provide definitive surgical treatment. This systematic review identifies those external fixators for use on lower limbs as a definitive treatment that are most clinically effective in the austere environment.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched to identify studies investigating outcomes of external fixators used in austere environments. Case reports were excluded. Hand searching and expert input identified additional references.

FINDINGS

33 publications met the inclusion criteria. These were used worldwide. Commercially available fixators were used in 18 publications, and non-commercial ones including Balkan-designed devices in 6. The remaining non-commercial devices had 1 or 2 publications each. Union rates, where reported, varied from 47 to 100 % with no discernible difference between devices or location of use. Clinical complications varied from infection (0-79 %) through to nonunion and delayed union (0-22 %), loosening (0-36 %), osteomyelitis (0-19 %), construct stability (27-100 %), and amputation (0-50 %).

INTERPRETATION

The variability in union and complication rates highlights the variability in severity of injuries, type of austere environment, and variability in fixator device efficacy. The non-commercial or "one-off" devices show promise, with comparable or better outcomes to the commercial devices, whereas others did not work well, with poor outcomes. The need for surge capacity availability in these austere environments would enable locally manufactured devices to be quickly made which are fit for purpose, yet regulation and quality control of these remains a challenge in their rollout.

Civilian Ballistic Femoral Shaft Fractures Compared With Blunt Femur Shaft Fractures

OBJECTIVE

To assess ballistic femoral shaft fracture outcomes in comparison with closed and open femoral shaft fractures sustained by blunt mechanisms. We hypothesized that ballistic femoral shaft fractures would have similar outcomes to blunt open fractures.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic Level I trauma center.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients 16 years and older presenting with ballistic (140), blunt closed (317), or blunt open (71) femoral shaft fractures.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Unplanned return to operating room, fracture-related infection, soft tissue reconstruction, nonunion, implant failure, length of stay, Injury Severity Scores, hospital charges, and compartment syndrome.

RESULTS

A total of 528 femoral shaft fractures were identified. A group of 140 ballistic fractures and comparison groups of all femoral shaft fractures sustained by blunt mechanisms and treated with intramedullary nailing were included in the analysis. Among the 2 subgroups of nonballistic injuries, 317 were blunt closed fractures and 71 were blunt open fractures. The ballistic group was associated with a 3-fold increase in overall complications (30%) compared with the blunt closed group (10%, P < 0.001), had a higher occurrence of thigh compartment syndrome (P < 0.001), and required more soft tissue reconstruction (P < 0.001) than either of the blunt fracture groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Ballistic femoral shaft fractures do not perfectly fit with blunt closed or open femoral fractures. A high index of suspicion for the development of thigh compartment syndrome should be maintained in ballistic femoral shaft fractures. The overall rates of nonunion and infection were comparable between all groups, but the all-cause complication rate was significantly higher in the ballistic group compared with the blunt closed group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Management of gunshot wound-related hip injuries: A systematic review of the current literature

Purpose

To propose a gunshot wound-related hip injury algorithm and improve patient outcomes.

Methods

Multiple online databases were queried to identify studies reporting on management of gunshot-wound hip injury.

Results

Of 47 papers included, 5 and 14 studies recommended surgical intervention for the treatment of low- and high-velocity gunshot wounds, respectively, and 1 paper advocated the use of prophylactic antibiotics in the treatment of high-velocity injuries. All remaining papers had mixed and conflicting results.

Conclusion

Various therapeutic strategies have been used for the management of gunshot wound-related hip injuries but further prospective studies are necessary to determine the optimal therapeutic modality.

Management of upper extremity war injuries in the subacute period: A review of 62 cases

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to describe the relationship between the localization of rarely seen upper extremity war injuries and their complications in the subacute period, and define our preferences for surgery and antibiotic use.

METHODS

Patients with an upper extremity war injury who presented to our institution between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. Data regarding demographics, time between injury and presentation, location of injury, type of damage, complications, treatment methods, infection rates and antibiotic use were recorded. Tissue defects, fracture fixation, neurovascular damage, infection development and treatment approaches were analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty-two male patients with isolated upper extremity injuries (mean age: 31.66 ± 8.28 years) were included in the study. The average time between trauma and hospitalization was 14 days. The mean hematocrit (Hct) level at presentation was 36.3 ± 6.8%. Patients had been followed up for an average period of 95.6 ± 32.1 days. Twenty-nine patients (46.8%) had nerve injury, eight (12.9%) had arterial injury that required repair, and 23 had infection (37.1%), of which five developed osteomyelitis. Infection was polymicrobial in nine cases and monobacterial in 14. A positive correlation was found between the presence of fracture and nerve injury (p = 0.013). The frequency of nerve injuries due to gunshot wounds was higher in the mid-section and lower part of the arms and in the proximal forearm when compared to other regions (p = 0.011). The infection rates were significantly higher in patients with fractures (p = 0.033). The mean hematocrit (Hct) level at presentation of the patients with infection (32.1 ± 6.3%) was significantly lower than that of those who did not have infection (38.8 ± 5.9%) (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Upper extremity war injuries require case-specific solutions. Microbiological samples should be taken prior to empirical antibiotic treatment for infection management and rational antibiotic use principles should be applied according to the culture and antibiogram results. The holistic and ambiguous character of nerve injuries often requires early exploration and combined reconstructive interventions. Arterial injuries can be overlooked by physical examination alone and thus routine angiography should be performed. Completion of the bone and soft tissue reconstructions in the same session using a holistic approach minimizes the possible risks.

Gunshot-induced fractures of the extremities: a review of antibiotic and debridement practices

The use of antibiotic prophylaxis and debridement is controversial when treating low- and high-velocity gunshot-induced fractures, and established treatment guidelines are currently unavailable. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the literature for the prophylactic antibiotic and debridement policies for (1) low-velocity gunshot fractures of the extremities, joints, and pelvis and (2) high-velocity gunshot fractures of the extremities. Low-velocity gunshot fractures of the extremities were subcategorized into operative and non-operative cases, whereas low-velocity gunshot fractures of the joints and pelvis were evaluated based on the presence or absence of concomitant bowel injury. In the absence of surgical necessity for fracture care such as concomitant absence of gross wound contamination, vascular injury, large soft-tissue defect, or associated compartment syndrome, the literature suggests that superficial debridement for low-velocity ballistic fractures with administration of antibiotics is a satisfactory alternative to extensive operative irrigation and debridement. In operative cases or those involving bowel injuries secondary to pelvic fractures, the literature provides support for and against extensive debridement but does suggest the use of intravenous antibiotics. For high-velocity ballistic injuries, the literature points towards the practice of extensive immediate debridement with prophylactic intravenous antibiotics. Our systematic review demonstrates weak evidence for superficial debridement of low-velocity ballistic fractures, extensive debridement for high-velocity ballistic injuries, and antibiotic use for both types of injury. Intra-articular fractures seem to warrant debridement, while pelvic fractures with bowel injury have conflicting evidence for debridement but stronger evidence for antibiotic use. Given a relatively low number of studies on this subject, we recommend that further high-quality research on the debridement and antibiotic use for gunshot-induced fractures of the extremities should be conducted before definitive recommendations and guidelines are developed.

Ballistic Fractures During The 2003 Gulf Conflict - Early Prognosis And High Complication Rate

BACKGROUND

Ballistic fractures are devastating injuries often necessitating extensive reconstructive surgery or amputation, particularly if associated with high-energy transfer wounds. Infective complications are common, particularly in the austere environment encountered in war. We present the management and early outcome of these injuries with reference to the mechanism of injury and bony injury.

METHOD

Data on ballistic fractures was collected prospectively during the 'war-fighting' phase of the 2003 Gulf Conflict, between 19th March and 20th May. Fractures were scored using the Red Cross Fracture classification and early outcome analysed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients, with 50 ballistic fractures, were treated by British military surgeons. Patients were predominantly Iraqi (90%) and 50 per cent of ballistic fractures were caused by bullets. Seventeen upper limb fractures and 33 lower limb fractures were sustained. There were seven traumatic amputations, and a further 2 limbs were amputated primarily. Methods of primary stabilisation for the remaining 41 fractures were: external fixation (22%), POP (14.5%), K-wires (14.5%) traction (10%), and no stabilisation (39%). Seven individuals were evacuated early after primary surgery, hence 43 ballistic fractures were available for follow-up. 13/43 (30%) of wounds became infected, 5/43 (11.5%) were deep infections necessitating surgical drainage. There were 4 late amputations (9.5%), 3 of which had initially been managed by external fixation. Infection occurred significantly more often in gunshot fractures (10/21, 48%), wounds closed primarily against the principles of war surgery (415, 80%) and intra-articular fractures (3/3, 100%) (p=0.022, 0.024 and 0.023 respectively). Differing methods of stabilisation had no bearing on the rate of postoperative infection.

CONCLUSION

Ballistic fractures remain a challenge for trauma surgeons in times of war and still have a poor prognosis. Further work is required to determine the optimal treatment of these injuries during conflicts. In addition, there still seems to be a continued need to re-learn the principles of war surgery in order to minimise complications and optimise functional recovery.