Indiana Orthopaedic Journal - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
Transcription
Indiana Orthopaedic Journal - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
Indiana Orthopaedic Journal INDIANA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT of ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY 2010 Clarian Human Motion offers complete care for bones, joints, spine and muscles — everything that keeps humans in motion. Through our affiliation with Indiana University School of Medicine and some of the most prestigious private physician practices in Central Indiana, Clarian Human Motion provides preeminent musculoskeletal care at all Indianapolisarea Clarian Health facilities. When it comes to your orthopedic referrals, you can rest assured that Clarian Human Motion will provide your patients with the specialized care they need. We work with top physicians in the state to deliver the highest quality of care in a wide range of orthopedic specialties, including: s!RTHRITISand Rheumatology s"ONE#ANCER s&OOTand!NKLE s(AND s*OINT2EPLACEMENT2ECONSTRUCTION and Revisions s+NEE s0AIN-ANAGEMENT s0EDIATRIC/RTHOPEDICS s0HYSICAL-EDICINEand Rehabilitation sRehabilitation Services sShoulder and Upper Extremity sSpine sSports Medicine s3PORTS0ERFORMANCE s4RAUMA&RACTURE#ARE To receive more information on Clarian Human Motion, PLEASECALL)-!#3/NE#ALLAT1-800-265-3220 or visit us at www.clarian.org/hm. /UROrthopedic specialists cover a full range of human motion. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Table of Contents Annual Reports 1 3 4 5 7 8 10 12 14 15 19 22 23 24 27 28 30 Chairman’s Report – Jeff Anglen, MD Residency Program Director’s Report – Randy Loder, MD Orthopaedic Research Lab Report – Melissa Kacena, PhD Faculty of the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Volunteer Faculty and Lecturers Residents and Fellows Faculty Awards, Grants, and Selected Publications Garceau-Wray Lectureship Lindseth Lectureship and Mark Brothers Lectureship Endowment of the Bill and Louise Capello Chair of Orthopaedic Surgery: An Interview with Bill Capello, MD Faculty Volunteer Orthopaedic Service in South India – Alex Mih, MD In Memoriam: Charles H. Turner, PhD Arthroscopy Skills Trainer for Residency Program Event Photos Alumni List by Graduation Year Alumni News Indiana Orthopaedic Society Manuscripts 32 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night. An Instructional Course Lecture, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Andrew H. Schmidt, MD, Jeffrey Anglen, MD, Arvind D. Nana, MD, Thomas F. Varecka, MD 44 Current and Future Trend in Articular Cartilage Restoration. Jack Farr, MD 48 Minimum 10-Year Results after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: How the Loss of Normal Knee Motion Compounds Other Factors Related to the Development of Osteoarthritis after Surgery. K. Donald Shelbourne, MD, Tinker Gray, MA i Indiana Orthopaedic Journal 50 55 Volume 4 – 2010 The Use of Implantable Bone Stimulators in Nonunion Treatment. Michael S. Hughes, MD, Jeffrey O. Anglen, MD Pediatric Diaphyseal Femur Fractures: A Comparison of Flexible Versus Rigid Intramedullary Nailing. Daniel J. Cuttica, DO, Allan C. Beebe, MD, John R. Kean, MD, Jan E. Klamar, MD, Kevin E. Klingele, MD 60 Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Associated With Consumer Products. 64 Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis:Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options. 70 Randall T. Loder, MD Craig F. Shank, MD, Eric J. Thiel, MD. Kevin E. Klingele, MD Outpatient Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation in Adolescent Patients: Long-Term Follow-up Study. Natalie M. Best MD, Rick C. Sasso MD 74 Clinical Outcomes of Scaphoid and Triquetral Excision With Capitolunate Arthrodesis Versus Scaphoid Excision and Four-Corner Arthrodesis. R. Glenn Gaston, MD, Jeffrey A. Greenberg, MD, Robert M. Baltera, MD, Alex Mih, MD, Hill Hastings, MD 79 Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing a Semitendinosis Graft and Titanium Flip Button Tension Band Construct. Vivek Agrawal, MD 84 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management. 91 Advances in Orthopaedic Oncology for 2010. 94 Instructions for Authors Daniel Wurtz MD, Judd Cummings MD Bruce T. Rougraff, M.D. Judy R. Feinberg, PhD Editor Donna L. Roberts Assistant ii Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Chairman’s Report The end of summer and coming of fall always bring a sense of transition. Summer vacation is over, and the kids are heading back to school; the new academic year is in full swing, and football season is just around the corner. The time seems to fly by from our annual picnic at the Anglen house where we welcome the newbies, to the Garceau-Wray dinner when we say goodbye to old friends. This year we welcome four new faculty members along with the five new interns who have been at work for a couple of months now. Two new pediatric orthopaedic surgeons (Drs. Kishan and Gantsoudes) join Drs. Loder and Caltoum at Riley Hospital; a fifth fellowship trained orthopaedic traumatologist (Dr. Shively) joins the team working at Wishard Hospital; and Dr. Nolan, a shoulder and elbow surgeon comes on board as well. This brings our number of new faculty hires in the past five years to 13 – a number both exciting and challenging. The expansion of capacity, opportunity and teaching manpower is exciting. Fitting everyone into already tight facilities and schedules is the challenging part. As usual, our faculty has continued the tradition of IU Orthopaedic excellence, as you will see in the pages to come. In 2011, our Department will make another transition by becoming part of a new venture you may have heard about, the Indiana Clinic. This union of the IU School of Medicine faculty practice plan with the Clarian Hospital system (soon to be the Indiana University Health Care System) will allow us to provide care to patients from across the state and beyond in a more efficient, coordinated, safe and effective manner, and will position us to prosper in the face of health care reform. Becoming the musculoskeletal arm of this new system will provide strategic advantages, stability, and strength to our clinical enterprise, allowing us to better secure the future of our academic mission. Over the past year, we learned of two exciting and significant gifts to the Department, which I announced to those of you who were able to attend the Indiana Orthopaedic Reception at the AAOS annual meeting in New Orleans. Dr. Richard Halfast of Kokomo, an orthopaedic surgeon and graduate of IU School of Medicine made a generous bequest to our Department for support of an orthopaedic fellowship. Dr. Bill Capello, a current and long-time member of the faculty, made the outstanding commitment necessary to endow a Chair in Orthopaedics, our second endowed Chair. Read more about Dr. Capello’s career in an interview in this journal. His many contributions to our Department, including this wonderful gift, have helped us to produce many outstanding orthopaedic surgeons. To advance our educational, research and clinical missions, and to train the next generation in our profession, we need your help. These are challenging times for orthopaedic education. Declining reimbursement from government and insurers affects all orthopaedic practices, but academic departments are particularly hard hit. The increasing number of uninsured patients in this economy means that more underfunded care falls on our clinics and doctors, as we become the last resort for patients turned away from private groups and facilities because they cannot pay. Shrinking government support for research and education coupled with increasing regulatory burden from quasigovernmental entities like the ACGME and JCAHO, more demands on reduced clinical revenues, continually increasing time requirements for faculty and staff, and cut-throat competition from private groups (many staffed by former IU trainees) make it harder than ever to continue to maintain the traditions of our profession and renew our ranks. It simply cannot be done successfully without the support and engagement of a wide spectrum of orthopaedic surgeons – not just the few who chose a full-time academic career. We greatly appreciate the support of alumni and colleagues who have donated their time to lectures, conferences, journal club, and mentorship for the residents, 1 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Chairman’s Report (continued) intern applicant interviews, and help with recruiting. We also appreciate those who appropriately refer complex patients to our faculty, and those who provide call coverage and indigent care for patients in their own community. For those of you who may be inclined, we have a variety of other ways you can contribute financially. In addition to our lectureship funds, we have started an alumni/ally fund to obtain an arthroscopy simulator for the residency. After the great success of our campaign for the resident electronic learning center, this seemed like a natural next step. Read more about the simulator in AAOS NOW at the website, http://Aaos.Org/news/aaosnow/oct09/cover2. Asp. If you are willing to contribute to the project, either with dollars or time, please let us know! Sadly, another transition occurred this past year when we lost Dr. Charles Turner to cancer. Charles was an amazingly productive research scientist who worked with orthopaedic faculty, residents, and students for the past two decades at IUPUI. His work in bone biomechanics brought both great credit and significant research support to IU. He will be sorely missed by his many friends and collaborators on campus. We hope you will plan to visit with us annually at the Lindseth Lectureship, the Indiana Reception at AAOS, or the Garceau-Wray Professorship – or any other time you happen to be in Indianapolis. Thank you for your continued support and good will. It has been a great pleasure for us to become closer to our alumni and to reconnect with our IU orthopaedic family over the past six years, and we look forward to growing our relationships in the future. Jeffrey O. Anglen, M.D. Professor and Chairman, Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery 2 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Residency Program Director’s Report Since the last issue of the Indiana Orthopaedic Journal, several noteworthy events have occurred regarding our residency program. Resident Applications We again used our out-patient clinics as the site of the resident interviews. This location and format also allow for more interviews per interviewee, thus affording the interviewee to get a more complete perspective of the program. This has been very popular with the applicants. Some comments we have received are: “Having time to speak with the current residents was very valuable.” “There was more time allotted to interview with each set of attendings/residents than other programs.” “It was nice to be able to engage in conversation rather than repeat skimming the surface due to time limitations in other interviews.” “It was great getting to meet so many of the faculty and residents.” “The residents’ presence at the interviews was great. They were very enthusiastic and knowledgeable.” “I liked that all the chief residents were involved in the interview process.” Dr. Loder This year we received 449 applications for the five positions, up from 409 last year. Of these 449 applicants, 205 were screened out simply on the basis of USMLE Part I Board Scores; 244 files were then reviewed, and 88 applicants were offered interviews. These interviews took place over three days, two for non-IU students and one specifically for IU students. The day for IU students is shorter as they are acquainted with the facilities and program. The addition of this third day reserved for IU students allows us to interview more non-IU students on the other two days, thus potentially increasing the diversity and number of potential residents. We wish to extend our appreciation to all the faculty, both full-time and volunteer/alumni, who participated in the resident interview process this year. Our five new PGY-1 residents who began their studies July 1, 2010 are: Dr. Matthew Beck from Wake Forest University, Dr. Eric Dockter from the University of Toledo, Dr. Isaac Fehrenbacher from Indiana University, Dr. Austin McPhilamy from Wayne State University, and Dr. Justin Millard from the American University of the Caribbean. Resident Awards Dr. Jonathon Wilhite, PGY-4, was nominated for induction into the IUSM Chapter of the Gold Humanism Society. Dr. Kirk Reichard, PGY-5, was nominated for induction into the IUSM Chapter of the Gold Humanism Society. Dr. Susan McDowell, PGY-3 resident, continues as one of the co-PIs on a Biomedical Research Grant from the IU School of Medicine entitled “Structural and Functional Evaluation of Stainless Steel and PMMA Induced Membranes as a Graft Bed for Segmental Bone Defects’. Dr. Katie Peck, PGY-3 resident, is one of the co-PIs on and IU Simon Cancer Center Institutional Research Grant entitled “Effects of Platelet Number and Adhesion on Osteosarcoma Growth and Metastatic Potential”. Overseas Volunteerism Dr. Susan McDowell, PGY-3 resident, volunteered in the Barefoot Doctors School, a school which has been outside Chiang Mai, Thailand for over 20 years. Their mission is to educate Burmese village health care workers from the villages in Myanmar. These people are local leaders in the villages, and they vary in age, education levels, and backgrounds. It was the first 6-week session of a 3-year program. The focus was on learning the basics of primary health care from taking blood pressure to treating tropical diseases. Dr. McDowell taught the Orthopaedic/Neuro sessions covering fracture types and basic splinting (with bamboo and banana leaf stalks) for adjunct treatment of arthritis and polio. The Barefoot Doctor School is backed by the Frontier Labourers for Christ, a mission in Chiang Mai. She was in Thailand for five days teaching at the school. Further information can be obtained from http://barefootschool.blogspot.com/ Randall T. Loder, M.D. PGY-3 Resident, Dr. Susan McDowell, teaching Orthopaedics to Burmese health care workers as part of a mission program, George J. Garceau Professor of Pediatric Orthopaedics Residency Program Director, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery The Barefoot Doctor School, in Thailand. 3 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Orthopaedic Research Laboratory Report Orthopaedic research at IU is primarily located in laboratories within Fesler Hall, Medical Sciences, and the Engineering/Science & Technology Building. There are five main orthopaedic research laboratories directed by Drs. Stephen Trippel, David Burr, Tien-Min Gabriel Chu, Melissa Kacena, and Robyn Fuchs. The research group includes approximately 25 scientists and clinicians, eight of whom have grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). These scientists come from four different disciplines: Orthopaedic Surgery, Anatomy and Cell Biology, Physical Therapy, and Restorative Dentistry. Below are brief research updates from the five research directors as well as a brief update on additional orthopaedic research endeavors/grants awarded. Research Update Stephen Trippel, MD, Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery: Dr. Trippel’s research focuses on cartilage-related disorders. The research team consists of Stephen Trippel MD, Shuiliang Shi PhD and Albert Chan BS. Recent work includes the investigation of gene therapy and the regulation of articular cartilage by growth factors. His work is funded by the NIH and VA. David Burr, PhD, Professor and Chair of Anatomy and Cell Biology: Dr. Burr’s research is directed towards increasing the understanding of the effects of changes in bone collagen on the mechanical properties, and of increased fracture risk, of bone in osteoporosis and in Type II diabetes. Dr. Burr currently serves as President of the American Association of Anatomists and the Orthopaedic Research Society. He recently was awarded the Borelli Award from the American Society of Biomechanics. Much of his work is funded by the NIH and NSBRI. Tien-Min Gabriel Chu, DDS, PhD, Associate Professor of Restorative Dentistry: Dr. Chu’s research is focused on the development of tissue engineering strategies to enhance the regeneration in long bones and in craniofacial areas. He is particularly interested in the fabrication and characterization of high strength three dimensional (3D) biodegradable scaffolds capable of carrying mesenchymal stem cells and/or releasing growth factors. He has funding from IU School of Dentistry and the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Foundation to investigate the use of polymerreinforced calcium phosphate as novel 3D scaffolds to enhance regeneration in rabbit cranial defects. Melissa Kacena, PhD, Assistant Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chair, Orthopaedic Research Committee: Dr. Kacena’s overall research goal is to improve the understanding of the interaction of the bone and hematopoietic systems, thereby potentially improving the treatment of metabolic bone disease and fracture healing. To achieve this goal, her research will focus in three areas: 1) The role of megakaryocytes, megakaryocyte growth factors, and their receptors in bone homeostasis; 2) Translational/clinical studies examining the genetic regulation of skeletal homeostasis; and 3) The molecular mechanisms underlying bone repair/fracture healing. She has received numerous honors, young investigator awards, and grants for her research, including NIH funding. This past year she served as an ad hoc member on several NIH study sections. Robyn Fuchs, PhD, Assistant Professor of Physical Therapy and Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology: The goal of Dr. Fuchs research is to develop a better understanding of the genes and molecular pathways involved in regulating periosteal bone apposition at the tissue and cellular level in response to anabolic therapies and fracture healing. Dr. Fuchs is currently funded by NIH under the division of NIAMS for her work evaluating the role of the extracellular matrix protein periostin in bone formation. Additional Basic Orthopaedic Research Studies/News: Dr. Charles H. Turner, Director of Orthopaedic Research, lost is battle with cancer July 16, 2010. We mourn his loss and our thoughts are with his family. Please see the memorial on page 22 of the journal for further details. Drs. Brian Mullis, Janos Ertl, Jeffrey Anglen, Matthew Allen, Tien-Min Gabriel Chu, and Melissa Kacena are working together on a rabbit study examining the structural and functional evaluation of stainless steel and PMMA induced membranes as a graft bed for segmental bone defects. Dr. Mullis recently received a Biomedical Research Grant from the IU School of Medicine to support this work. Orthopaedic surgery resident, Dr. Susan McDowell, is also assisting on this project. Drs. Brian Mullis, Peter Hoggs, Tien-Min Gabriel Chu, and Mr. Daniel Alge (PhD student in Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University) are working together to compare the load and mode of failures in fresh-frozen cadaver femurs fixed by sliding hip screws implants with non-locking plates and locking plates. Dr. Mullis recently received funding from Synthes Inc. to support this work. Drs. Judd Cummings, Melissa Kacena, Daniel Wurtz and Lindsey Mayo are working together to examine the role of platelets and megakaryocytes in osteosarcoma. Dr. Cummings recently received Ying-Hua Cheng, MD, PhD, is a an American Cancer Society Grant from the IU School of Medicine to support this work. Orthopaedic Research Associate in the Department of surgery resident, Dr. Katie Peck, is assisting with this research. Orthopaedic Surgery. Dr. Cheng is the Dr. Theresa Guise and her research and clinical group moved from UVA to IU School of Medicine manager of the orthopaedic cell biology in the summer 2009. Their research primarily focuses on bone cancers. The arrival of their group on laboratory. In addition, as a trained orthopaedic surgeon, Dr. Cheng performs campus has significantly strengthened our already strong bone research program. the bulk of the orthopaedic animal surgeries. Surgical models include: Masqulet membrane (rabbits); critical Melissa A. Kacena, Ph.D. sized defect bone healing (rats and mice); Assistant Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery and fracture healing (mice). Chair, Orthopaedic Research Committee 4 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Faculty Jeffrey O. Anglen, MD Professor and Chairman Clinical Interests: Orthopaedic trauma and post-traumatic complications with special interest in pelvis and acetabulum fractures, peri-articular fractures of both upper and lower extremity, bone healing, nonunions, malunions, deformity and post-traumatic infections. Contact Information: 317-274-7913 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Thomas A. Ambrose, MD, FACS George J. Garceau Professor of Pediatric Orthopaedics and Vice Chairman Clinical Interests: Pediatric orthopaedics with special interest in scoliosis, pediatric hip disorders (hip dislocation, Perthes’ disease, slipped capital femoral epiphysis), clubfoot, and cerebral palsy. Contact Information: 317-278-0961 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Associate Professor and Chief of Surgery at Clarian West Clinical Interests: Adult reconstruction (total joint replacements), Sports Medicine and treatment of post-traumatic complications such as non-unions and malunions. T reatment of severe musculoskeletal injuries, such as pelvic and acetabular fractures as well as complex long bone fractures. Contact Information: 317-278-5492 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Christine B. Caltoum, MD Randall T. Loder, MD Assistant Professor Clinical Interests: Pediatric orthopaedic surgery with special interest in Perthes disease and shoulder problems secondary to obstetrical brachial plexus palsies Contact Information: 317-274-1174 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) G. Peter Maiers, II, MD Assistant Professor Clinical Interests: Sports medicine with a focus on total knee care, adult and pediatric athletic injuries, ligament reconstruction, cartilage restoration, and hip arthroscopy Contact Information: 317-580-3516 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Alexander D. Mih, MD Associate Professor, and Chief of Upper Extremity Service Clinical Interests: Reconstructive surgery of the upper extremity, brachial plexus reconstruction and repair, pediatric upper extremity disorders, microsurgery, shoulder reconstruction Contact Information: 317-274-3224 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) William N. Capello, MD Professor Emeritus Clinical Interests: Hip replacement with special interest in revision hip replacement Contact Information: 317-274-8617 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Brian H. Mullis, MD Assistant Professor and Chief of Orthopaedic Trauma Service Clinical Interests: Orthopaedic trauma and post-traumatic complications with special interest in pelvic and acetabular fractures, peri-articular fractures of both upper and lower extremities, bone healing, nonunions, malunions, deformities, and post-traumatic infections Contact Information: 317-630-6192 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Judd E. Cummings, MD Assistant Professor J. Andrew Parr, MD Assistant Professor and Chief of Adult Reconstruction Service Clinical Interests: Management of adult and pediatric patients with bone and soft tissue tumors or tumor-like conditions utilizing a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach. Operative treatment incorporates contemporary surgical techniques for removal of extremity, pelvic tumors, and spinal tumors. Reconstructive techniques include limb sparing surgery using both endoprostheses and structural allografts. Metastatic lesions of bone are managed with prophylactic stabilization, internal fixation, or resection and reconstruction. Clinical Interests: Minimally invasive total hip and knee surgery, alternative bearing surfaces and complex revision hip and knee replacement. Janos P. Ertl, MD Stephen B. Trippel, MD Contact Information: 317- 274-3227 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Assistant Professor, and Chief of Orthopaedics, Wishard Hospital Clinical Interests: Bridging orthopaedic trauma and sports medicine including surgical procedures of arthroscopic assisted periarticular fractures, long bone fractures, non-unions, minimally invasive fracture treatment arthroscopy, autogenous and allograft chondral transplantation, ligament reconstruction and amputation reconstruction. Contact Information: 317-278-8880 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Professor Clinical Interests: Arthritis treatment, joint preserving and joint replacement surgery. Contact Information: 317-278-6904 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Contact Information: 317-630-6192 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Paul E. Kraemer, MD Assistant Professor Clinical Interests: General spine surgery, spinal trauma, adult spinal deformity, and metastatic disease to the spine, adjacent segment disease, and revision / deformity surgery. Contact Information: 317- 713 6879 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Richard E. Lindseth, MD Professor Emeritus Mark D. Webster, MD Assistant Professor and Chief of Orthopaedic Service at VA Clinical Interests: Sports medicine, fractures, total joints, trauma. Contact Information: 317-278-5789 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) L. Daniel Wurtz, MD Associate Professor and Chief of Orthopaedic Oncology Service Clinical Interests: Operative and non-operative treatment of musculoskeletal tumors Contact Information: 317-278-3227 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) 5 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Research Faculty David B. Burr, PhD Melissa A. Kacena, PhD Contact Information: 317-274-7496 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Contact Information: 317-278-3482 (office phone); [email protected] (e-mail) Professor and Chair of Anatomy Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery (Indiana University) Professor of Biomedical Engineering (Purdue University, IUPUI) Assistant Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery (Indiana University) Assistant Professor of Biomedical Engineering (Purdue University, IUPUI) New Faculty George D. Gantsoudes, MD Pediatrics Dr. Gantsoudes completed his undergraduate work at the University of Michigan and his MD degree from the University of IllinoisChicago College of Medicine. After completing his residency in Orthopaedic Surgery at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City in 2009, he was spent a year as a Fellow in Pediatric Orthopaedics and Scoliosis at the San Diego Children’s Hospital before joining the faculty at IU. He will be seeing patients at both Riley and Clarian North Hospitals. Shyam Kishan, MD Pediatrics Dr. Kishan is a 1991 graduate of the Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research. He then completed his residency in Orthopaedic Surgery at Bombay University in Bombay, India. Since coming to the United States in 1997 initially as a Research Fellow in the Department of Surgery at Staten Island University Hospital, he completed a residencies in General Surgery and Orthopaedic Surgery at the New Jersey Medical School in Newark. In 2005, he was a Fellow in Pediatric Orthopaedics and Scoliosis at the San Diego Children’s Hospital. He then spent a year as an attending orthopaedic surgeon at Shriner’s Hospital for Children in Erie, PA and then four years as a pediatric orthopaedic surgeon at Loma Linda Hospital in Loma Linda, CA, before joining our faculty. He will be seeing patients at both Riley and Clarian North Hospitals. Elizabeth (Betsy) M. Nolan, MD Shoulder and Elbow Dr. Nolan received her medical doctorate in 2003 from The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, and completed her specialty training in Orthopaedic Surgery at Los Angeles County University of Southern California Medical Center in 2008. Dr. Nolan then went on to complete two Shoulder and Elbow fellowships. The first was at Balgrist Hospital, University of Zurich, Switzerland, 2008-2009. The second was at William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, MI, 2009-2010. She then joined the Department as a specialist in problems of the Shoulder and Elbow at Wishard, the VA Hospital, and the Clarian system. The combination of the European and American fellowships give her unique and extensive training in newer techniques and implants in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. This includes the Reverse Total Shoulder Replacement, which has been performed in Europe for over 20 years, but received FDA approval for use in the US only in 2004. Dr. Nolan’s research interests include clinical outcomes of Total Shoulder and Reverse Total Shoulder Replacement surgeries, as well as biomechanical wear properties and durability of these types of joint replacements, elbow injuries, shoulder instability, and rotator cuff tears. She is also actively involved in teaching with the IU School of Medicine Orthopaedic Surgery Residents and Students. Karl D. Shively, MD Trauma Dr. Shively received his medical degree from the University of Illinois College of Medicine, and then completed his residency here at Indiana University. Following his residency, he completed a fellowship in trauma at the University of Texas Southwester, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery. He joined our faculty this fall and will be working with Drs. Ertl and Mullis doing trauma care at Wishard Hospital. 6 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 The Indiana University Department of Orthopaedic Surgery would like to thank the following individuals for their valuable contributions to our residents’ education during the 2009-2010 academic year Volunteer Faculty Chiefs of Service Thomas J. Fischer, MD Chief of Hand Service David A. Porter, MD, PhD Chief of Foot & Ankle Service Lance A. Rettig, MD Chief of Sports Medicine Service Rick C. Sasso, MD Chief of Spine Service Resident Conference Lecturers 2009 Jack Farr, MD ..................................................................... Specialty Centers for Orthopaedics Thomas Fisher, PhD ............................................. IUPUI Department of Occupational Therapy Eric Horn, MD ...................................................................University Neurosurgery Associates Daniel Lehman, MD ..................................................................................................Ortho Indy John McCarroll, MD ........................................................................ Methodist Sports Medicine Alex Meyers, MD .....................................................Reconstructive Hand Surgeons of Indiana Gary Misamore, MD ........................................................................ Methodist Sports Medicine Michael Pannunzio, MD ...........................................Reconstructive Hand Surgeons of Indiana Christopher Perry, CP, LP ................................................................................ Perry Prosthetics Arthur Rettig, MD............................................................................ Methodist Sports Medicine Lance Rettig, MD............................................................................. Methodist Sports Medicine Peter Sallay, MD .............................................................................. Methodist Sports Medicine Rick Sasso, MD ......................................................................................... Indiana Spine Group David Schwartz, MD .................................................................................................Ortho Indy K. Donald Shelbourne, MD .................................................................... The Shelbourne Clinic Terry Trammell, MD ..................................................................................................Ortho Indy Scott Urch, MD ....................................................................................... The Shelbourne Clinic 7 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 PGY-2 through PGY-5 Residents PGY-2 David Barba, MD University of California Los Angeles Edgar Fernandez, MD University of Texas Galveston Scott Pepin, MD University of Minnesota Chad Turner, MD University of Utah Jason Watters, MD Indiana University Ryan R. Jaggers, MD Indiana University School of Medicine Raymond J. Metz, Jr., MD Indiana University School of Medicine Justin A. Miller, MD University of Louisville School of Medicine W. Lee Richardson, MD Ohio State University College of Medicine Susan M. McDowell, MD Indiana University School of Medicine Kathryn M. Peck, MD Indiana University School of Medicine Daniel R. Sage, MD SUNY Downstate College of Medicine Tarek A. Taha Medical University of South Carolina David M. Fang, MD Washington University School of Medicine Stephen P. Jacobsen, MD University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey Christopher B. Vincent, MD University of Colorado School of Medicine Jonathan H. Wilhite, MD Indiana University School of Medicine PGY-3 Matthew D. Abbott, MD Indiana University School of Medicine PGY-4 Scott R. Bassuener, MD University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health PGY-5 Joseph E. Bellamy, MD University of Illinois College of Medicine 8 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Left To Right: A. Kirk Reichard, MD Medical School: University of Louisville School of Medicine Research Project Title: Radiographic Identification of Total Hip Stems: How Good Are We? (mentor: J. Andrew Parr, MD) Fellowship: Adult Reconstruction (Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute, Alexandria, VA) Good Luck to our 2010 PGY-5 Residents Megan A. Brady, MD Medical School: Iowa Carver College of Medicine Research Project Title: The Incidence of Wound Complications Following Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Calcaneal Fractures (mentors: Gregory D. Dikos, MD, David Brokaw, MD) Fellowship: Trauma (MetroHealth, Cleveland, OH) Justin W. Miller, MD Medical School: Indiana University School of Medicine Research Project Title: Lumbar Extraforaminal Decompression: A Retrospective Study Looking at Surgical Outcomes and Complications as an Outpatient Procedure (mentor: Rick C. Sasso, MD) Fellowship: Spine (University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI) Larry Martin, Jr., MD Medical School: Meharry Medical College Research Project Title: The Relationship of Posterior Inferio Tibial Slope and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries (mentor: K. Donald Shelbourne, MD) Fellowship: Sports (University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH) Not pictured: Conor D. Dwyer, MD Medical School: Indiana University School of Medicine Research Project Title: Fracture Union Rates Secondary to Gunshot Wounds: A Retrospective Review (mentors: Janos Ertl MD, Brian Mullis, MD, Jeffrey Anglen, MD) Practice: Witham Health Services (Lebanon, IN) Good Luck to the 2009-2010 Fellows Arup Bhadra, MBBS Methodist Sports Medicine Center Creso C. Bulcão, M.D. IUSM Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Melissa Gorman, MD OrthoIndy Trauma Charan Gowda, MD Indiana Hand to Shoulder Center John Hildenbrand, MD Indiana Hand to Shoulder Center William T. Page, MD Indiana Hand to Shoulder Center Michael Krosin, MD OrthoIndy Trauma William T.J. Payne, MD Indiana Hand to Shoulder Center William Kurtz, MD OrthoIndy Trauma Chad Weber, DO OrthoIndy Trauma Robert LeBlanc, MD Indiana Hand to Shoulder Center Matthew D. Welsch, MD Indiana Hand to Shoulder Center Welcome… to the PGY-3 Class Kartheek K. Reddy Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine Raj Kakarlapudi, MD OrthoIndy Spine to the New PGY-1 Class Matthew Beck, MD Wake Forest University School of Medicine Eric R. Dockter, MD Isaac W. Fehrenbacher, MD The University of Toledo Indiana University College of Medicine School of Medicine 9 Austin M. McPhilamy, MD Wayne State University School of Medicine Justin D. Millard, MD American University of the Caribbean Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 2009-2010 Faculty Awards, Grants & Publications Faculty Awards Jeffrey O. Anglen, M.D. was designated as one of Indy’s Top Docs in Indianapolis Monthly. He was also an invited speaker as part of the AAOS/OTA delegation to the 46th Congreso Argentino de Oropedia Y Traumatologia held in Salta, Argentina in November, 2009. He is also vice president of ABOS and is on the Board of Directors of AAOS. Melissa A. Kacena, Ph.D. was elected to the Board of Directors for the journal, Advances in Mineral Metabolism (AIMM). J. Andrew Parr, M.D. won the 2010 Trustee Teaching Award for Orthopaedic Surgery. Award recipients must have demonstrated a sustained level of teaching excellence in the form of documented student learning and must have completed at least three years of service at IUPUI to be eligible. A review committee selects 53 recipients based on the criterion of excellence in teaching as the primary factor for selection, including the review of student and/or course evaluations. The award is presented annually at the IUSM Commencement, and recipients are also honored at the Spring Faculty Meeting and the annual campus Chancellor’s Honors Convocation. L. Daniel Wurtz, M.D. was selected as one of three Healthcare Heroes by the Indianapolis Business Journal. He was a finalist for the award in the Advancements in Health Care category for his work in limb-saving research for children with cancer. Grants Project Director Project Title Granting Agency Cummings, Judd Effects of Platelet Number and Adhesion on Osteosarcoma Growth and Metastatic Potential Am Cancer Society / IU Simon Cancer Center Ertl, Janos Rhbmp2 vs. Autograft for Critical Size Tibial Defects: A Multicenter Randomized Trial OTA Ertl, Janos Ankle Fracture Plating: A Multicenter Randomized Trial Comparing Lateral and Antiglide Plating in Displaced Lateral Malleolus Fractures Ohio State U Research Foundation Kacena, Melissa The Role of OPG in GATA-1 Deficiency NIH-NIAMS Kacena, Melissa Young Investigator in Basic Science Award CTSI Kacena, Melissa Collaboration in Translational Research Award CTSI Mullis, Brian Research Assistant Funding Synthes Mullis, Brian A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study of Adults with a Fresh Unilateral Tibial Diaphyseal Fracture Statue Post Definitive Fracture Fixation with an Intramedullary Nail Amgen Mullis, Brian A Multicenter, Randomized Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of AMG 785 in Skeletally Mature Adults with a Fresh Unilateral Tibal Diaphyseal Fracture Status Post Definitive Fracture Fixation with an Intramedullary Nail Amgen Mullis, Brian Hip Fracture Evaluation with Alternatives of Total Hip Arthroplasty versus Hemi-Arthroplasty: A Multicenter, Randomized Trial Comparing Total Hip Arthroplasty and Hemi-Arthroplasty on Revision Surgery and Quality of Life in Patients with Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures Boston U Mullis, Brian Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip Fractures U of Minnesota Trippel, Stephen Gene Transfer Treatment of Articular Cartilage Damage NIH-NIAMS Trippel, Stephen Selection of Therapeutic Agents for Articular Cartilage Repair VA Merit Grant 10 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Selected Publications Anglen JO, Bosse MJ, Bray TJ, Pollak AN, Templeman DC, Tornetta P 3rd, Watson JT. The Institute of Medicine report on resident duty hours. Part I: The Orthopaedic Trauma Association response to the report. J Bone Joint Surg – Am. 91(3):720-2, 2009. Barrett MO, Anglen JO, Hoernschemeyer DG, Schnetzler KA. Case report: associated both-column acetabulum fracture with an ipsilateral centrally dislocated intertrochanteric femur fracture. J Trauma-Inj Infect Crit Care. 66(3):918-21, 2009. Anglen JO, Archdeacon MT, Cannada LK, Herscovici D Jr, Ostrum RF. Avoiding complications in the treatment of humeral fractures. Instr Course Lect 58:3-11, 2009. Archdeacon MT, Cannada LK, Herscovici D Jr, Ostrum RF, Anglen JO. Prevention of complications after treatment of proximal femoral fractures. Instr Course Lect. 58:13-9, 2009. Ostrum RF, Anglen JO, Archdeacon MT, Cannada LK, Herscovici D Jr. Prevention of complications after treatment of femoral shaft and distal femoral fractures. Instr Course Lect. 58:21-5, 2009. Cannada LK, Anglen JO, Archdeacon MT, Herscovici D Jr, Ostrum RF. Avoiding complications in the care of fractures of the tibia. Instr Course Lect. 58:27-36, 2009. Herscovici D Jr, Anglen JO, Archdeacon MT, Cannada LK, Scaduto JM. Avoiding complications in the treatment of pronation-external rotation ankle fractures, syndesmotic injuries, and talar neck fractures. Instr Course Lect. 58:37-45, 2009. Templeman DC, Anglen JO, Schmidt AH. The management of complications associated with tibial fractures. Instr Course Lect. 58:47-60, 2009. Engsberg JR, Steger-May K, Anglen JO, Borrelli J Jr. An analysis of gait changes and functional outcome in patients surgically treated for displaced acetabular fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 23(5):346-53, 2009. Schmidt AG, Anglen JO, Nana AD, Varecka TF. Adult trauma: Getting through the night. Instr Course Lect. 59:437-53, 2010. Schmidt AG, Anglen JO, Nana AD, Varecka TF. Adult trauma: Getting through the night. J Bone Joint Surg – Am. 92(2):490-505, 2010. Capello WN, D’Antonio JA, Geesink RG, Feinberg JR, Naughton M. Late remodeling around a proximally HA-coated tapered titanium femoral component. Clin Orthop. 467(1):155-65, 2009. Vail TP, Mont MA, McGrath MS, Zywiel MG, Beaule PE, Capello WN. Hip resurfacing: patient and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg – Am. 91(Suppl 5):2-4, 2009. Capello WN, Feinberg JR. Use of an alumina ceramic-on-alumina ceramic bearing surface in THA in a 13 year old with JIA--a single case study. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 67(4):384-6, 2009. Cummings JE, Smith RA, Heck RK Jr. Argon beam coagulation as adjuvant treatment after curettage of aneurismal bone cysts: a preliminary study. Clin Orthop. 468(1):231-7, 2010. Ciovacco WA, Goldberg CG, Taylor AF, Lemieux JM, Horowitz MC, Donahue HJ, Kacena MA. The role of gap junctions in megakaryocyte-mediated osteoblast proliferation and differentiation. Bone. 44(1):80-6, 2009. Ciovacco WA, Cheng YH, Horowitz MC, Kacena MA. Immature and mature megakarocytes enhance osteoblast proliferation and inhibit osteclast formation. J Cell Biochem. 109(4):774-81, 2010. Lemieux JM, Horowitz MC, Kacena MA. Involvement of integrins alpha(3)beta(1) and alpha(5)beta(1) and glycoprotein IIb in megakaryocyte-induced osteoblast proliferation. J Cell Biochem. 109(5):927-32, 2010. Chitteti BR, Cheng YH, Poteat B, Rodriguez-Rodriguez S, Goebel WS, Carlesso N, Kacena MA, Srour EF. Impact of interactions of cellular components of the bone marrow microenvironment on hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell function. Blood. 115(15):323948, 2010. Gaston RG, Greenberg JA, Baltera RM, Mih A, Hastings H. Clinical outcomes of scaphoid and triquetral excision with capitolunate arthrodesis versus scaphoid excision and four-corner arthrodesis. J Hand Surg – Am. 34(8):1407-12, 2009. Foulk DM, Mullis BH. Hip dislocation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 18(4):199-209, 2010. Shi S, Mercer SA, Dilley R, Trippel SB. Production of recombinant AAV vectors encoding insulin-like growth factor I is enhanced by interaction among AAV rep regulatory sequences. Virology. 6:3, 2009. Shi S, Mercer S, Eckert GJ, Trippel SB. Growth factor regulation of growth factors in articular chondrocytes. J Biol Chem. 284(11):6697704, 2009. Shi S, Mercer S, Trippel SB. Effect of transfection strategy on growth factor overexpression by articular chondrocytes. J Orthop Res. 28(1):103-9, 2010. 11 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 The Garceau-Wray Lectureship In 1966, the Riley Memorial Association began the Garceau Lectureship in honor of Dr. George Garceau, the first Chairman of the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at the Indiana University School of Medicine. The combined Garceau-Wray Lectureship was begun in 1976 in memory of Dr. James B. Wray, the second Chairman of the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, following his untimely death. Dr. Garceau (1896-1977) was recognized around the world as a both a fine pediatric orthopaedic surgeon and as a true gentleman. He joined the staff at Riley Hospital in 1928 and rose through the academic ranks to become Professor and Chairman of Orthopaedic Surgery, then a section of General Surgery, in 1948. He was instrumental in forming an independent Department of Orthopaedic Surgery in 1960 and served as the Chairman until his retirement in 1966. During his career, he served as Vice President of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery, President of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery, and President of the Clinical Orthopaedic Society. In addition to being a skilled surgeon, he was an inspiring and innovative teacher, developing the model of the residency program still in use at Indiana University. Dr. Wray (1926-1973) was recruited as the second Chairman of the Department in 1966. He was dedicated to the investigation and research of metabolic and vascular responses to fracture and to the general metabolic responses to trauma, and he established the orthopaedic basic science research laboratories in 1967. In addition to multiple scientific publications, he was the recipient of three research awards for excellence. Like his predecessor, he was an inspiring and dedicated surgeon and teacher. His sudden and untimely death left a void in the hearts of his colleagues, residents, and medical students by whom he was liked and respected. The Garceau-Wray Lectureship is supported by generous donations from our alumni and industry. Each year two nationally known speakers are invited to address the faculty, residents, alumni, and community surgeons in honor of these two fine gentlemen. This year’s meeting was held on June 3-4, 2010 at the University Place Conference Center and Hotel on the IUPUI campus. Keynote speakers were: Roy W. Sanders, M.D. University of South Florida School of Medicine, Tampa, Florida Dr. Sanders is a highly respected specialist in trauma and post-traumatic reconstruction as well as foot and ankle surgery, and has published nearly 100 articles and abstracts on orthopaedic trauma. Dr. Sanders attended medical school at NYU and completed his residency at the Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute in NYC. After completing his fellowship in musculoskeletal trauma at Vanderbilt University, he was granted the prestigious AO/ASIF Jack McDaniels Memorial Trauma Fellowship, trained under the tutelage of Thomas Ruedi, MD, in Chur, Switzerland, and then completed a foot and ankle fellowship at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle, WA. He currently serves as the Director of the Orthopaedic Trauma Service and Chief of the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at Tampa General Hospital. In addition he is President of the Florida Orthopaedic Institute and the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. As the George J. Garceau lecturer, he presented a paper entitled, The Operative Management of Displaced Intra-Articular Fractures of the Calcaneus. Arnold-Peter Weiss, M.D. Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island Dr. Weiss is a highly respected specialist in wrist and hand reconstruction with a special interest in joint replacement surgery, and has published over 100 articles. Dr. Weiss attended medical school and completed his orthopaedic residency at Johns Hopkins medical school in Baltimore, and then completed his fellowship in hand surgery at the Indiana Hand Center under the tutelage of Dr. James Strickland. He is currently the R. Scot Sellers Scholar of Hand Surgery, Professor of Orthopaedics and Associate Dean of Medicine at Brown University. He also serves as the Director of the Microvascular Surgery Laboratory. He was Editor-inChief of the Journal of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand and is currently an Associate Editor of the Journal of Hand Surgery. As the James B. Wray lecturer, he presented a paper entitled, Wrist Arthritis & Instability. Caption: Drs. Sanders, Anglen, and Weiss at 2010 GarceauWray Lectureship 12 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 We gratefully acknowledge contributions from the following companies in support of the Garceau-Wray Lectureship: CLARIAN HUMAN MOTION INSTITUTE STRYKER ORTHOPAEDICS ZIMMER MIDWEST SMITH & NEPHEW DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS ORTHOFIX PFIZER, INC. MEDTRONIC SPINAL AND BIOLOGICS BIOMET HEARTLAND ORTHOPAEDICS, INC. ANGIOTECH BIOMED DJO GLOBAL In 30 years, I still plan to be hitting the trail The LEGION™ CR knee with VERILAST™ Technology has been lab tested for 30 simulated years of wear performance. This revolutionary implant was lab tested more than twice as long as other knee replacements. It’s hypoallergenic and lighter weight – weighing 20% less than traditional knee technology. And it substantially reduces wear – a leading cause of knee replacement failure. It’s time to put a stop to your chronic knee pain. Ask for the only knee lab tested for 30 years of wear performance. Rediscover your go with VERILAST Technology. Go to RediscoverYourGo.com today to find a surgeon who specializes in VERILAST Technology. There are potential risks with knee replacement surgery such as loosening, fracture, dislocation, wear and infection that may result in the need for additional surgery. Do not perform high impact activities such as running and jumping unless your surgeon tells you the bone has healed and these activities are acceptable. Early device failure, breakage or loosening may occur if you do not follow your surgeon’s limitations on activity level. Early failure can happen if you do not guard your knee joint from overloading due to activity level, failure to control body weight or accidents such as falls. Knee replacement surgery is intended to relieve knee pain and improve knee functions. Talk to your doctor to determine what treatment may be best for you. Additional information available at www.RediscoverYourGo.com or 888-825-2062. ™Trademark of Smith & Nephew. Certain marks Reg US Pat. & TM Off. VERILAST_Full Color_8.5x5.5.indd 1 13 8/3/2010 2:36:22 PM Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 3rd Annual Lindseth Lectureship November 5, 2010 Dr. James R. Gage, 2010 Lindseth Lecturer 8am - 5pm 6pm - Cocktail Reception and Dinner University Place Conference Center & Hotel 850 W. Michigan Street Indianapolis, Indiana The Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at Indiana University School of Medicine is pleased to present the 3rd Annual Lindseth Lectureship through the generosity of the Orthopaedic Residency Alumni. The Lectureship will consist of a full day of talks and case presentations on pediatric orthopaedics presented by the pediatric faculty of Indiana University and other distinguished academic pediatric orthopaedists. In addition to several invited speakers who are pediatric orthopaedic specialists, it is our honor to welcome Dr. James R. Gage of Gillette Children‛s Hospital, St. Paul, Minnesota as the third annual Lindseth Lecturer in Pediatric Orthopaedics. Dr. Gage is the former Medical Director of Gillette Children‛s Specialty Healthcare and Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota. The title of his presentation is ‘The Evolution of Treatment of Ambulatory Cerebral Palsy‛. Registration fee for this program is $50, which includes conference materials, continental breakfast, break refreshments, and lunch. Reservations for the dinner may be purchased at an additional $30. Residents-in-training may attend the meeting and dinner free of charge; however, registration is required for all attendees. On line registration is available at http://cme.medicine.iu.edu. After November 3, 2010 please register at the door. IU School of Medicine – 2010 Mark Brothers Lectureship Award Dr. and Mrs. Guey C. Mark created the endowed Mark Brothers Lectureship to recognize nationally and internationally renowned medical scientists of Asian descent. The Mark Brothers Lectureship has been awarded for outstanding biomedical and clinical research since its origin in 1999. The winners have had long, distinguished careers, many holding endowed chairs. Several have had significant leadership roles in their medical schools and departments, or directed research institutes such as those at the NIH or major universities. This year Dr. Freddie Fu was received this honor from the IU School of Medicine. Dr. Fu is Distinguished Service Professor and David Silver Chair of Orthopaedics at University of Pittsburgh, with joint appointments in Physical Therapy, Mechanical Engineering, and Health & Physical Activity. He serves as head team physician for the Pittsburgh Department of Athletics, and company physician for the Pittsburgh Ballet, as well as multiple professional sports teams. He is the founding medical director of the UPMC Center for Sports Medicine, former President of the AOSSM, and current President of the International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery, and Sports Medicine. He is an NIH funded clinicain-scientist who has received over 170 professional awards and honors, published over 350 papers and edited 28 major textbooks. Dr. Jeff Anglen, Chair, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Laurie Mark, 4th year medical student and granddaughter of Dr. Guey Mark, and Dr. Freddie Fu, 2010 Mark Brothers award recipient. The IU School of Medicine maintains an archive of award presentations through Media Viewer. If you would like to learn more about Dr. Guey Mark and view Dr. Fu’s lecture, entitled Anatomic ACL Reconstruction: A Change in Paradigms, use the following link: http://bit.ly/bSKrLE. 14 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 An Interview with Bill Capello JOA: Bill, you recently made an extremely generous bequest to our department by endowing the Bill and Louise Capello Chair in Orthopaedics. This kind of support shows great confidence in IU Orthopaedics, and demonstrates great leadership that I’m hoping will kick off alumni support for our most recent project, the drive to get an arthroscopy simulator. WC: I was happy to do it, and I think it’s nice if you can use it to stimulate additional support. I was recently at a social event and ran into Jim Steichen, who was a hand surgeon with the Indiana Hand Center, retired now, an emeritus professor. He happened to be sitting at my table and he made a point, during the night, to come over and sit down directly beside me and mention this whole thing and tell me how he was impressed with that kind of gesture. I never realized that the word is out so to speak. Dr. William and the late Louise Capello JOA: We announced it at the IU AAOS reception in New Orleans, and recently sent a letter to the alumni about it. I think it means a lot to people when a faculty member shows that kind of support. I wanted to share with our alums a little about you and how you got to where you are today. Did you come from a medical family? WC: No, I was actually the first one in my family to graduate from college. All four of my grandparents came from northern Italy. My father was a house painter, who went into business for himself and became sort of a contractor for little homes. I went to work in the summers when I was 10 and worked as a carpenter during the summers through medical school. My father and my grandfather, his dad, believe it or not, took night courses at Carnegie Tech, Carnegie Mellon, in chemistry. They both loved chemistry. They didn’t get degrees, but my granddad had this chemistry lab in his garage. He would do experiments. My grandfather had a couple of patents. He was a very interesting guy. JOA: Where’d you grow up? WC: In western Pennsylvania, in a coal mining town. There were probably 800 people in the town. The towns were all named after mines. I didn’t realize I was from Pittsburgh until I went to college, and after I had to take a half an hour to explain it, and they finally said “Well, you’re from Pittsburgh.” So, it was only 15 miles away but in another world. JOA: What about college? WC: I went to Rutgers on a football scholarship. Back then, colleges had a lot of interest in kids from western Pennsylvania. They produced a lot of decent ball players over the years. Joe Montana, Dan Marino, Mike Ditka - they were all from that area. I was fortunate enough to play at a very small school as a halfback and did well. I had full scholarship offers to Notre Dame, , Miami (FL), Arizona State, Minnesota, and Navy. JOA: But you picked Rutgers. WC: Well, I picked Rutgers because by that time I had decided to go into medicine. I wrote away to five of the schools that I was seriously considering, Notre Dame was one of them, and simply asked them “If I complete your pre-med program, what are my chances of getting into medical school?” which I thought was a reasonable question. I only got two responses, one from Notre Dame, which said “We don’t know” and one from Rutgers that said “100%.” JOA: Sounds like the pre-med program might have been pretty tough. What was your major at Rutgers? WC: I majored in biological sciences in the School of Liberal Arts. I wound up taking no less than 19-21 credits per semester. There was a committee of one, one guy, Ralph DeFalco, was your advisor, and he would sit you down and he would say “Where do you want to go to medical school? “ I wanted to go to Pittsburgh. He said “Good! Because no one wants to go to Pittsburgh.” He wrote all your evaluation letters, long hand, and he got over 100 guys into medical school that year. JOA: That’s pretty cool. WC: I have a good friend, Jim D’Antonio, who’s an orthopedist in Pittsburgh now. We’ve written several papers together. Jim was also from western Pennsylvania, on the Rutgers football team, and a fraternity brother of mine. Another guy, Andy 15 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 An Interview with Bill Capello (continued) Carollo, was another friend of ours, three Italians. Carollo was fullback and Jim and I were the halfbacks on the freshman football team. And we’re all three orthopaedic surgeons today. JOA: Do you guys get together at all now? WC: Well, Jim and I see each other routinely, and we see Andy from time to time. He still lives in New Jersey. JOA: How did you get interested in Orthopaedics? WC: Initially I wanted to be a GP, but Pitt wasn’t turning out any GPs. If you were in the top 15% of the medical school class or so, you would go into Internal Medicine. So that’s where I went. I wanted to be a neurologist. JOA: Really? WC: Yes. So I interviewed at the University of Virginia and was accepted into the Neurology program there. It was a pretty decent program at the time. But, that was to occur after my internship, so I applied for a straight medical internship and I got one at the University of Pittsburgh. It was every other night call for a year, and it was during that year I realized a bunch of things. One, I wasn’t cut out to be an internist. I’d had a bad experience on Orthopaedics as a student, but when I got into it as a house officer, you kind of know everybody, and there was no question that the guys I really enjoyed were the Orthopods. I kind of felt like they were normal people. So I decided, what the heck, I’m going to become an orthopaedic surgeon. JOA: Where did you train? WC: I wanted to stay at Pitt. I picked up the phone, like within 10 minutes of getting my Berry Program deferment letter, called Al Ferguson up, who was the Chairman at Pitt, and I said, “Dr. Ferguson, I just got this deferment. Do you have a spot for me?” He said, “I just gave the last one away this morning to Jim D’Antonio.” I decided to look around, but everywhere I called was full. Finally, I called Iowa. Iowa was in the matching program, but the match had fallen apart. Iowa was one of the only major programs that still hadn’t committed because they were in the match. Well, I did get in, I don’t know how. But it was the only place I applied. That was good. Then I went in the Army after that. JOA: After the residency? WC: Yes, that’s how I got here. JOA: Oh, is that right? I was wondering what your connection was to Indiana. WC: I have to tell you, I was really disappointed. JOA: In coming to Indianapolis? WC: Oh yeah. I had originally been assigned to Fort McPherson in Atlanta, and my wife and I were so excited about going to Atlanta. Well, I got bumped. So then I said I’d go to Fort Eustis, VA, which was open, outside of DC. Same thing happened! And they finally said, “Well, we’re going to put you at Fort Benjamin Harrison” and I told my wife that we’d better accept this, otherwise we could wind up some place in Louisiana. JOA: It’s getting worse and worse, better take this one. When did you get married? WC: I got married in 1965, when I was a sophomore in medical school. JOA: How’d you guys meet? WC: Her brother and I played American Legion baseball together. He was a couple of years older than I was. He was a good player. 16 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 An Interview with Bill Capello (continued) Anyhow, I remember him saying that he was a senior in high school and he had gotten a football scholarship to Rutgers. So a couple of years later, there I am in the same spot, so I decided to call him up just to see how Rutgers was. I went down to meet him and who answers the door but my future wife. She was the same age I was, we were seniors in high school at that time. So that’s how we started dating. JOA: And so did you guys date all the way through college and medical school? WC: Yes, and then got married while I was in medical school. JOA: So you guys came to Indianapolis and spent two years here in the Army. JOA: When did you start to develop an interest in arthroplasty? WC: Oh, that was when I came here. I got a phone call from Don Kettlekamp, who had been on the faculty at Iowa when I was a resident. He had just taken the job here. I remember the exact conversation we had. He called me up and said “Bill, what are you doing?” I said “Nothing yet. I don’t have a job.” He said “Well, we’re desperate here. It was going to be Paul DeRosa, Dick Lindseth and me with Ray Pierce over a Wishard. We don’t have anybody here doing any adult stuff. We need help. You want a job? You got a job.” I told him that I’d come down for a year. So I came here and he said to me, “I don’t care what else you do but you gotta do hips. I said “Well, Don, let me tell you something. When I was a resident, I did two total hips. And I’ve been in the service for two years and I haven’t even seen one.” I went over to the VA and looked over the resident’s shoulders, and they thought I was a great faculty member because I wasn’t bothering them. I remember Don called me in his office and said, “Look, you’ve got to do me a favor. This old man here in town, this old orthopaedist is driving me crazy. He’s insisting that I send over a young guy. I’ve tried to get Merrill Ritter to go but he said, “I’m not going!” He said “Would you consider going over there?” I said, “Well, I don’t care. I’ve got nothing else to do.” So, I go to Winona Hospital, where I met Palmer Eicher. JOA: That was up on Meridian? WC: Yes. He seemed ancient at the time, and he was a crusty guy. He takes me in his office and shows me this little cup. “You just put it on top of the bone, you don’t cut the bone off, you just put it on top, put a piece of plastic in and you’re done. I’m going to do one tomorrow. Come over here tomorrow and I’ll show you how to do it.” Within a matter of probably two weeks, I was doing the surgery, and he was helping me. JOA: Really? WC: Yes, on his patients. So I got pretty proficient operating, and he got to trust me. Then he retired. He basically said, “Look, I’m old. I’m retiring and I like the way you handle people. I’d be happy if you took over my practice. “ So he shipped patients over here, gave me all his charts, and he said, “By the way, here. If you want to play around with this thing, go ahead.” It turned out to be the Indiana Conservative Hip. JOA: And so did he just make it himself? WC: DePuy made it for him in Warsaw. Anyway, I was invited to be part of a hip symposium at the AAOS meeting where I also met Dr. Frank Stinchfield founder of both the Hip Society and the International Hip Society, One the plane ride home I sat next to Dr. Drennan Lowell, a professor at Harvard who, a month later, invited to give Grand Rounds at Harvard. My first paper was on the conservative hip, and was an invited paper to CORR at the request of Dr. Michael Freeman. I began to see some failures and report them, which was unusual – a lot of people didn’t report failures. With the help of a resident named Nancy Wilson, I wrote a paper on bone scanning of surface replacements. It turns out you can predict which ones will fail based on the scan. That paper won the Hip Society’s Charnley Award. JOA: You have had a great career here at IU over 30+ years. Did you ever think about going anywhere else? WC: I had some offers. Paul Curtis was chair at Ohio State, and he recruited me shortly after I came here. Tom Mallory, who is a well known, high volume hip surgeon in Columbus called me up a while after that, and I went to look there. I had been to Italy to learn osteotomies from Bombelli, and was interested in that stuff. Well, Tom was doing total hips and whoever worked with Tom was going to do total hips. He’s such a nice guy, but he was very clear that you had to turn out a certain volume or else you weren’t worth much. 17 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 An Interview with Bill Capello (continued) I can remember talking to his business manager. I’ll never forget that conversation. The guy says “What do you charge for a total hip in Indiana?” And I said, “Like $3,000.” He said, “How’d you arrive at that?” I said, “I don’t have a clue!” He said, “You don’t know why you charge that amount?” I said, “Not really.” He said “How much does it cost you to do it there?” I said, “I have no idea.” “He said, “Well, we can tell you exactly how much it costs and know the clear cost of a total hip, we have a certain amount of evidence that will support our charges. If anybody ever asks us, we can defend exactly what we are charging.” Anyhow, he offered me more money to start than I’ve ever made. He said, “Then after a year or so you’ll start making some real money.” Also, Gus Sarmiento called me up when he took the job as Chair in LA. He called Leo Whiteside at the same time, too. He wanted both of us to come out there and join his faculty. And I thought that if I were going to go anywhere, that’s probably where I’d go. So then he called me back and said “I’m just going out there, give me a chance.” And you know he ran into some real political problems out there. JOA: Yeah, I know Gus and have a copy of his book, “Bare Bones”. It’s an interesting book. WC: After he got there, he called me and said “Look Bill, this is probably not the place for you. And that was about it. I never really looked around after that. I’d been here about 10 years, so I decided to stay. JOA: You liked it and things were going well. You could stay in one place, focus on one thing and really take care of business. You’ve seen some significant ups and downs for this Department over the time that you’ve been here. WC: I have. When I came here, we had a pretty simple compensation plan. I mean everybody made the same, basically. Whatever was made was put into a pot and divided up equally among all of us, allowing a couple of thousand dollars for different academic ranks, but basically that was it. It allowed you to kind of do what you wanted to do and, you know, if my partner gave me a hip to do, it didn’t hurt his income. So we could kind of super-specialize there without taking a financial hit getting started. So that was kind of a good thing. I recognized the fact that the guys working at Riley and Wishard were working hard and not making any money because the patients didn’t pay. My overhead was about 85%. That never bothered me, it didn’t have a bearing on me. I was making enough money. JOA: What do you think are the biggest changes you’ve seen in the residency program over the 30+ years that you’ve been here? WC: Well, I think, in general terms, we’re training high quality people in our program. We’ve always had high quality people. but we had a bigger spectrum early on. JOA: Do you think the applicant pool has just gotten better and better? WC: That, and I think it also reflects the fact that the institution has got a better name, and we attract better people. I really think that the educational program we offer the residents, with the curriculum we put together, is really first rate and a marked improvement over what it was for me when I came here. I think in general the residents seem much happier, and there’s a much better team approach than I’ve ever seen which is really rewarding for me. JOA: Do you think residents coming out today will have as good a career as we’ve had during our careers? And the same opportunities? Will there be innovators like yourself and Palmer Eicher? WC: I still think there are going to be guys who are going to excel, develop new things either in the lab or at the bedside. I still think we attract the kinds of individuals who are capable of doing that. It may not be quite as easy, but in my mind, they’ve always been rare. JOA: What do you hope to accomplish by endowing the professorship? WC: My goal is to support our ability to have people here who will continue the great work that the Department has done in teaching, research and service. I’d like to see them continue on with clinical research, because that’s such an important part of how we learn, how we advance our profession. I hope to make it easier for IU Orthopaedics to continue the tradition of excellence that my friends and colleagues have built here over the years. It would be very rewarding to do that. JOA: Bill, I think I can speak for the whole IU Orthopaedic family, three decades worth of residents, fellows, students and faculty, when I say thank you for your service and loyalty. WC: It has been an honor and a pleasure. 18 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Volunteer Orthopaedic Experience in South India Alexander D. Mih, MD Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Orthopaedic surgeons in the United States have numerous opportunities to volunteer their services both at home and abroad. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery and the American Society for Surgery of the Hand are actively involved in numerous national and international programs providing opportunities for both service and teaching. Likewise, the Indiana University School of Medicine has strong ties to overseas medical centers in a variety of locations around the world. The need for contemporary medical care in developing countries is great, especially in areas far removed from large population centers. Matching medical volunteers to appropriate opportunities can be difficult due to problems with facilities, support systems and language/cultural differences. One program that has been active in bridging the gap between medical volunteers and the unique needs of a population in a developing country has been the medical program of the South India Church of Christ Mission (SICCM). The Mission has been meeting needs in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu since the 1950‘s, bringing medical treatment to this population in a variety of fields from immunizations, well baby/maternal care, and the treatment of orthopaedic disorders. In the 1970’s, the program treated several thousand patients with leprosy annually and served as one of the district hospital centers attended by the late Dr. Paul Brand, one of the pioneers in the field of reconstructive surgery for this and other disorders. As effective chemotherapy was developed for leprosy, the need for reconstructive surgery was greatly reduced. Image 1: Girl with polio and severe atrophy of arm motor atrophy can be addressed through appropriate tendon transfer with a resultant significant improvement in function. (IMAGE 1) Leprosy is rarely seen in the U.S., with almost all cases involving contact with the nine-banded armadillo in the Gulf coast area. The nerve damage inflicted by this disorder preferentially affects the ulnar nerve leading to the classic claw position of the hand in the setting of impaired sensation. (IMAGE 2) In 1996, a group of Orthopaedic Surgeons and Physiatrists from Indiana University traveled to Tamil Nadu to initiate a program with SICCM focusing on polio and other childhood disorders. Following this original encounter, additional orthopaedic medical trips were undertaken to treat patients in this developing area. This area has been largely agricultural, although recent development has led to the addition of some manufacturing. The focus of the medical program has largely been on disorders of the upper extremity. Numerous conditions are encountered on a regular basis and include congenital disorders, nerve palsy secondary to infectious causes such as polio and leprosy, burn scar contracture, and the residual effects of trauma. The goal has been to improve the upper extremity function of those afflicted with these disorders with an emphasis on the needs of daily living and employment Surgery in the developing world often exposes the surgeon to conditions not frequently encountered. While rarely encountered in the West, polio remains a significant problem in many areas of the world. Massive efforts by both governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) toward immunization have been successful in reducing the incidence of the viral disease, yet new cases continue to emerge each year. The resulting nerve palsy with profound 19 Image 2: Claw deformity from leprosy secondary to ulnar nerve palsy Open flame cooking is the normal mode of meal preparation leading to frequent accidental burns. The lack of early and effective burn care may result in profound deformities that often require staged reconstructive efforts. (IMAGE 3) Combinations of contracture release, skin grafting and therapy measures can greatly improve hand function. (IMAGE 4) Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Volunteer Orthopaedic Experience in South India (continued) the world. The residency program at that institution has welcomed lecturers from the Indiana University Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, and faculty visits between institutions have encouraged academic exchange and collaboration. Image 3: Longstanding burn scar contracture Image 5: Resident Lonnie Davis with medical student Damian Harris, and faculty member, Jeff Greenberg Image 4: Result after surgical release of burn scar contracture The goal of this program has been to bring contemporary treatment to patients without access to medical care. A dedicated effort has been put forth in securing appropriate operating conditions, anesthesia service, and aftercare. A large number of individuals trained in everything from preoperative screening to vocational training have been a vital link in the overall success of the medical program. A fruitful partnership between both secular and faith-based organizations has developed bringing restorative surgery to over 1000 patients in south India. The role of medical education is fundamental to the ultimate success of any volunteer program. Faculty from Indiana University, as well as from other US medical centers, has participated in a vast array of educational conferences including several National Hand Surgery Courses at the Christian Medical College of Vellore, Tamil Nadu. The open exchange of information, technical training and research into these disorders has been beneficial to attendees from around Image 6: Resident Kurt Martin examining hand pre-op 20 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Volunteer Orthopaedic Experience in South India (continued) Image 7: Resident Matt Welsch with patient and Michigan State faculty member, Jeff King The Indiana University Orthopaedic Surgery Department has provided enthusiastic support for resident involvement in this overseas project. Since 1997, 14 residents and medical students have participated in this project as have six faculty members. (IMAGES 5, 6, 7) Over 15 nurses, therapists and other personnel have also provided service with several individuals making multiple trips. Orthopaedic implant and equipment companies have provided significant monetary 21 and material support. Resident physicians are involved in every aspect of patient care from initial evaluation and recommendations through surgery and recovery under direct supervision of Indiana University faculty. A log of procedures and activity is kept by residents during their time in India. For further information regarding this program please contact Alexander D Mih, MD by email: [email protected]. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Charles H. Turner, Ph.D. 1961 - 2010 The Department of Orthopaedic Surgery lost a great leader and the Director of Orthopaedic Research on July 16, 2010, when Dr. Charles H. Turner passed away at home, with his family, in Indianapolis, Indiana. He is survived by his two children, Jeff and Emily; his parents, Bob and Mary Turner; and his siblings Robert, David, and Anne Marie. Dr. Turner was born November 29, 1961 in Roswell, New Mexico. He earned his B.S. in mechanical engineering from Texas Tech University in 1983 and his Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Tulane University in 1987. He joined the faculty on the Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) campus in 1991 after four years with the Osteoporosis Research Center at Creighton University. During his tenure at IUPUI, Charles rose to the ultimate ranks of Chancellor’s Professor and Associate Director within the Department of Biomedical Engineering (Purdue University), and Professor and Director of Orthopaedic Research within the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery (Indiana University School of Medicine). Dr. Turner was an internationally renowned expert in musculoskeletal biomechanics and bone biology, with particular interests in how bone responds to mechanical loading and skeletal genetics. He published more than 250 scientific papers and gave over 100 invited presentations worldwide. He received numerous awards and honors for his contributions to the field, including receiving the prestigious Fuller Albright Award from the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research in 2001; elected as a Fellow of the American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering in 2001; the Abraham M. Max Distinguished Professor Award from the Purdue School of Engineering and Technology in 2006; and being named a Chancellor’s Professor at IUPUI in 2008. He also won numerous grants from the National Institutes of Health and served as an expert consultant for many agencies including the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, National Research Council, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Food and Drug Administration, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Swiss National Science Foundation, Austrian Science Fund, Israel Science Foundation and the Wellcome Trust. Throughout his career, Dr. Turner showed dedication to the training of young engineers and scientists at all levels. Many of these individuals were awarded prestigious young investigator awards while under Dr. Turner’s tutelage and have since gone on to successful careers in academia and industry. Dr. Turner was one of the world’s leaders in bone biomechanics research. He was a distinguished scientist and engineer, teacher, colleague, mentor, and friend, and he will be sorely missed. A funeral service for Dr. Turner was held on July 20th at the Second Presbyterian Church in Indianapolis. To honor his memory, the family would like contributions to be made out to the Charles H. Turner Young Investigator Bone Research Award. This award will be presented annually to a pre-doctoral student or postdoctoral fellow on the IUPUI campus who will present their bone-related research at an annual meeting. Donations can be made out to Indiana University Foundation-Charles H. Turner Young Investigator Bone Research Award and sent to Indiana University Foundation, P.O. Box 660245, Indianapolis, IN 46266-0245 using the enclosed donation card. If you would like to make a donation using a credit card please visit the following secure website: www.medgifts.iu.edu/tribute. 22 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Opportunity for Financial Support of the IU Residency Program Arthroscopy Skills Trainer (ArthroSim) Residents and residency programs today face challenges which we never imagined, from mastering the exploding knowledge in our field to increasing regulatory burdens from government and society. As if learning to do a good history and physical exam weren’t hard enough, the incorporation of rapidly changing technologies into orthopaedic practice and training is a constant struggle, and makes achieving competence a moving target. It is increasingly expensive to provide training, and, at the same time, resources to provide the training are being squeezed tighter and tighter. Because we believe all orthopaedic surgeons share an interest in, and commitment to training the next generation of our profession, we increasingly turn to our alumni and friends who may not be in full time academic practice to help with this important activity. Many of our local alumni provide career mentoring, clinical rotations, research opportunities, and participate in selection of students for residency positions. Likewise, faculty and alumni have been very generous in providing philanthropic financial support to help with the increasing costs of providing a first rate education to IU’s current orthopaedic residents. Dozens of alumni and faculty responded to our fund-raising project two years ago, and we were able to open the George Rapp Orthopaedic Library and Media Center for orthopaedic residents to bring state-of-the-art computer learning resources to our residency training program. After many years of development, there is now a useful and realistic surgical simulator for arthroscopic training. You may have read about this in the October 2009 AAOS NOW (http://www.aaos.org/news/aaosnow/oct09/cover2. asp). ArthroSim is the result of collaboration between the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA), the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgeons (ABOS) and Touch of Life Technologies (ToLTech). Obtaining an arthroscopy simulator would facilitate the training of our residents and keep IU Orthopaedics at the forefront of residency training, It also fits in well with the IU School of Medicine’s new simulation center, one of the areas in which IU SOM is a true leader in medical education. The goal of this new campaign is to bring our orthopaedic alumni together to raise funds for the purchase of the arthroscopy simulator. If you have any questions about this project or the equipment, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Anglen or any of the current Orthopaedic faculty. We realize that times are tight for everyone, however we would hope that all of you appreciate the importance your orthopaedic residency training played in your own success and ability to provide outstanding care to your patients. I hope you will join with your fellow IU Ortho classmates and support this campaign. We are asking our alumni who are interested in advancing the training of current orthopaedic residents to donate to this project through the IU Foundation. A donation card is enclosed in this Journal for your ease in making a tax-deductible donation. Thank you in advance for your support of this project. 23 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Picnic to Welcome New Residents Residents, Drs. Jon Wilhite, Justin W. Miller, and Larry Martin enjoying the picnic Dr. Jeff Anglen enjoying conversation with Meredith Hole, Department Administrator, and Dr. Bill Capello, Professor Emeritus, at the annual summer picnic Anglen Residence Hostess, Diane Anglen (standing) with Dr. and Mrs. Mark Webster Indiana Alumni Reception – AAOS Annual Meeting Dr. Gary Moore (class of 1985), Dr. Rick Eaton (class of 1983), Dr. Mark O’Meara (class of 1982) reminisce at the Indiana Alumni Reception at the annual AAOS meeting New Orleans Dr. Wes Mesko (class of 1986) in discussion with Dr. Jeff Anglen at the reception Dr. David Foulk and his wife, Mary, with Dr. Matt Welsch and his wife, Tammy meet in their first year as resident alumni (class of 2009) 24 Dr. Jerry Mackel (class of 1974) and his wife, Dr. Barry Callahan (class of 1995) and his wife, with Pat Price from the Indiana Orthopaedic Society Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Garceau-Wray University Place Conference Center Dr. Christine Caltoum with speaker, Dr. Matt Dobbs from Washington University Dr. Kirk Reichard, PGY-5 resident, receiving the George Alavanja award for Orthopaedic Professionalism and Fellowship from Dr. Anglen Dr. Jeff Anglen with Dr. Twee Do, pediatric specialist and speaker at the Lindseth Lectureship Residents, Drs. Chad Turner and Matt Abbott, chat with Ryan Elpers, Stryker Rep, in the vendor’s area during a break in the meetings Dr. Richard Lindseth, speaker, Dr. Scott Mubarek from the University of California, San Diego, and Dr. Jeff Anglen Lindseth Lectureship Dr. Jon Wilhite, PGY-4 resident, receiving the Best Resident Research Paper taward from Dr. Anglen University Place Conference Center 25 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Diane Anglen, Dr. Brian Mullis, April Sasso, Dr. Rick Sasso, and Dr. Anglen at the annual holiday party Volume 4 – 2010 Dr. Larry Martin, PGY-5 resident with his wife, Jermeliah Holiday Party Columbia Club Dr. Kirk Reichard, PGY-5 resident, with his wife, Julie, and baby daughter, Emma, Dr. Joe Bellamy, PGY-4 resident, and Dr. Susan McDowell, PGY-3 resident Dr. Chris Vincent, PGY-2 resident, and his wife, Jenni, with Dr. Justin A. Miller, PGY-4 resident, and his wife, Meredith enjoying the holiday party Dr. Christine Caltoum arriving at the party 26 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Residency Program Alumni Class of 1974 Colin W Hamilton, MD Jerry L Mackel, MD Class of 1956 Joseph C Randolph, MD Robert J. Burkle, MD Thomas W Marshall, MD Class of 1958 Class of 1975 Gerald H. Weiner, MD Ronald G Bennett, MD Kenneth L Bussey, MD Class of 1961 Ronald G. Kleopfer, MD (deceased) Milton R Carlson, MD William H Couch, MD Class of 1962 Robert L Forste Jr, MD John M Miller, MD Alfred E Kristensen, MD George F Rapp, MD Class of 1976 John G Suelzer, MD James E. Albright, MD Class of 1963 James R. Dashiell, MD Donald F Hodurski, MD Alois E Gibson, MD John L Reynolds, MD Class of 1964 Peter C. Weber, MD Walter E Badenhausen, MD Class of 1977 Ronald M Gilbert, MD Robert T Clayton, MD Class of 1965 Charles E Jordan, MD William O Irvine, MD Stephen G Powell, MD Wilbur G Sandbulte, MD Class of 1967 John F Showalter, MD Peter C Boylan, MD Leo Stelzer, Jr., MD Class of 1968 Class of 1978 Steven R Glock, MD David L Bankoff, MD George E Reisdorf, MD Edward Dykstra, MD James W Strickland, MD Philip M Faris, MD Class of 1969 James Heinrich, MD Philip H Ireland, MD Bennett J. Cremer, MD David F Mackel, MD Ronald P Pavelka, MD David A Tillema, MD Class of 1979 Larry T Johnson, MD Class of 1970 Philip W Pryor, MD Wheeler T Daniels, MD Theodore L Stringer, MD G Paul DeRosa, MD Terry R Trammell, MD William J Sabo, MD Class of 1980 Class of 1971 Michael M Durkee, MD William A Atz, MD James P Pemberton, MD Kyu Sop Cho, MD Class of 1981 Pedro Musa-Ris, MD George W Lane, MD Keith D Sheffer, MD K Donald Shelbourne, MD Willard G Yergler, MD Franklin D Wilson, MD Class of 1972 David A Yngve, MD Anthony J Arnold, MD Class of 1982 Robert E Cravens, MD John G Crane, MD Alan J Habansky, MD Eric S Leaming, MD Charles J Holland, MD Mohammed R Nekoomaram, MD James B Steichen, MD Mark T. O’Meara, MD John P. Vincent, MD Dennis C Stepro, MD Class of 1973 Class of 1983 John Howard Avery, MD Karen S Duane, MD John M Gossard, MD Richard W Eaton, MD John C Klein, MD Gary W Misamore, MD Robert L Thornberry, MD William B LaSalle, MD Thomas M Trancik, MD Wade Rademacher, MD Class of 1955 Edward V Schaffer, MD Class of 1984 Steven K Ahlfeld, MD Frank Johnson, Jr., MD John K Schneider, MD Christopher Stack, MD Phillip L Stiver, MD Class of 1993 Paul M Keller, MD Michael L Kramer, MD Daniel E Lehman, MD Lynn M. Nelson, MD Peter Sallay, MD Class of 2002 Robert O Anderson, MD Timothy G Berney, MD Joseph G Jerman, MD Chad E Mathis, MD Lance A Rettig, MD Class of 1985 John M Ambrosia, MD Louis Angelicchio, MD Vincent L. Fragomeni, MD John O. Grimm, MD Gary R Moore, MD Class of 1994 Karl M Baird M.D. David A Goertzen, MD Stephen L Kollias, MD Scott A Lintner, MD Dean W Ziegler, MD Class of 2003 Cary M Guse, MD Daniel W Hanson, MD Adelbert (AJ) J Mencias, MD Mark C Page, MD Todd R Wurth, MD Class of 1986 Jack Farr II, MD Michael S Green, MD J Wesley Mesko, MD Richard D Schroeder, MD Charles D Van Meter, MD Class of 1995 Barry S Callahan, MD Carey A Clark, III MD James E Goris, MD Kosmas J Kayes, MD John I Williams, MD Class of 2004 Kevin E Julian, MD Aaron LeGrand, MD Kurt R Martin, MD John T Pinnello, MD Timothy L Walker, MD Class of 1987 Joseph Baele, MD Richard G Buch, MD Robert A Czarkowski, MD David A Fisher, MD Donna P Phillips, MD Class of 1988 Frederick E Benedict, MD Gregory Graziano, MD Michael F Kaveney, MD Delwin E Quenzer, MD H Jeffery Whitaker, MD Class of 1989 Andrew Combs, MD P Kevin Gerth, MD Robert J Huler, MD Class of 1990 Jeffrey A Clingman, MD Dean C Maar, MD Keith A Miller, MD Richard Mullins, MD William B Rozzi, MD Carlos K Woodward, MD Class of 1996 James S Kapotas, MD Karen J McRae, MD P Andrew Puckett, MD Nirmal (Nimu) K Surtani, MD Peter Tang, MD Class of 1997 Joseph F Bellflower, MD Thomas W Kiesler, MD Scott A Magnes, MD Paul S Nourbash, MD James R Post, MD Class of 1998 Rick Ahmad, MD William P Didelot, MD Jarvis Earl, MD David B Fulton, MD Thomas J Puschak, MD Class of 1999 Vivek Agrawal, MD Dale Dellacqua, MD Mark B Durbin, MD Colin G Sherrill, MD Marshall L Trusler, MD Class of 1991 Mark J Conklin, MD Steven E Fisher, MD Gregory T Hardin, MD Bruce T Rougraff, MD Jeffrey D Webster, MD Class of 2000 George Alavanja, MD Patrick K Denton, MD Brett F Gemlick, MD Steven B Smith, MD Anton A. Thompkins, MD Class of 1992 David Brokaw, MD Richard V Davis, MD Norman Mindrebo, MD Jonathan H Phillips, MD John C Pritchard, MD Class of 2001 Jamie Kay, MD Euby Kerr, MD Kevin E Klingele, MD Christopher R Price, MD Kirnjot (KJ) Singh, M.D. 27 Class of 2005 Lonnie D Davis, MD Jedediah W Jones, MD Michael J Sukay, MD Marcus A. Thorne, MD Class of 2006 C Noel Henley, MD Ari J Kaz, MD Brian J. Kerr, MD G. Peter Maiers, MD Aaron J Mast, MD Alex Meyers, MD Class of 2007 Brady P. Barker, MD Padraic Obma, MD Michael J. Rusnak, MD Bret W. Winter, MD Jeffrey Wu, MD Class of 2008 Ben J. Garrido, MD Sean M. Garringer, MD Kevin J. Lemme, MD John W. Powell, MD Class of 2009 Gregory Dikos, MD David Foulk, MD Karl Shively, MD Matthew Welsch, MD Ripley Worman, MD Class of 2010 Megan Brady, MD Conor Dwyer, MD Larry Martin, Jr, MD Justin W Miller, MD A Kirk Reichard, MD Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Alumni News Class of 1956 Robert J. Burkle, M.D. is practicing as a board-certified orthopaedic surgeon and is an active staff member at Terre Haute Regional Hospital in Terre Haute, IN. He also serves as courtesy staff at Union Hospital in Terre Haute and at Greene County Hospital in Linton, IN. He is an active member of the Vigo Medical Society, ISMA, AMA, Indiana Bone & Joint Club, and the Indiana Orthopaedic Society. He has 5 grown children and 7 grandchildren. Class of 1961 Ronald G. Kleopfer, MD, died 7-22-09 in Cody, Wyoming at the age of 79. Class of 1970 G. Paul DeRosa, MD has retired from operative orthopaedics but continues to be a consultant to the ABOS as Executive Director Emeritus. He is also Emeritus Professor of Orthopaedics at Duke University and maintains a consultant firm for orthopaedic graduate medical education, primarily for programs that have difficulties with the ACGME. He and his wife, Mary Ann, live in Durham, NC, and are busy with a growing family. Their son, James and his wife, Molli, are expecting their first child in January and that will be the 13th grandchild! He has three grown daughters – Rachel, who is an Emergency Medicine physician in New Hampshire; Sarah, who is an archaeologist with the National Forest Service in New Hampshire; and Laura, who is a professor of marine biology presently working in Woods Hole, Mass. He and his wife. Cheryl, live in Geneva, New York. Class of 1986 Wes Mesko, MD sent the following in response to our request for alumni news: Thanks to Indiana University department of Orthopedics for reinstating me as a 1986 alumni in this year’s edition (Editor’s note: Sorry, Wes). I was encouraged when Judy told me that I was not the only person who noticed I was not in the list. I know I learned my lesson to never be late in sending my annual donation to the Department again, and I never again will throw away an unopened letter from IU. It took me six months to convince the hospital at re-credentialing time that I had, indeed, finished an orthopedic residency. Thankfully, all is well now. Judy asked me for a brief profile. As the years pass, my gratitude increases toward Indiana University Department of Orthopedic Surgery with its attending surgeons, staff, nurses, and fellow residents who gave me the opportunity to train to become an Orthopedic Surgeon. I am especially grateful to Bill Capello and Dave Heck who let me take a 2nd bite at the apple of training to be one of his first total joint fellows after I had completed my HPSP pay back to the Air Force. Now in my 21st year in Lansing, Michigan, I find my occupation has been a most enjoyable and rewarding ride. Dave Heck’s role model for data collection motivated me from Day #1 to create a personal registry that now includes over 8000 joints. I was selected this year to be a board member of the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR) to get America on board in the vital area of an implant registry. International medicine has remained a vital part of my career, as I have participated in providing orthopedic care in short-term mission trips to Haiti, Nicaragua, Vietnam, and Kenya. I am grateful for the multi-year donations of total hip and knee implants and instrumentation from the Stryker Corporation, as I have led annual week-long teams to Tenwek Hospital in Kenya to do over 60 joints in the last 4 years. G. Paul DeRosa and family at his 70th birthday party Class of 1977 Charles E Jordan, MD retired from active orthopaedic surgery practice in 2004, sold his office building, and now does part-time Independent Medical Examinations. This allows plenty of time for travel and his passport is nearly full with trips to China, Africa, India, Egypt, Russia, Germany, France, Switzerland, England, Peru, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Netherlands, Scandinavia, Turkey, Greece, the Caribbean and all over the US and Canada. Chuck and Cheryl Jordan traveled to Africa, France, and China in the past year. This photo was taken by Wes Mesko’s son, Daniel, from about 10 yards away in a safari vehicle – with the driver ready to hit the gas should the lions decide we looked like we’d make a good meal. 28 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Alumni News (continued) to work at ‘Double Harvest’, an agricultural outreach in Haiti that also supported two operating suites. Dr. Mindrebo is the father of four students – one an undergraduate, two graduate students, and one who just started medical school at IU this fall. He is also a grandfather of two. Working in underserved areas has become part of the children’s lives and their vocational goals. Class of 2001 Kevin Klingele, MD has been the attending surgeon at Nationwide Children’s Hospital in…since 2002 and is currently the Program Director for Orthopaedic Education and Clinical Research and Surgical Director of Sports Medicine. He and his wife, Molly, have four children: Nathan (8), Andrew (6), Luke (4), and Emma (2). Kevin’s email address is: [email protected]. Class of 2007 Michael Rusnak, MD is doing orthopaedic trauma in Fort Collins, Colorado, with the Orthopaedic Center of the Rockies. Jeff Wu, M.D. is practicing at the Cleveland Clinic in Florida and recently married his wife, Melissa, a former staff member at Riley Hospital, in Maui. This was our team in from Tenwek hospital in Bomet, Kenya in May, 2009 where we did 18 joints in a 4-day stint. Standing - Nathan Mesko (MD); Viki Watkins (Scrub Tech); Meshack (RN); Daniel Mesko (Med Student); Elliot (Med Student); David (Anesthetist); Kneeling - J. Wesley Mesko (MD); Paul (Anesthetist). My wife, Kathy, and I have been blessed with good health, and have enjoyed seeing our three sons grow up - one in Orthopedic Residency, one in Med School contemplating Orthopedic Surgery, and #3 finishing college with a business degree bound and determined to maneuver himself into a position to make the rules of how his brothers will get paid. I thank Judy for the invitation for a brief Bio, and look forward to reading others in the future. In reality, I want to know if Mike Green and Rich Schroder of the class of 1986 are still alive and well, about whom I have not heard any reliable news and precious little rumors since we finished. I nominate both of them to be featured in the next edition. Class of 1992 Norman Mindrebo, MD started his practice, New Hope Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine in Indianapolis in 1998. His undergraduate studies in third world development and his deep interest in world events empowered he and his wife to travel to Haiti following the recent earthquake Jeff and Melissa Wu at their wedding this past year in Maui Norm Mindrebo with colleagues in Haiti following the earthquake 29 The Alumni News has been a popular section in the IOJ, but we need you to provide us with the content each year. If you’d like to report some news, personal or professional, we’d love to publish your info next year. If you notice that you or any of your classmates’ names are missing from our alumni list, let us know as well. Please email Donna Roberts ([email protected]) where you’re working, any awards you’ve won, how many kids you have, any interesting travels, or anything else you think your fellow alumni would be interested in reading about. Don’t forget to attach a photo or two. Thanks!!! Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 An Invitation To Get Involved I recently came across the following Native American proverb: “Tell me and I’ll forget. Show me, and I may not remember. Involve me, and I’ll understand.” The proverb applies to so many life experiences including family, work, involvement in the community and our professional organizations. How many of us take the time to really get involved? I know that many of you who are still practicing in Indiana have been members of the Indiana Orthopaedic Society and have attended our annual meetings held throughout the state. I also know that during the past 54 years of its existence several have dropped their membership due to lack of interest or retirement. Also a few have begged financial difficulties believing that the dues of $250 is excessive and more than they are willing pay (IOS has not raised dues in 17 years). I encourage you to return to our society and become members of IOS, and above all, participate in our annual meetings. During the past three years attendance at our annual meetings has increased to 120 attendees on average which is roughly one third of our membership. According to statistics that is a significant number of participants. Our exhibitors have contributed over $55,000 annually to support IOS through meeting exhibits, grants and sponsorships. Our recent April meeting in Indianapolis at the Conrad Hotel was another successful event which included a reception in the new Lucas Oil Stadium Quarterback Club. Our Keynote speakers included Butler University basketball coach Brad Stevens, son of orthopedist Mark Stevens. He spoke to a standing room only crowd and his message was one of empowerment, involvement, and commitment. U.S. Senator John Barrasso, also a keynote speaker from Casper, Wyoming, where he practiced for 24 years as an orthopedic surgeon, and elected to the Senate in 2008, shared his prospective on Washington and the Health Care Reform was enlightening and surprising. Here is a brief look at what IOS has to offer. IOS has introduced a recent technologic improvement to our meetings using Audience Response systems. And to make our meetings more appealing to all specialties we have added breakout sessions targeting subspecialties such as Total Joint, Sports Medicine, Trauma, Spine and Hand. New this year was a breakout session pertaining to Medical Legal Issues which will continue to be a part of our programming. Annual Meeting – Save The Date May 13-14, 2011 Join us May 13-14, 2011, at the French Lick Resort and West Baden Hotel. Our Presidential speakers are Dr. James Andrews of Birmingham, Alabama, and Dr. Richard J. Hawkins of Greenville, South Carolina. Dr. Andrews is Senior Orthopaedic Consultant for the Washington Redskins football team and Medical Director for the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team. He is the team physician for the Birmingham Barons Double A baseball team, an affiliate of the Chicago White Sox. Dr. Andrews is also the Co-Medical Director of the Ladies Professional Golf Association. Previously, Dr. Andrews has been a member of the Sports Medicine Committee affiliated with the United States Olympic Committee . He has served on the NCAA Competitive Safeguards in Medical Aspects of Sports Committee. Dr. Richard J. Hawkins practices orthopedic surgery in Greenville, South Carolina and Spartanburg, South Carolina. Dr. Hawkins specializes in shoulder, elbow and knee reconstructive surgery and sports medicine. A renowned shoulder surgeon, he has authored textbooks on shoulder surgery that are used throughout the world. Dr. Hawkins is a founding member of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Society and is team physician for the Denver Broncos and the Colorado Rockies. He also is a clinical professor at the University of South Carolina School of Medicine. 30 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 An Invitation To Get Involved (continued) IOS President Dr. Gary Misamore and his committee are developing plans for a great meeting you do not want to miss. IOS Leadership: IOS Board members include President Gary Misamore, Vice President Dan Lehmen, Secretary Treasurer, Peter Maiers, Membership Chairman Joe Randolph, Members at Large, Chris LaSalle, Scott Karr and Molly Weiss, BOC representatives, Dave Bankoff and Eric Monesmith, Immediate Past President Tom Woo, Legislative Chair Bob Hagen, Jeff Anglen, IU Program Chair, and Executive Director Patricia K Price, a recipient of the AAOS 2009 Executive Director of the Year. This honor acknowledges the excellency of our programs and is a primary reason to join and actively participate in our society. IOS PAC: The state PAC focuses on those in the House and Senate who have significant roles in health related issues. Your PAC money plays an important part in raising awareness about the issues important to orthopaedic surgeons around the state. PAC donations are $100. IOS Foundation: The Foundation is an independent organization that raises funds to support resident education and involvement in related activities including participation at the National Orthopaedic Leadership Conference. Grants have also been made to Special Olympics, IU Alumni “Project Operation” and the Indiana Chapter of Arthritis Foundation, plus a Orthopaedic Resident 2009 Mission trip to Kenya. Foundation contributions are $100. Donations over $100 are appreciated. IOSociety.org: IOS web site has updated information regarding board members, annual meeting information, membership applications, a career center, membership dues a newsletter and a variety of interesting topics. Just log on and search our site for other hot links to the AAOS and our popular “Contact Congress” tab. Physician Assistants and Nurse Practioners: IOS has created a new membership category “associate membership” for orthopaedic PAs and NPs. We encourage your PAs and NPs to attend our annual meeting and become active members. At the 2011 meeting, we will be inviting Practice Administrators. IOS NEWS Publication Our newsletter, published three times a year, incorporates items related to Board of Councilors activities, meeting updates and medical-legal issues. Get Involved! On behalf of the IOS Board of Directors I invite you to become an active member of IOS, if you have been a previous member in good standing consider rejoining. Applications are available on our web site iosociety.org. The truth of the proverb is as you get involved you will understand the importance of IOS membership, the importance of time commitment and energy to help us achieve our goals. • To remain as politically unbiased as possible while still supporting those issues important to the Indiana Orthopaedic Society membership and our patients. • To enhance our commitment to stay abreast of current information and advancements in the dynamic practice of modern orthopaedic surgery. • To be part of a proactive cutting-edge society to preserve our optimal environment in the practice of Orthopaedics. • To address those issues pertinent to the practice of Orthopaedics. • To achieve our vision to be a collegial group of orthopaedic surgeons with united voice for quality orthopaedic care. See you in French Lick!! Patricia K. Price Executive Director -Indiana Orthopaedic Society 31 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night An Instructional Course Lecture, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons By Andrew H. Schmidt, MD, Jeffrey Anglen, MD, Arvind D. Nana, MD, and Thomas F. Varecka, MD © 2010 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. Reprinted from the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, Volume 92, pp. 490-505, with permission. There has been a dramatic change in the approach to the treatment of acute musculoskeletal injuries over the past decade. The previous emphasis on socalled ‘‘early total care,’’ which advocated immediate definitive repair of all injuries, has shifted to an approach emphasizing ‘‘damage control orthopaedics’’ for a multiply injured patient. In this new paradigm, definitive repair of fractures is delayed until the patient is stabilized physiologically, associated soft-tissue injuries (if present) have healed, and optimum resources are available. However, there remain situations in which immediate treatment may be needed, such as in a patient with a pelvic ring injury and hemodynamic instability, a compartment syndrome, or an irreducible joint dislocation with associated neurovascular compromise. In these circumstances, there may not be time to safely transfer the patient to a specialized center, and emergent treatment directed at the specific problem must be provided. Emergent treatment of open fractures, compartment syndrome, and hemodynamic instability in a patient with a pelvic fracture as well as damage control in multiply injured patients should be understood by all who treat musculoskeletal injuries. Finally, a less-often discussed but no less important aspect of surgical care that may affect initial treatment decisions and outcome is sleep deprivation and fatigue of the members of the surgical team. Open Fractures Traditionally, the initial management of open fracture wounds was débridement within six hours after the injury to prevent infection. That guideline was based on animal experiments performed in the 1890s and is not supported by modern human clinical studies. The LEAP study, a prospective multicenter investigation of severe open lower-extremity fractures, showed no relationship between the time from the injury to the surgery and subsequent infection1. Multiple retrospective series of open fractures have also failed to support the ‘‘six-hour rule,’’2-4 and recent literature reviews have revealed scant support for emergency surgical débridement of open fractures5,6. The current consensus favors prudent early surgery within the first twenty-four hours. The initial surgical procedure for an open fracture is débridement and irrigation of the open wound. The purpose of débridement is to remove foreign material, contaminating pathogens, and devitalized host tissue. The principles of the surgical procedure include (1) extension of the traumatic wound longitudinally, with the surgeon being careful to consider options for future closure and proceeding systematically through each tissue layer from superficial to deep; (2) careful inspection of surfaces, with preservation of critical tissue such as skin and articular surfaces when possible; and (3) thorough removal of foreign material and dead tissue. Doing this well requires attention, patience, and surgical judgment. Tissue viability is dynamic, and initially it is not possible to determine precisely which tissue will survive. Usually, repeat examination is necessary to ensure adequate removal of dead tissue. Open wounds do not necessarily adequately decompress tissue compartments, and compartment syndrome is a risk with many high-energy fractures. Irrigation of open fracture wounds cleans the wound by removing additional debris and lowering the bacterial load. The irrigation volume, pressure, mode of delivery, and additives are all of potential importance, but little information is available about these parameters. Animal studies suggest that increasing the volume of fluid improves removal of particulate debris and bacteria up to a point7, but there are no clear clinical guidelines regarding this parameter. Although there are no specific data to support this recommendation, we suggest an empiric protocol of using 9 L (three 3-L bags) of fluid for Gustilo type-III open fracture wounds, 6 L (two bags) for a type-II wound, and 3 L for a type-I wound. High-pressure irrigation has been shown to drive contamination into the tissue, damage bone, delay healing, and impair infection resistance in animal models and in vitro experiments8. Pulsatile delivery of fluid has no proven advantage9. Irrigation-fluid additives have included antiseptics, antibiotics, and soaps. Antiseptics such as Betadine (povidoneiodine) or hydrogen peroxide are toxic to host immune cells and should not be used; antibiotics are of no proven value in open fracture wounds. Soap solutions help to remove dirt and bacteria through disruption of the hydrophobic and electrostatic forces that bind them to surfaces. In one prospective clinical study, soap solution was compared with antibiotic solution for open fracture wounds and soap was found to have an advantage10. Traditional teaching dictates that open fracture wounds should not be closed; however, low-energy wounds that have been adequately débrided and cleaned can be closed safely, if closure can be done without tension. If these conditions cannot be met, the fracture wound should be covered, within a week, by delayed primary closure, skin-grafting, rotational flaps, or free tissue transfer. During the time before definitive coverage, the wound tissues should be protected from desiccation with appropriate dressing techniques. Two methods in use are the antibiotic bead-pouch technique and the Vacuum Assisted Closure device (wound V.A.C.; KCI, San Antonio, Texas). The antibiotic bead-pouch technique is a simple method in which handmade polymethylmethacrylate beads are placed on a strand of heavy suture or 18-gauge surgical wire and placed into the wound; the wound is covered with an occlusive adhesive barrier such as OPSITE Post-Op (Smith and Nephew, Memphis, Tennessee) or Ioban (3M, St. Paul, Minnesota). Stabilizing open fractures promotes healing and infection resistance. The choice and timing of fixation strategy depends on the characteristics of the patient, the injury, the surgeon, and the operating room resources. In general, immediate plate fixation of open fractures of the lower extremity should be avoided because of an increased risk of infection, although immediate plate fixation 32 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) of upperextremity open fractures can often be done safely. Acute intramedullary nail fixation of open fractures of the lower extremity can be acceptable, provided that a clean wound with viable bone and soft tissues is achieved with irrigation and débridement. Temporary external fixation, often spanning injured joints, is a useful strategy to protect soft tissues, allow adequate time for planning, and avoid performing complex procedures in the middle of the night. When done for a severely, multiply injured patient with unresolved physiologic issues, this strategy is known as ‘‘damage control orthopaedics.’’11 Antibiotic treatment is one of the most important aspects of open fracture care. Traditionally, cephalosporin antibiotics were used for three days. For type-III open fractures, aminoglycosides were added and treatment was extended to five days. It has been suggested that penicillin be added to the regimen for agricultural injuries with soil contamination because of the risk of clostridial infection. However, these recommendations are based on poorly designed studies done more than twenty years ago12,13. More recent data support a shorter duration (twenty-four to forty-eight hours) of first-generation cephalosporin antibiotics and no additional drugs for coverage of gramnegative or clostridial organisms14,15. Compartment Syndrome Acute compartment syndrome can complicate any extremity injury, but it is most common in patients with tibial fracture, especially in men under the age of thirty-five years16. Patients with forearm fracture are the second most common group. Although acute compartment syndrome occurs as a result of the initial injury, it is important to remember that acute surgical stabilization can increase the risk of the syndrome17,18. The diagnosis can be difficult, and it should be considered for all patients with an extremity injury. Acute compartment syndrome is a surgical emergency because a delay in treatment may be associated with substantial short and long-term morbidity related to the degree of muscle necrosis that occurs. In the early phase, morbidity is related to potential renal impairment from rhabdomyolysis, whereas long-term disability is related to the degree of functional impairment caused by muscle fibrosis and neural dysfunction. Not surprisingly, delayed diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome is a common reason for litigation against physicians19,20. Clinical Diagnosis of Compartment Syndrome Acute compartment syndrome is typically diagnosed on clinical grounds. The ‘‘classic’’ symptoms of acute compartment syndrome are known as the ‘‘five P’s’’—pain, pallor, pulselessness, paresthesia, and paralysis—but these are late findings. Escalating pain, pain with passive stretch of the involved muscle, and numbness are the clinical clues of an acute compartment syndrome. These criteria are subjective and may be attributed to the associated fracture. This diminishes their diagnostic value. Avoiding regional anesthetic blockade and patient-controlled analgesia, which can completely mask the pain that occurs with acute compartment syndrome, is recommended21. Peripheral nerves are sensitive to ischemia; therefore, hypoesthesia in the distribution innervated by a peripheral nerve located within the involved compartment is an important early finding in acute compartment syndrome22,23. However, neurologic deficits 33 may be due to the initial trauma and are therefore not specific. The variability in the clinical signs and symptoms of acute compartment syndrome makes the accuracy of clinical diagnosis poor, and the sensitivity and positive predictive value of clinical findings are low24. In contrast, the specificity and negative predictive value of clinical signs are high, meaning that the absence of clinical findings associated with compartment syndrome of the leg is more useful for excluding the diagnosis than the presence of findings is for confirming the diagnosis24. Given the uncertainty in the clinical diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome, a high index of suspicion must be maintained when caring for patients at risk. Measurement of Intramuscular Pressure By definition, intramuscular pressure is elevated in cases of acute compartment syndrome, but, because there is wide variation in intramuscular pressure among patients with tibial fractures and since many patients without compartment syndrome can have intramuscular pressures exceeding 30 mm Hg, the direct measurement of intramuscular pressure is not diagnostic25. Intramuscular pressure measurement is an adjunct to the clinical examination and is indicated for any patient with equivocal findings; no reliable diagnostic threshold has yet been described26-28. Intramuscular pressure measurement is the sole means of diagnosis for patients for whom a clinical examination is not possible, such as those who are intoxicated or have a head injury or those who are already intubated. Typically, intramuscular pressure is measured in the anterior, lateral, and deep posterior compartments of the leg with use of either a commercially available device such as the Stryker Intra- Compartmental Pressure Monitor System (Stryker, Kalamazoo, Michigan) or an arterial line manometer. Both techniques have acceptable accuracy29. Intramuscular pressures vary within each compartment, with measurable differences occurring at distances as close as 5 cm from the site at which the highest pressure was recorded30. Intramuscular pressures are also influenced by the position of the adjacent joints31. The most well-supported threshold for fasciotomy appears to be a perfusion pressure of <30 mm Hg32-34. The perfusion pressure (DP, or ‘‘delta P’’) is equal to the diastolic blood pressure minus the intramuscular pressure. When the perfusion pressure is ‡30 mm Hg, it is safe to assume that the patient does not have an acute compartment syndrome. Conversely, when DP is <30 mm Hg for a sustained period of time, compartment syndrome may be present and fasciotomy is recommended. To improve the diagnosis of compartment syndrome and eliminate the need to perform multiple serial intramuscular pressure measurements, continuous intramuscular pressure monitoring has been advocated33,35. McQueen et al. demonstrated that continuous pressure monitoring of the anterior compartment of the leg in a cohort of patients with a tibial fracture in whom a compartment syndrome developed led to a marked reduction in the sequelae of acute compartment syndrome, presumably because the diagnosis was made earlier33. One important benefit of continuous monitoring is that the time trend of intramuscular pressure is an important variable that cannot be assessed on the basis of a single measurement. Prayson et al. reported that 53% of the patients in their series had at least one intramuscular pressure measurement that was within 40 mm Hg of Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) their mean arterial pressure (an alternative definition of a borderline perfusion pressure), yet none had signs of sequelae of compartment syndrome25. Thus, a rising or sustained elevated pressure (or inadequate perfusion pressure) is a more important indication of an acute compartment syndrome and a better indicator of the need for fasciotomy than is a single pressure. How to accurately assess perfusion pressure in patients who are under anesthesia is not known.While a patient is under anesthesia, the blood pressure may be artificially low, leading to an inaccurately small perfusion pressure, and to unneeded surgery if that pressure is used to decide whether a patient needs a fasciotomy. Kakar et al. recorded blood pressures in a series of patients undergoing tibial nail fixation36. Diastolic blood pressure during surgery was lower than that either before or after surgery, but the postoperative diastolic blood pressure was predicted by the preoperative blood pressure. Therefore, a more accurate measurement of an anesthetized patient’s perfusion pressure should be based on the preoperative diastolic pressure rather than the intraoperative pressure. The only caveat to this is that, if the patient is to remain under anesthesia for some time, the intraoperative blood pressure should be used. Surgical Treatment of Compartment Syndrome Once identified, compartment syndrome must be treated with prompt fasciotomy. Early diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome and prompt fasciotomy have been shown to lead to more rapid union and improved function in patients with a tibial fracture32,33. In contrast, if fasciotomy is done too late, the procedure may have little benefit and may actually be harmful37. Fasciotomy that is performed after myonecrosis has occurred exposes the necrotic tissue and can lead to bacterial colonization and infection. Finkelstein et al. reviewed the cases of five patients in whom fasciotomy had been performed more than thirty-five hours after the injury. Of these five patients, one died of multiple organ failure and the others had amputation of the limb37. Technique of Fasciotomy The fasciotomy is done by making a longitudinal skin and fascial incision over the entire compartment with release of all constricting tissues. An inadequate skin incision can contribute to persistent elevation of intramuscular pressure38. The precise incisions to be made and the structures that require release vary depending on the situation. Two-incision fasciotomy of the leg: Fasciotomy of the leg can be done safely and easily with use of two incisions: one lateral and one medial. The anterior and lateral compartments are released separately through the lateral incision. The superficial posterior compartment may be released through either incision. The deep posterior compartment is released through the medial incision. The intervening skin flap is at risk for necrosis if there has been damage to the anterior tibial artery. Therefore, when the anterior tibial artery is known to be or suspected of being injured, a singleincision four-compartment release from a lateral approach is recommended. To perform a two-incision fasciotomy, initially a lateral incision is made midway between the fibula and the anterior crest of the tibia. The skin is gently retracted anteriorly and posteriorly to expose the fascia of the anterior and lateral compartments, respectively. The lateral intermuscular septum that divides the anterior and lateral compartments and the superfi- cial peroneal nerve are identified. The peroneal muscle fascia is usually released first. Finally, the anterior compartment fascia is completely released. Alternatively, the fascia overlying one compartment can be released, followed by division of the intermuscular septum to decompress the other compartment. However, iatrogenic injury to the superficial peroneal nerve may be more likely with this technique39. Next, the medial incision is made 1 cm posterior to the posteromedial border of the tibia. The saphenous vein and nerve should be identified. The fascia of the gastrocnemius-soleus complex should be completely released. Distally, the soleus bridge (representing the condensation of the anterior and posterior investing fibers of the soleus muscle) should be specifically released from the posterior aspect of the tibia in order to completely decompress the flexor digitorum longus and tibialis posterior muscles. Single-incision fasciotomy of the leg: To perform a single-incision fasciotomy, a single lateral incision, extending from the neck of the fibula to the lateral malleolus, is made. Fibulectomy is not necessary39. The anterior and lateral compartments are released in the manner described for the two-incision fasciotomy. The superfi- cial posterior compartment (the gastrocnemius-soleus muscle complex) is released by elevating the skin posteriorly. Finally, a parafibular approach is used to decompress the deep posterior compartment. The peroneal muscles are retracted anteriorly, and the dissection is carried posteriorly to the fibula. With the lateral head of the gastrocnemiussoleus retracted posteriorly, the septum dividing the superficial and deep posterior compartments can be identified and released. If access to the deep posterior compartment is difficult, a medial incision can always be made as described above. Upper-extremity fasciotomy: The muscles of the entire upper extremity can be decompressed with use of an extended anterior incision extending from the shoulder to the wrist. In the upper arm, anterior release of the biceps and brachialis can be extended across the elbow and incorporated into a volar fasciotomy of the forearm. In turn, the volar forearm release can be extended into the palm of the hand to release the median (carpal tunnel) and ulnar nerves (Guyon canal). Beginning with the upper arm, an anterior incision is made along the medial edge of the biceps. The fascia of the biceps and underlying brachialis are released. The incision is extended across the flexion crease of the elbow in a zigzag fashion in order to avoid later contracture, and then it is continued distally along the volar aspect of the forearm as needed. Although rarely necessary, the triceps can be decompressed with use of a separate posterior incision. Adequate decompression of the forearm requires release of a number of potential sites of compression, including the lacertus fibrosus, all muscle fascia, and the flexor retinaculum. First, the incision is continued along the medial border of the mobile wad, consisting of the brachioradialis and radial wrist extensors, which are released. The fascia of the digital flexors, supinator, and pronator quadratus is released as needed. Rarely, a separate dorsal forearm fasciotomy is needed. Finally, a standard carpal tunnel release is performed at the wrist, with the incision again crossing the wrist flexion crease in a zigzag fashion to avoid contracture. Injury to the palmar cutaneous branch of the median nerve must be avoided. If the hand is also involved, release of the thenar, hypothenar, and interosseous muscles 34 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) of the hand is performed separately with use of longitudinal dorsal incisions between the second and third metacarpals and between the fourth and fifth metacarpals. Management of fasciotomy wounds: An advance in the management of fasciotomy wounds is the wound V.A.C. device. When applied at the time of fasciotomy, the wound V.A.C. device may allow earlier closure of the fasciotomy site and a decreased need for skingrafting40. Closure of the fasciotomy site before five days is not recommended and can be associated with recurrent compartment syndrome41. Skin-grafting is associated with fewer complications than is either primary or delayed wound closure42. Damage Control Orthopaedics The understanding of the role of orthopaedic resuscitation in the overall management of multiply injured patients has changed dramatically in recent years. The potential benefits of optimal fracture care in this patient population include (1) facilitating overall patient care, (2) controlling bleeding, (3) decreasing additional softtissue injury, (4) avoiding further activation of the systemic inflammatory response, (5) removal of devitalized tissue, (6) prevention of ischemia/ reperfusion injury, and (7) pain relief. Until recently, appropriate fracture care in a multiply injured patient was considered to be fixation of all fractures as soon as possible. This was thought to decrease the inflammatory load through stabilization of bone and soft tissue, and all long-bone fractures were definitively stabilized within twenty-four hours (or as soon as possible) so that the patient could be positioned upright for adequate pulmonary toilet. The paradigm at the time was ‘‘This patient is too sick not to be treated surgically.’’ In a landmark study, Bone et al. showed that this type of management resulted in fewer days of ventilator treatment, fewer days in the intensive-care unit, and lower prevalences of multiple organ failure and mortality43. About fifteen years ago, published reports began to suggest that, in some cases, this aggressive initial management might be harmful44. The term ‘‘damage control’’ was originally coined by the United States Navy to describe the repair of damaged sea vessels in combat to allow continued use. An approach best described as ‘‘damage control surgery’’ was reported by Rotondo et al., who used rapid but nondefinitive control of hemorrhage to avoid the lethal triad of acidosis, hypothermia, and coagulopathy in patients exsanguinating from penetrating abdominal trauma45. In 1993, the report by Pape et al. of increased pulmonary complications in multiply injured patients undergoing immediate femoral nailing44 ushered in the era of ‘‘damage control orthopaedics,’’ and the new paradigm is best described as ‘‘optimal surgery’’ rather than ‘‘maximal surgery.’’ In the past decade, substantial work has been done to define which group of patients can be safely treated with maximal fixation and which should have damage control surgery only. In general, the early death of a multiply injured patient is caused by primary brain injuries and major blood loss, whereas late death is due to secondary brain injury and host defense failure46. The first ‘‘hit’’ (initial trauma) results in hypoxia, hypotension, organ and soft-tissue injuries, and fractures. The second and subsequent ‘‘hits’’ (surgical procedures and sepsis) lead to hypoperfusion, hypoxia/ischemia, reperfusion, blood loss due to acute endothelial injury, and tissue 35 damage causing local necrosis, inflammation, and acidosis. Any type of surgical procedure that induces substantial bleeding and/or soft-tissue damage can be sufficiently traumatic to the patient to represent a ‘‘second hit.’’ Damage control orthopaedics is defined as the provisional stabilization of musculoskeletal injuries in order to allow the patient’s overall physiology to improve. The primary tactic of damage control orthopaedics is to use traction or external fixation as the means of provisional stabilization. The purpose of damage control orthopaedics is to avoid the worsening of physiologic parameters related to the second hit of a major orthopaedic procedure by delaying definitive fracture repair until the patient’s physiology is optimized. In this approach, the focus is on controlling the bleeding, managing the injuries to the soft tissues, and achieving provisional fracture stability. Pathophysiology of Trauma Cytokines, leukocytes, the vascular endothelium, and endothelialleukocyte interactions are the key determinants of the response to injury. Typical physiologic changes that occur after trauma are increased capillary permeability in the lung, gut, blood vessels, and muscle. The lung parenchyma is most affected in trauma patients. The largest capillary bed in the body is found in the lung, and pulmonary edema is a frequent sign of increased pulmonary permeability. As is the case in the lung, increased permeability of the blood vessels leads to movement of fluid into the third space. Increased tissue permeability also results in translocation of bacteria in the gut. In muscle, edema and bleeding can lead to compartment syndrome. The inflammatory response to injury (first hit or second hit) includes the systemic inflammatory response syndrome, which is mediated by proinflammatory cytokines, arachidonic acid metabolites, proteins of the acute phase/coagulation systems, complement factors, and hormonal mediators. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome can lead to adult respiratory distress syndrome and/or multiple organ failure. Simultaneous with the onset of systemic inflammatory response syndrome is the counter-regulatory anti-inflammatory response syndrome, which can cause immunosuppression and subsequent infection. The counter-regulatory antiinflammatory response syndrome is described as endothelial cell damage, accumulation of leukocytes, disseminated intravascular coagulopathy, and microcirculatory imbalances that lead to apoptosis and necrosis of parenchymal cells. Measurement of specific markers can help to quantify the inflammatory responses. These markers include base deficit or serum lactate, soluble thrombomodulin, polymorphonuclear elastase, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) DR (Table 1). Genetic influences have also been shown to play a role with IL-6, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor (TNF), and HLA-DR47. A base deficit or elevated serum lactate level is considered evidence of continued metabolic acidosis. A serum lactate level of >2.5 mmol/L can indicate occult hypoperfusion and can be used to judge a patient’s suitability for surgery. Crowl et al. showed that, when a nail is used to stabilize a femoral fracture within twenty-four hours after the injury, there is a twofold higher incidence of postoperative complications if the serum lactate level is >2.5 mmol/L48. Four hours after femoral nailing (with or without reaming), markers associated with Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) Table 1. Specific Markers and Mediators of Damage Control Surgery Base deficit or serum lactate (hypovolemic shock) Soluble thrombomodulin (endothelial injury) Polymorphonuclear elastase (tissue injury) Interleukin-6 (pro-inflammatory cytokine) Interleukin-10 (anti-inflammatory cytokine) Human leukocyte antigen DR (resistance to infection) the systemic inflammatory response are elevated49. Waydhas et al. demonstrated that patients with a high polymorphonuclear elastase level combined with a high C-reactive protein level and thrombocytopenia have a 79% incidence of lung, liver, or kidney failure50. IL-6 concentration has also been shown to be a reliable index of the magnitude of injury (burden of trauma) and of the ‘‘second hit’’ produced by the surgical procedure49. If the initial IL-6 level is >500 pg/dL (>5 mg/L), then definitive surgery should be delayed for at least four days after provisional stabilization surgery51. Patients with a high Injury Severity Score52 have an elevated IL-6 level for more than five days. The potent anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 also inhibits TNF-a and IL-1 expression and negatively regulates HLADR expression. Giannoudis et al. showed that elevated initial and persistently elevated IL-10 levels correlate with sepsis53. HLA-DR is an indicator of resistance to infection and is expressed by circulating monocytes. It is required for antigen presentation and helper Tlymphocytes and thus plays a central role in the immune response to infection. Diminished HLA-DR expression is associated with sepsis and death54. Timely analysis of specific markers and factors may not be possible in many facilities. In the absence of precise biomarker data, the orthopaedic surgeon may have to rely on physiologic and clinical parameters to guide decision-making (Table 2). The following injuries are usually best managed with the damage control ortho- paedic protocol: femoral shaft fracture in a multiply injured patient, pelvic ring injuries with substantial hemorrhage, and polytrauma in a geriatric patient. Pape et al. described the criteria for implementing the damage control orthopaedic protocol to include a serum lactate level of >2.5 mmol/L, a base excess of >8 mmol/L, a pH of <7.24, a temperature of <35C, surgical time of more than ninety minutes, coagulopathy, and transfusion of more than ten units of packed red blood cells55. When damage control orthopaedic protocols are followed, initial stabilization of fractures is achieved with minimal blood loss, fluid shifts, hypothermia, or prolonged surgical time. Options for fracture stabilization in damage control orthopaedic protocols include skeletal traction, splints or casts, intramedullary nail fixation, conventional plates, minimally invasive plates, and external fixation. External fixation is the preferred method of initial stabilization because it can be done quickly with minimal blood loss. Nana and Kessinger showed that use of spanning external fixation for complex distal tibial fractures that are treated immediately improves skin perfusion56. After provisional stability has been obtained, definitive surgery is considered only after the patient has been adequately resuscitated. End points for resuscitation with use of damage control principles are outlined in Table 3. A simplified guideline is to proceed with definitive surgery when fluid balance is negative. Hemodynamic Instability in Patients with a Pelvic Ring Injury Up to 40% of patients with an unstable pelvic ring injury die from their injuries, and hemodynamic instability is the main predictor of death. The initial management of patients with a pelvic ring injury, including the assessment and management of hemodynamic instability and acute (rather than de- finitive) stabilization of the pelvic injury, is critical. There are several key points to remember: 1. Pelvic ring injuries are markers of violent injury and are associated with life-threatening hemorrhage and injuries to other organs and sites, including the abdominal viscera and genitourinary system. It should not be assumed that the pelvis is the source of bleeding in an unstable patient. Table 2. Parameters to Consider When Deciding to Implement Damage Control Orthopaedic Protocol Polytrauma with Injury Severity Score of >20 points and additional thoracic trauma (Abbreviated Injury Scale score83 of >2 points) Polytrauma with abdominal and pelvic injuries and hemorrhagic shock (systolic blood pressure of <90 mm Hg) Injury Severity Score of ≥40 points without additional thoracic injury Initial pulmonary artery pressure of >24 mm Hg Increased pulmonary artery pressure of >6 mm Hg during intramedullary nailing Difficult resuscitation Platelet count <90,000/μL (<90 109/L) Hypothermia (e.g., temperature of <35˚C) Transfusion of >10 units of blood Bilateral lung contusion on initial chest radiograph Multiple long-bone fractures and truncal injury Prolonged duration of anticipated surgery (>90 min) 36 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) 2. Although the anatomic and mechanistic classifications of pelvic ring injuries are useful, they are not perfectly predictive of the risk of bleeding. 3. Pelvic ring compression with sheets is a simple and effective treatment for immediate management of bleeding in patients with an open-book injury. 4. The role of immediate angiography instead of operative exploration remains controversial and probably varies depending on institutional resources and injury patterns. 5. The key to the correct initial assessment of a pelvic ring injury is careful evaluation of the radiographs for evidence of deformity and instability. Assessment of Pelvic Ring Injury The physical examination of patients with a pelvic ring injury is primarily aimed at defining the neurovascular status of the lower extremities. The motor function and the sensation in the lower extremities should be documented. The examiner should look for asymmetry and/or deformity of the iliac crest, limb-length inequality, and skin lesions (including any open wounds and areas of closed degloving). Every patient should have a rectal examination, the prostate should be examined in males, and the vagina should be examined in females, as lacerations in these locations may be the site of an open pelvic fracture. Standard imaging of the pelvic ring includes both plain radiographs and computed tomography scans. Radiographs should include anteroposterior, inlet, and outlet views. A cystogram should be done in all patients, and a retrograde urethrogram should be perTABLE 3. End Points for Damage Control Resuscitation Giannoudis84 Stable hemodynamics Stable oxygen saturation Lactate level of <2 mmol/L No coagulopathy Normal temperature Urinary output of >1 mL/kg/hr No inotropic support formed in male patients prior to passage of a Foley catheter. Computed tomography is done primarily to define the posterior part of the pelvic ring; axial views best demonstrate sacroiliac joint injuries and sacral fractures. Vertical displacement is underestimated on anteroposterior radiographs and cannot be measured on axial computed tomography cuts. Vertical displacement can be determined on the inlet and outlet radiographs of the pelvis. Deformity and instability should be established when radiographs of an injured pelvis are evaluated. Deformity is assessed on the basis of the relative degree of internal or external rotation of the iliac wing as well as anteroposterior and/or vertical displacement of the posterior aspect of the pelvis. A pelvic fracture is considered to be unstable when there is symphysis diastasis of >2.5 cm, >1 cm of displacement of the posterior part of the pelvis, complete widening of the posterior sacroiliac joint, and/or any neurologic injury. Classification of Pelvic Ring Injuries A fracture classification system should group together fractures that have a similar injury pattern, treatments, potential complications, and sequelae. With pelvic fractures, all of these are primarily related to the condition of the posterior aspect of the pelvic ring because stability, neurologic injury, pelvic asymmetry, limb-length inequality, and persistent lumbosacral pain are determined by the extent of injury to the posterior aspect of the pelvic ring. Tile Classification Pennal, Tile, and colleagues classified injuries into three types57. Type-A injuries are stable with an intact posterior arch. Type-B injuries are rotationally unstable, with incomplete disruption of the posterior arch. These are subdivided into open-book or external rotation injuries (Type B1), lateral compression or internal rotation injuries (Type B2), and bilateral injuries (Type B3). Finally, Type-C injuries are both rotationally and vertically unstable, and they are subdivided into different types depending on the nature of the posterior injury. Young-Burgess Classification Tscherne et al.85 No increasing infiltrate on chest radiograph Balanced or negative fluid balance PaO2/FiO2 (arterial oxygen tension/fraction of inspired oxygen) of >250 Pulmonary artery pressure of <24 mm Hg Maximal inspiratory airway pressure of <35 cm H2O Platelet count of >95,000/μL (>95 10˚/L) White blood-cell count of <12,000/μL (>12 10˚/L) Intracranial pressure of <15 cm H2O 37 Young, Burgess, and colleagues proposed a mechanistic classification of pelvic ring injury, noting a correlation between the mechanism of injury and associated complications58. They proposed four types of injuries: anteroposterior compression (APC), lateral compression (LC), vertical shear (VS), and combined. Each of these major groups is further subtyped on the basis of the degree of displacement, deformity, and instability. Hemodynamic Instability Hemodynamic instability is defined by shock (low blood pressure), metabolic parameters (base deficit), and the need for blood products. The risk of bleeding is correlated with the fracture pattern, but hemodynamic instability can occur with any pelvic fracture59. Anteroposterior compression (APC) pelvic injuries are more likely to be associated with posterior bleeding, whereas lateral compression injuries are more often associated with anterior vessel injury. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) Sarin et al. reviewed the cases of 283 patients with a pelvic ring injury who were in shock (a systolic blood pressure of <90 mm Hg) at the time of presentation60. Thirteen percent required embolization because of persistent hypotension. In that series, the fracture pattern and orthopaedic management did not differ between the stable patients and those needing angiography. Advanced age was signifi- cantly correlated with an increased need for embolization in women only (the mean age of the women who needed embolization was fifty-five years compared with forty years for women not needing embolization), while the Injury Severity Score correlated with the need for embolization in men but not in women60. Treatment Options Fluid replacement is the initial treatment for a patient with a pelvic ring injury who is hemodynamically unstable. Fluid replacement alone can increase bleeding in some instances and should be used judiciously. If the patient does not respond to fluid replacement, or initially responds but becomes hypotensive again, the source of bleeding should be found. Ultrasonographic examination of the abdomen and pelvis and computed tomographyangiography are the most common and expeditious means with which to evaluate bleeding. If there are no other sources of bleeding except the pelvic fracture, angiography, circumferential compression (by means of a sheet, pelvic binder, or external fixation), or an exploratory laparotomy with vascular repair and packing of the pelvis are three ways to control the bleeding. The most appropriate choice is institution and/or physician-dependent, and the options have not been standardized. Angiography has a limited role in the management of patients with pelvic ring injuries. Most bleeding after a pelvic ring injury is venous, and embolizable arterial lesions are uncommon. Large-vessel embolization has also been shown to cause extensive necrosis of the hip abductor muscles61. Balogh et al. reported increased adherence to the key steps of the guidelines and better clinical outcomes after institution of evidencebased practice guidelines that included abdominal clearance with diagnostic peritoneal aspiration/lavage or ultrasound (FAST [Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma] examination), noninvasive pelvic binding within fifteen minutes after presentation, pelvic angiography within ninety minutes after admission, and pelvic external fixation within twenty-four hours62. In the period after the guidelines were instituted, the transfusion of packed red blood cells in the first twenty-four hours decreased from 16 ± 2 units to 11 ± 1 units and the mortality rate decreased from 35% to 7% (p < 0.05). Fangio et al. used angiography in thirty-two patients with an average Injury Severity Score of 39 points who remained hypotensive despite controlled fluid resuscitation (500 mL of normal saline solution) and dopamine infusion and who did not have thoracic and abdominal bleeding, cardiac tamponade, or tension pneumothorax63. Twenty-five patients had positive results on angiography and underwent embolization. There was no relationship between the presence of an arterial lesion and the pelvic fracture pattern; in fact the only significant differences between those with and those without a lesion on angiography were the initial blood pressure (65 compared with 78 mm Hg) and the amount of blood products received. Thirteen patients had a laparotomy because of expanding intraabdominal fluid; three of six laparotomy procedures that were done before angiography revealed negative findings, whereas only one of seven done after angiography revealed negative findings. Twenty-five patients underwent embolization; pelvic arterial bleeding was stopped in twenty-four (96%) of them and was followed by hemodynamic improvement in twentyone (84%)63. Cook et al. reviewed the cases of twenty-three patients with a pelvic fracture who underwent angiography and found that the fracture morphology was not predictive of the location of the vascular injury64. Six of ten patients who died had had angiography as the first therapeutic intervention. Five of the ten patients had a fracture pattern that produced an increase in pelvic volume (APC or VS pattern), and two of those patients died during angiography. Cook et al. believed that these patients would have been better treated with external fixation before the angiography. Shapiro et al. demonstrated that repeat pelvic angiography might be necessary in patients with persistent hypotension after previous angiography, whether or not arterial bleeding was identified during the initial session65. Circumferential compression, external fixation, and pelvic packing to control pelvic stability are valuable methods to help control bleeding. They reduce bleeding, lessen pain, and allow the patient to be mobilized. Pelvic stability should be achieved as soon as possible after the injury and initial assessment. Simple wrapping of the pelvis with a sheet is now commonplace in the United States for any patient suspected of having a pelvic ring injury. It is cheap and simple, and it can be very effective. Bottlang et al. investigated stabilization of pelvic ring fractures with slings in cadavers66. They demonstrated that circumferential compression with a noninvasive pelvic sling is an effective and safe method for reducing and stabilizing open-book pelvic fractures (Young-Burgess APC II, APC III, and LC II) at an emergency scene66. Provisional pelvic external fixation as an initial method of controlling bleeding works but has a 21% rate of complications, which consist mostly of pin-track infections without sequelae67. Cothren et al. reported a reduction in blood product requirements and no deaths due to bleeding after instituting a protocol of preperitoneal pelvic packing and pelvic external fixation68. Recommended Algorithm for Treatment of Bleeding in Patients with Pelvic Ring Injury All patients identified with a pelvic ring injury during initial resuscitation should be treated with a pelvic binder and a Foley catheter (after a retrograde urethrogram and cystogram), and additional pelvic radiographs including inlet and outlet views and a pelvic computed tomography scan should be obtained. Fluid resuscitation is given with continuous monitoring of urine output, the base deficit, hemoglobin levels, and coagulation function. Mechanical instability of the pelvis is determined and, in patients with persistent hypotension, subsequent management depends on the fracture pattern: Rotationally unstable injuries: Patients with these fracture patterns may respond to wrapping of the pelvis with a sheet or application of a binder. If appropriate resources and expertise are available, anterior pelvic external fixation or symphyseal plate fixation can be done. Plate fixation is performed if the patient undergoes a lapa 38 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) rotomy; otherwise, an external fixator is applied. Some apparent open-book injuries include vertically unstable posterior injuries for which posterior iliosacral fixation is also warranted. The challenge is to identify these. Lateral compression injuries: These are more stable, and early pelvic fixation is not beneficial. If these patients remain hemodynamically unstable, angiography or laparotomy is indicated. Rotationally and vertically unstable injuries: Rarely, posterior pelvic clamping in the operating room is done after angiography if the patient is persistently hemodynamically unstable. Lower-Extremity Emergencies Orthopaedic conditions in the lower extremity that are emergent problems include hip dislocation, displaced femoral neck fracture in any patient in whom femoral head salvage is desirable (most patients less than sixty-five years of age), knee dislocation, talar neck fracture with displacement, and subtalar dislocation. Dislocation of the hip joint is usually a high-energy injury that can interrupt the blood supply to the femoral head and cause cartilage necrosis. Relocation should be done emergently to prevent irreversible damage to the joint, although reported time guidelines Upper-Extremity Emergencies The one absolute, nondeferrable, middle-of-the-night upperextremity surgical emergency procedure is the attempted replantation of an amputated finger or limb. While a lengthy discussion of this subject is beyond the scope of this review, it is important to bear in mind that replantation is time-sensitive. Restoration of arterial inflow and venous outflow is vital for the successful salvage of the amputated part and recovery of as much function as possible. Infectious processes require early, if not immediate, intervention. Infection causes fibrosis, adhesions, edema, stiffness, and other detrimental effects that adversely affect the normal sliding and excursion of delicate hand and upper-extremity structures. Immediate evacuation of pus and surgical control of infection are mandatory as soon as they are feasible. Suppurative tenosynovitis and septic arthritis caused by human bites, animal bites, or other penetrating injuries need immediate surgical treatment and antibiotic coverage with a third-generation cephalosporin. Ceftriaxone, or a similar antibiotic, should be used until specific culture and sensitivity results are available. An infectious disease consultation should be considered. Deteriorating neurologic function is an indication for at least provisional, if not definitive, stabilization of an upper-extremity fracture (Figs. 1-A, 1-B, and 1-C). A distal radial fracture due to a high-energy injury is particularly noteworthy, if not notorious, in this regard, with respect to median nerve compromise. There are three possible situations that can arise after distal radial fracture that may lead to acute dysfunction of the median nerve: 1. The median nerve is found to be impaired or nonfunctional at the time of presentation. Under such circumstances, the nerve was probably injured at the time of impact, by stretch or laceration (uncommon), and immediate or early intervention will not change the natural history of the nerve’s recovery. Emergent surgery is not warranted. 2. The neurologic function deteriorates during the process of examination, initial treatment, or early observation. This is essentially an impending compartment syndrome of the carpal tunnel and requires emergent carpal tunnel decompression (Figs. 2-A and 2-B). Fracture reduction alone can result in adequate ‘‘decompression’’ of the median nerve (in cases in which neurologic compromise is caused by pressure from a displaced bone fragment). 3. Nerve function changes over a period of several days or weeks. This most likely represents alteration in nerve physiology secondary to inflammation, hematoma organization, or accumulation of acute phase mediators. Nerve decompression and irrigation are indicated, but this should be done on an urgent, not an emergent, basis. 39 Fig. 1-A A severely displaced distal radial fracture, which was associated with evolving median nerve symptoms. Fig. 1-B The wrist after immediate temporary treatment with an external fixator. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) formation of a tense hemarthrosis may compress the blood vessels supplying the femoral head. In that setting, an open or percutaneous capsulotomy may improve the blood flow to the head, although this remains unproven. However, there are risks to this procedure, including damage to those very same blood vessels. Dislocation of the knee joint (that is, the femorotibial articulation, as opposed to the patellofemoral articulation) is a high-energy injury and can be limb-threatening because of associated vascular Fig. 1-C After definitive fixation with a volar plate. in the literature range from six to twenty-four hours. There are conflicting and strong opinions from various experts, but good data are lacking69. Theoretically, an associated acetabular fracture changes the urgency by decompressing both the soft-tissue tension and the hematoma. An expeditious relocation of the dislocated hip makes sense, if only from the point of view of reducing the patient’s pain. Certainly, patients should not be transferred to other centers with a hip that is still dislocated. Fig. 2-A A high-energy distal radial fracture with acute carpal tunnel syndrome caused by a displaced volar fragment that was not reducible by closed means (arrow). A variety of reduction maneuvers have been described, including the Allis, Bigelow, Stimson, and East Baltimore lift70 maneuvers. Adequate pain control, relaxation, and assistance are required. If one or two gentle and controlled attempts at reduction are unsuccessful, additional treatment should be carried out in an operating room with the patient under general anesthesia and with the facilities available for open reduction. Repeated, forceful attempts are ill-advised. The inability to reduce a dislocation is often due to interposed fragments from the femoral head or from the acetabulum, and such a dislocation should be treated in the operating room, where trochanteric osteotomy may be necessary to facilitate reduction71,72. If a patient has an unstable closed reduction or a dislocation with interposed fragments, skeletal traction should be used until definitive surgical treatment is accomplished. A femoral neck fracture in a young patient requires emergent reduction and fixation to protect the blood supply to the femoral head, and a controllable factor in outcome is the quality of the reduction. An anatomic reduction is recommended even if it must be performed in an open fashion. Fixation with three screws placed peripherally in an inverted-triangle configuration provides good stability. The necessity for a capsulotomy to release the hemarthrosis is controversial. In a young patient with a nondisplaced or minimally displaced fracture, the capsule may be competent and the Fig. 2-B Immediate open reduction and volar plate fixation with carpal tunnel release was performed. 40 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) injury. If there is an abnormality of the pulses or of perfusion in the limb, emergent evaluation and treatment are indicated. If the pulses can be palpated and are clinically normal, and the anklebrachial index is >0.9, arteriography is not necessary. If the limb is obviously not perfused, arteriography also is not necessary because the patient should be taken directly to the operating room for vascular exploration and repair. Delay of the vascular repair is an important risk factor for subsequent amputation73-75. The knee should be gently reduced and stabilized with a splint or external fixation to allow close monitoring of the neurovascular status and compartment pressures. There is no advantage to emergent ligament repair. Rarely, the dislocation is irreducible by closed means. This is usually due to the medial femoral condyle tearing through the capsule and becoming button-holed, with capsularligamentous tissue being caught in the intercondylar notch. If the patient is neurovascularly intact, this situation is not necessarily an emergency, but the patient should be monitored closely and taken on an urgent basis to the operating room for an open reduction. Talar neck fracture is considered an emergency by some because of the tenuous nature and retrograde flow of the blood supply to the talar dome, but emergent reduction and fixation have not been shown to improve outcomes76-78. However, if the displacement compromises the skin, as evidenced by tight blanched medial skin without capillary refill, the patient should be treated emergently to save the skin from dying. The same principle holds true for subtalar dislocation. If the skin is compromised, emergent reduction is warranted. Reduction can usually be accomplished in a closed fashion, but occasionally a surgical procedure is required if there is interposition of tendons. Surgeon Performance and Fatigue As with any orthopaedic emergency, the timing of the definitive procedure depends on multiple factors: availability of a suitable operating room, availability and operational integrity of appropriate equipment, availability of experienced assistants and Fig. 3-A A comminuted femoral fracture presenting late in the evening. scrub personnel, and other factors. Often overlooked, however, is the state of readiness of the surgeon. When deciding whether surgical treatment should be done in the middle of the night, surgeons are not always the most reliable judges of their own capabilities. Fatigue and sleeplessness have subtle but real negative influences on surgeons’ performances79. Because of the similar types of responsibilities and decisionmaking involved with their jobs, surgeons are often compared with airline pilots with respect to performance accuracy and performance deterioration as fatigue comes into play. Sexton et al. reported that >70% of surgeons refused to admit to fatigue-induced deterioration in performance as compared with only 23% of airline pilots80. Like surgery, flying airplanes requires a coordinated and skilled team. Over 90% of pilots were able to relinquish some authority and responsibility when they were overly fatigued, as opposed to about 55% of surgeons. Our medical colleagues do a much better job of recognizing fatigue; anesthesiologists are much better at preserving cohesiveness and team function when they are fatigued, doing almost twice as well as surgeons in these performance domains. Even residents and house officers far surpass us80. Fischer et al. studied petrochemical shift workers and found work performance and alertness were markedly impaired when they worked the nighttime shift81. Not surprisingly, these parameters showed a marked tendency to worsen further as the nocturnal work shift passed. Bartel et al. evaluated a cohort of anesthesiologists before and after a twentyfour-hour period of call82. The study group was tested for their ability to accurately complete a set of increasingly complex psychomotor tests. After a night on call, 30% of the doctors showed more than a 15% increase in simple-task reaction time and more than one-half showed similar increases in reaction times for more complex tasks. Surgeons are not the only ones affected by fatigue-induced deficits in accuracy and performance; however, we tend to be much less likely to recognize and acknowledge the fatigue effect. Fig. 3-B Immediate nailing was done during the middle of the night. Postoperative radiographs revealed a missed distal interlocking screw (arrow). 41 Fig. 3-C Revision surgery was required to replace the distal interlocking screw. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) Unfortunately, errors of commission probably take center stage more frequently than do most other errors when late-night or middle-of-the-night procedures are undertaken. Fatigue and accompanying decreases in decision-making accuracy and deterioration in motor skills can lead to imprecise reductions, inaccurate fixation, and incomplete treatment. Such circumstances often lead to poor outcomes and, worse, the need for revision surgery (Figs. 3-A through 4-B). Complex articular reconstructions are best deferred until the entire surgical team is well rested and ready to undertake these orthopaedic challenges. Fig. 4-A Postoperative anteroposterior radiograph of a malreduced bicondylar tibial plateau fracture, with unacceptable residual articular step-off (arrow). Fig. 4-B Anteroposterior radiograph after revision fixation showing anatomic reduction of the articular surface. References 1. Webb LX, Bosse MJ, Castillo RC, MacKenzie EJ; LEAP Study Group. Analysis of surgeon-controlled variables in the treatment of limb-threatening type-III open tibial diaphyseal fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:923-8. 2. Charalambous CP, Siddique I, Zenios M, Roberts S, Samarji R, Paul A, Hirst P. Early versus delayed surgical treatment of open tibial fractures: effect on the rates of infection and need of secondary surgical procedures to promote bone union. Injury. 2005; 36:656-61. 3. Khatod M, Botte MJ, Hoyt DB, Meyer RS, Smith JM, Akeson WH. Outcomes in open tibia fractures: relationship between delay in treatment and infection. J Trauma. 2003;55:949-54. 4. Spencer J, Smith A, Woods D. The effect of time delay on infection in open long-bone fractures: a 5-year prospective audit from a district general hospital. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2004;86:108-12. 5. Crowley DJ, Kanakaris NK, Giannoudis PV. Debridement and wound closure of open fractures: the impact of the time factor on infection rates. Injury. 2007;38:879-89. 6. Werner CM, Pierpont Y, Pollak AN. The urgency of surgical debridement in the management of open fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16:369-75. 7. Gainor BJ, Hockman DE, Anglen JO, Christensen G, Simpson WA. Benzalkonium chloride: a potential disinfecting irrigation solution. J Orthop Trauma. 1997;11:121-5. 8. Bhandari M, Schemitsch EH, Adili A, Lachowski RJ, Shaughnessy SG. High and low pressure pulsatile lavage of contaminated tibial fractures: an in vitro study of bacterial adherence and bone damage. J Orthop Trauma. 1999;13:526-33. 9. Owens BD, White DW, Wenke JC. Comparison of irrigation solutions and devices in a contaminated musculoskeletal wound survival model. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:92-8. 10. Anglen JO. Comparison of soap and antibiotic solutions for irrigation of lower-limb open fracture wounds. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1415-22. 11. Bose D, Tejwani NC. Evolving trends in the care of polytrauma patients. Injury. 2006;37:20-8. 12. Patzakis MJ, Wilkins J, Moore TM. Use of antibiotics in open tibial fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;178:31-5. 13. Patzakis MJ, Wilkins J, Moore TM. Considerations in reducing the infection rate in open tibial fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;178:36-41. 14. Hauser CJ, Adams CA Jr, Eachempati SR; Council of the Surgical Infection Society. Surgical Infection Society guideline: prophylactic antibiotic use in open fractures: an evidence-based guideline. Surgical Infect (Larchmt). 2006;7:379-405. 15. Gosselin RA, Roberts I, Gillespie WJ. Antibiotics for preventing infection in open limb fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;1:CD003764. 16. McQueen MM, Gaston P, Court-Brown CM. Acute compartment syndrome. Who is at risk? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82:200-3. 17. Kenny C. Compartment pressures, limb length changes and the ideal spherical shape: a case report and in vitro study. J Trauma. 2006;61:909-12. 18. Nassif JM, Gorczyca JT, Cole JK, Pugh KJ, Pienkowski D. Effect of acute reamed versus unreamed intramedullary nailing on compartment pressure when treating closed tibial shaft fractures: a randomized prospective study. J Orthop Trauma. 2000;14:554-8. 19. Bhattacharyya T, Vrahas MS. The medical-legal aspects of compartment syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:864-8. 20. Templeman D, Varecka T, Schmidt R. Economic costs of missed compartment syndromes. Read at 60th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 1993 Feb; San Francisco, CA. Paper no. 212. 21. Richards H, Langston A, Kulkarni R, Downes EM. Does patient controlled analgesia delay the diagnosis of compartment syndrome following intramedullary nailing of the tibia? Injury. 2004;35:296-8. 22. Mubarak SJ, Hargens AR. Acute compartment syndromes. Surg Clin North Am. 1983;63:539-65. 23. Rorabeck CH. The treatment of compartment syndromes of the leg. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1984; 66:93-7. 24. Ulmer T. The clinical diagnosis of compartment syndrome of the lower leg: are clinical findings predictive of the disorder? J Orthop Trauma. 2002; 16:572-7. 25. Prayson MJ, Chen JL, Hampers D, Vogt M, Fenwick J, Meredick R. Baseline compartment pressure measurements in isolated lower extremity fractures without clinical compartment syndrome. J Trauma. 2006;60:1037-40. 26. Janzing HM, Broos PL. Routine monitoring of compartment pressure in patients with tibial fractures: beware of overtreatment! Injury. 2001;32: 415-21. 27. Ovre S, Hvaal K, Holm I, Strømsøe K, Nordsletten L, Skjeldal S. Compartment pressure in nailed tibial fractures. A threshold of 30 mmHg for decompression gives 29% fasciotomies. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1998;118:29-31. 28. Wall CJ, Richardson MD, Lowe AJ, Brand C, Lynch J, de Steiger RN. Survey of management of acute, traumatic compartment syndrome of the leg in Australia. ANZ J Surg. 2007;77:733-7. 29. Boody AR, Wongworawat MD. Accuracy in the measurement of compartment pressures: a comparison of three commonly used devices. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2415-22. 30. Heckman MM, Whitesides TE, Grewe SR, Rooks MD. Compartment pressure in association with closed tibia fractures. The relationship between tissue pressure, compartment, and the distance from the site of the fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1994;76:1285-92. 31. Kumar P, Salil B, Bhaskara KG, Agrawal A. Compartment syndrome: effect of limb position on pressure measurement. Burns. 2003;29:626. 32. McQueen MM, Court-Brown CM. Compartment monitoring in tibial fractures. The pressure threshold for decompression. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78: 99-104. 33. McQueen MM, Christie J, Court-Brown CM. Acute compartment syndrome in tibial diaphyseal fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:95-8. 34. White TO, Howell GE, Will EM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM. Elevated intramuscular compartment pressures do not influence outcome after tibial fracture. J Trauma. 2003;55:1133-8. 35. McQueen MM, Christie J, Court-Brown CM. Compartment pressures after intramedullary nailing of the tibia. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72: 395-7. 36. Kakar S, Firoozabadi R, McKean J, Tornetta P 3rd. Diastolic blood pressure in patients with tibia fractures under anaesthesia: implications for the diagnosis of compartment syndrome. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21:99-103. 37. Finkelstein JA, Hunter GA, Hu RW. Lower limb compartment syndrome: course after delayed fasciotomy. J Trauma. 1996;40:342-4. 38. Cohen MS, Garfin SR, Hargens AR, Mubarak SJ. Acute compartment syndrome. Effect of dermotomy on fascial decompression in the leg. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991;73:287-90. 39. Tornetta P 3rd, Templeman D. Compartment syndrome associated with tibial fracture. Inst Course Lect. 1997;46:303-8. 40. Yang CC, Chang DS, Webb LX. Vacuum-assisted closure for fasciotomy wounds following compartment syndrome of the leg. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2006;15: 19-23. 42 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Adult Trauma: Getting Through the Night (continued) 41. Wiger P, Tkaczuk P, Styf J. Secondary wound closure following fasciotomy for acute compartment syndrome increases intramuscular pressure. J Orthop Trauma. 1998;12:117-21. 42. Johnson SB, Weaver FA, Yellin AE, Kelly R, Bauer M. Clinical results of decompression dermotomy— fasciotomy. Am J Surg. 1992;164:286-90. 43. Bone LB, Johnson KD, Weigelt J, Scheinberg R. Early versus delayed stabilization of femoral fractures. A prospective randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71:336-40. 44. Pape HC, Auf’m’Kolk M , Paffrath T, Regel G, Strum JA, Tscherne H. Primary intramedullary femur fixation in multiple trauma patients with associated lung contusion—a cause of posttraumatic ARDS? J Trauma. 1993;34:540-8. 45. Rotondo MF, Schwab CW, McGonigal MD, Phillips GR 3rd, Fruchterman TM, Kauder DR, Latenser BA, Angood PA. ‘Damage control’: an approach for improved survival in exsanguinating penetrating abdominal injury. J Trauma. 1993;35: 375-83. 46. Keel M, Trentz O. Pathophysiology of polytrauma. Injury. 2005;36:691-709. 47. Hildebrand F, Pape HC, van Griensven M, Meier S, Hasenkamp S, Krettek C, Stuhrmann M. Genetic predisposition for a compromised immune system after multiple trauma. Shock. 2005;24:518-22. 48. Crowl AC, Young JS, Kahler DM, Claridge JA, Chrzanowski DS, Pomphrey M. Occult hypoperfusion is associated with increased morbidity in patients undergoing early femur fracture fixation. J Trauma. 2000;48:260-7. 49. Giannoudis PV, Smith RM, Bellamy MC, Morrison JF, Dickson RA, Guillou PJ. Stimulation of the inflammatory system by reamed and unreamed nailing of femoral fractures. An analysis of the second hit. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999;81:356-61. 50. Waydhas C, Nast-Kolb D, Trupka A, Zettl R, Kick M, Wiesholler J, Schweiberer L, Jochum M. Posttraumatic inflammatory response, secondary operations, and late multiple organ failure. J Trauma. 1996;40:624-31. 51. Pape HC, van Griensven M, Rice J, G¨ansslen A, Hildebrand F, Zech S, Winny M, Lichtinghagen R, Krettek C. Major secondary surgery in blunt trauma patients and perioperative cytokine liberation: determination of the clinical relevance of biochemical markers. J Trauma. 2001;50:989-1000. 52. Baker SP, O’Neill B, Haddon W Jr, Long WB. The injury severity score: a method for describing patients with multiple injuries and evaluating emergency care. J Trauma. 1974;14:187-96. 53. Giannoudis PV, Smith RM, Perry SL, Windsor AJ, Dickson RA, Bellamy MC. Immediate IL-10 expression following major orthopaedic trauma: relationship to anti-inflammatory response and subsequent development of sepsis. Intensive Care Med. 2000;26: 1076-81. 54. Ditschkowski M, Kreuzfelder E, Rebmann V, Ferencik S, Majetschak M, Schmid EN, Obertacke U, Hirche H, Schade UF, Grosse-Wilde H. HLA-DR expression and soluble HLA-DR levels in septic patients after trauma. Ann Surg. 1999;229:246-54. 55. Pape HC, Giannoudis PV, Krettek C, Trentz O. Timing of fixation of major fractures in blunt polytrauma: role of conventional indicators in clinical decision making. J Orthop Trauma. 2005;19:551-62. 56. Nana A, Kessinger S. Improved soft-tissue perfusion following application of temporizing external fixation in complex distal tibia fractures. Presented as a poster exhibit at the Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association; 2008 Oct 15-18; Denver, CO. Poster no. 99. 57. Pennal GF, Tile M, Waddell JP, Garside H. Pelvic disruption: assessment and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;151:12-21. 58. Young JW, Burgess AR, Brumback RJ, Poka A. Pelvic fractures: value of plain radiography in early assessment and management. Radiology. 1986; 160:445-51. 59. Metz CM, Hak DJ, Goulet JA, Williams D. Pelvic fracture patterns and their corresponding angiographic sources of hemorrhage. Orthop Clin North Am. 2004;35:431-7. 60. Sarin EL, Moore JB, Moore EE, Shannon MR, Ray CE, Morgan SJ, Smith WR. Pelvic fracture pattern does not always predict the need for urgent embolization. J Trauma. 2005;58:973-7. 61. Yasumura K, Ikegami K, Kamohara T, Nohara Y. High incidence of ischemic necrosis of the gluteal muscle after transcatheter angiographic embolization for severe pelvic fracture. J Trauma. 2005;58: 985-90. 43 62. Balogh Z, Caldwell E, Heetveld M, D’Amours S, Schlaphoff G, Harris I, Sugrue M. Institutional practice guidelines on management of pelvic fracture-related hemodynamic instability: do they make a difference? J Trauma. 2005;58:778-82. 63. Fangio P, Asehnoune K, Edouard A, Smail N, Benhamou D. Early embolization and vasopressor administration for management of life-threatening hemorrhage from pelvic fracture. J Trauma. 2005;58: 978-84. 64. Cook RE, Keating JF, Gillespie I. The role of angiography in the management of haemorrhage from major fractures of the pelvis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002;84:178-82. 65. Shapiro M, McDonald AA, Knight D, Johannigman JA, Cuschieri J. The role of repeat angiography in the management of pelvic fractures. J Trauma. 2005;58: 227-31. 66. Bottlang M, Krieg JC, Mohr M, Simpson TS, Madey SM. Emergent management of pelvic ring fractures with use of circumferential compression. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84 Suppl. 2:43-7. 67. Mason WT, Khan SN, James CL, Chesser TJ, Ward AJ. Complications of temporary and definitive external fixation of pelvic ring injuries. Injury. 2005; 36:599-604. 68. Cothren CC, Osborn PM, Moore EE, Morgan SJ, Johnson JL, Smith WR. Preperitonal pelvic packing for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures: a paradigm shift. J Trauma. 2007;62:834-9. 69. Bhandari M, Matta J, Ferguson T, Matthys G. Predictors of clinical and radiological outcome in patients with fractures of the acetabulum and concomitant posterior dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:1618-24. 70. Schafer SJ, Anglen JO. The East Baltimore Lift: a simple and effective method for reduction of posterior hip dislocations. J Orthop Trauma. 1999; 13:56-7. 71. Anglen JO, Hughes M. Trochanteric osteotomy for incarcerated hip dislocation due to interposed posterior wall fragments. Orthopedics. 2004;27: 213-6. 72. Moed BR, WillsonCarr SE, Watson JT. Results of operative treatment of fractures of the posterior wall of the acetabulum. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84: 752-8. 73. Hollis JD, Daley BJ. 10-year review of knee dislocations: is arteriography always necessary? J Trauma. 2005;59:672-5. 74. Klineberg EO, Crites BM, Flinn WR, Archibald JD, Moorman CT 3rd. The role of arteriography in assessing popliteal artery injury in knee dislocations. J Trauma. 2004;56:786-90. 75. Mills WJ, Barei DP, McNair P. The value of the ankle-brachial index for diagnosing arterial injury after knee dislocation: a prospective study. J Trauma. 2004;56:1261-5. 76. Vallier HA, Nork SE, Barei DP, Benirschke SK, Sangeorzan BJ. Talar neck fractures: results and outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1616-24. 77. Patel R, Van Bergeyk A, Pinney S. Are displaced talar neck fractures surgical emergencies? A survey of orthopaedic trauma experts. Foot Ankle Int. 2005; 26:378-81. 78. Lindvall E, Haidukewych G, DiPasquale T, Herscovici D Jr, Sanders R. Open reduction and stable fixation of isolated, displaced talar neck and body fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86: 2229-34. 79. Rothschild JM, Keohane CA, Rogers S, Gardner R, Lipsitz SR, Salzberg CA, Yu T, Yoon CS, Williams DH, Wien MF, Czeisler CA, Bates DW, Landrigan CP. Risks of complications by attending physicians after performing nighttime procedures. JAMA. 2009;302; 1565-72. 80. Sexton JB, Thomas EJ, Helmreich RL. Error, stress, and teamwork in medicine and aviation: cross sectional surveys. BMJ. 2000;320:745-9. 81. Fischer FM, de Moreno CR, Notarnicola da Silva Borges F, Louzada FM. Implementation of 12-hour shifts in a Brazilian petrochemical plant: impact on sleep and alertness. Chronobiol Int. 2000;17: 521-37. 82. Bartel P, Offermeier W, Smith F, Becker P. Attention and working memory in resident anaesthetists after night duty: group and individual effects. Occup Environ Med. 2004;61:167-70. 83. Committee on Injury Scaling. The Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 1990—Update 98. Des Plaines, IL: Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine; 1998. 84. Giannoudis PV. Surgical priorities in damage control in polytrauma. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003; 85:47883. 85. Tscherne H, Regel G, Pape HC, Pohlemann T, Krettek C. Internal fixation of multiple fractures in patients with polytrauma. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;347;62-78. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Current and Future Trend in Articular Cartilage Restoration Jack Farr, MD Cartilage Restoration Center of Indiana – OrthoIndy, Indianapolis, IN Introduction Cartilage restoration has evolved from the very limited use of fresh osteochondral allografts by a few centers (e.g., Gross, Convery, and Meyers) to the widespread use of marrow stimulation today and the lower volume techniques of osteochondral autograft and cultured chondrocyte implantation. While the scientific goal of articular cartilage restoration is to recreate normal hyaline cartilage at the site of a cartilage defect, at present this has only been achieved through osteochondral transfer, noting that limitations of autograft and allograft implants preclude widespread use. While hyaline-like tissue properties may be demonstrated using cell therapy alone, the tissue lacks the natural stratification of normal hyaline cartilage. However, the clinical goal in each of these cartilage surgeries is pain free normal function with a durable implant. With increased emphasis on costs, it may not be necessary for all techniques to yield hyaline like cartilage, but rather to satisfy patient goals. That is, while laudable, stratified hyaline cartilage may not be necessary to meet these goals. In fact, currently when evaluating new clinical cartilage restoration techniques, the FDA does not request biopsies for histomorpholgy, but rather they require patient reported outcomes as the primary endpoint. This is typically pain or, when there are co-primary endpoints, the endpoints are pain and functional activity level. Therefore, as one explores future trends in the technique of cartilage restoration, the demand match approach is useful; applying the optimal technique to benefit the specific cartilage lesion of a specific patient in a cost efficient manner. Osteochondral Allograft Bugbee et al1 recently reported the largest series of osteochondral allograft (OCA) with follow up as long as 19.5 years. The PROs (patient reported outcomes) results for monopolar OCA continue to be approximately 76% good/ excellent, while bipolar typically in the range of 50% positive. The number of transplants per year has been relatively stable in the range of 1-2,000/year as surgical challenges limit the number of interested surgeons and availability continues to be a limiting factor. Currently, extensive testing necessitates a delay of 10-14 days from harvest to availability for transplant. As the chondrocyte viability decreases with storage time, most tissue banks expire the tissue at 28 days. To extend the shelf life, various alternative medias have been tried and most recently, Bugbee et al2 showed improved chondrocyte viability of OCA stored at 37º Centigrade instead of the classic 4º Centigrade. At the time of transplant, the chondrocytes are vulnerable to impaction forces and may be easily die with standard levels of impaction. The trend is to use thin (6-8 mm) composites that are beveled and use only finger pressure to press-fit the plug in the socket. This thinner construct also speeds the time of incorporation through creeping substitution by requiring less allograft bone. Williams et al3 showed viability is also affected negatively during the post operative environment (hemarthrosis) and this may be an area for optimization. To expand availability, a variety of freezing techniques have been tried, but even those with cryo-preservation have not yielded consistent outcomes. That led to a search for other ways to preserve the tissue. One approach is to stabilize the matrix and allow all the cells to die. In one example of this technique, the matrix is stabilized by cross linking with methylene blue. Animal studies are promising and human trials are to begin shortly. It is typically stated that OCA are immune-privileged, yet a percentage of patients become antibody positive after OCA transplantation4. When Bugbee et al4 compared PROs, those that were antibody positive had less favorable outcomes than those that are antibody negative. This antibody response is primarily to the boney portion of the graft--probably the soft tissue remnants within the subchondral bone. Thus, the thin OCA constructs noted above that allow pulsatile irrigation to more thoroughly clean the bone, may decrease the extent of an immunogenic response. Carried to the extreme, removal of all bone would negate immunogenic response, yet pure cartilage shells do not integrate with host bone. However, if the cartilage is particulated, the chondrocytes escape, multiply and form new matrix. While this has been shown to occur in the animal model, the Cartilage Restoration Center of Indiana has submitted for publication the first prospective case series using this technique: DeNovo NT (IsTo St. Louis MO and Zimmer, Warsaw IN) Marrow Stimulation Marrow stimulation is the generic term for the techniques that allow marrow cells to enter from the subchondral bone. The goal for the “marrow derived cells” is to create hyalinelike cartilage when exposed to the appropriate post operative mechanical environment (continuous passive motion and protected weight bearing). This term may be a misnomer as there is typically little or no red marrow in subchondral knee bone. Rather, most of the pluripotential cells in the clot are probably similar in origin to any other clot that occurs throughout the body—blood derived and local tissue derived. Regardless, numerous studies show a wide range of fibrocartilage to hyaline-like cartilage with this technique. The preservation of the mechanical and biologic integrity of the subchondral bone plate is important for clinical success. As it is technically difficult to reproducibly “lightly burr” the subchondral plate without weakening it, drilling and microfracture, as popularized by Steadman5, are more commonly used than abrasion arthroplasty technique. One of the reported advantages of marrow stimulation over drilling was that microfracture would not cause the thermal necrosis thought possible with drilling. However, this concern is being challenged by Buschmann et al6 as they demonstrated in an animal model that drilling does not cause thermal injury 44 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Current and Future Trend in Articular Cartilage Restoration (continued) and that the drill holes allow more consistent channels for cell migration compared to microfracture. Regardless of whether the technique is drilling or microfracture, the ease of performing an all-arthroscopic inexpensive “marrow stimulation” procedure and the acceptable results in small to medium sized cartilage lesions has resulted in this being the most widely used cartilage restoration procedure in the United States. Expanding on marrow stimulation, the goals are to improve the hyaline-like characteristics and durability of the resultant tissue. One option is to increase the number of available adult stem cells using true hemopoetic marrow harvested from the iliac crest. The marrow or concentrated stem cells are then transferred to a microfracture-prepared bed. Another approach is to apply an acellular scaffold for cells to organize (autologous membrane induced chondrogenesis or AMIC). There are many scaffold variants ranging from a true physical membrane to a biphasic liquid hydrogel that congeals in situ. Finally, it may be possible to further influence the pluripotential cells with growth factors, such as reported with OP-1.7 Osteochondral Autografts Morgan (United States) and Bobic (United Kingdom)8 developed the technique of harvesting moderate sized osteochondral (OC) plugs (8-12 mm) and transferring them to focal cartilage defects. During the same time period, Hangody (Hungary)9 used smaller OC plugs (4-8mm) to create a mosaicplasty at the recipient site. Currently, efforts are directed at diminishing harvest site morbidity (pain and hemarthrosis) by back filling the harvest sites and using laboratory data to select the harvest site. Cole10 demonstrated there is less stress at the intersection of the trochlea and the medial femoral condyle than the site of classic harvest laterally. When harvest sites are unknown, there are subsets of patients who experience pain at these sites. Science will continue to guide optimization of the technique. For example, to avoid chondrocyte death minimal force is applied to the cartilage to seat the plug. The plug needs to be flush with the surrounding cartilage to avoid increased stress on the opposing articular surface. Expanding on this concept, synthetic plugs may have the capacity to reform bone and cartilage in the defects (see cell free scaffolds below). Cultured Chondrocyte Implantation The rapidly exploding field of cell therapy to treat article cartilage defects is based on the pioneering work of Dr. Lars Peterson. The basics of the technique are still used today and for the foreseeable future. As a two-stage technique, the first stage is a biopsy of healthy articular cartilage harvested arthroscopically from a low load area of the knee. The matrix is enzymatically degraded to release the chondrocytes. The chondrocytes expand in a monolayer culture (where they dedifferentiate into spindle cells) creating more than 10 million cells from only the few hundred thousand cells in the original biopsy. The cell suspension is then injected 45 beneath a periosteal patch or collagen substitute11, where they differentiate to chondrocytes and produce matrix. Two companies now assay the cells to assure this potential (Genzyme VIP and Tigenix ChondroSelect). Since the work of Peterson, there have been many modifications for the use of autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). The timing and action of the cells in culture may be modified with various factors. For example, fibroblast growth factor (FGF) is used by Prochon which requires fewer cells at harvest and less time to implantation while maintaining a higher chondrocytic phenotype. This is just the start of cell manipulation during culturing with the end goal of creating cells that reproducibly form hyaline cartilage. Using this same technique, it is possible to use allograft cells. With one product, DeNovo NT, infantile chondroctyes have a robust cell and matrix response. The chondrocytes are so robust that disks of neocartilage are formed without the need for a scaffold. The safety and feasibility has been shown clinically in a three center (the Cartilage Restoration Center of Indiana [CRCI] being one such center) Phase I-II study of DeNovo ET (IsTo, St. Louis MO and Zimmer, Warsaw, IN). The original technique used autologous periosteum to form a water tighter cover over the chondrocyte suspension. This often resulted in periosteal overgrowth, which required subsequent surgery (usually chondroplasty). To obviate this problem, a variety of scaffolds have been used in place of the periosteum with clinical outcomes similar to ACI. Initially, these largely collagen membranes (C-ACI) were used in the same manner as the periosteum and thus the term CollagenACI or C-ACI originated. This technique was then modified by Steinwach12 who seeded the cell suspension on the scaffold. After cell adherence the patch is implanted. Finally, many companies are providing a construct that result from seeding the cells onto a scaffold during the culturing process. This allows a physically robust chondrocyte/scaffold construct that allows arthroscopic implantation. Converting this two-stage procedure to a one-stage procedure is appealing to patients and insurance companies alike. As with the DeNovo NT mentioned above, it is possible to mince autologous cartilage at the time of surgery, implant it and have it grow “new cartilage” as reported at ICRS Poland in 2007 by CRCI13. A prospective properly powered randomized control phase 3 trial is now under way to evaluate clinical efficacy of this technique (Cartilage Autologous Implant System CAIS). Future modifications of each of these techniques will focus on arthroscopic applications, efficacy and cost effectiveness. Scaffold Use in Cartilage Restoration Scaffolds are currently not approved for cartilage restoration in the United States for clinical use outside of FDA approved trials. Outside the US, scaffold use in cartilage surgery is more prevalent than the original cell suspension ACI technique. Scaffolds are often categorized by their structure (monophasic, biphasic, multiphasic, etc.) and/or if they are used “with” or “without” cells. To be clear as to the Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Current and Future Trend in Articular Cartilage Restoration (continued) US clinically available scaffolds. For detailed information of the basic science and clinical applications please refer to the chapter by Gomoll and Farr.14 mechanism of action, the term should be “scaffolds without cells at implantation,” as these scaffolds function by providing structural guidance for endogenous pluripotential cells, which rapidly populate them. Tables 1-3 list the preclinical and non- Table 1 Scaffolds Without Cells At Time of Implantation (Host Cell Source) Scaffold Type Product Name Manufacturer Autologous Matrix Induced Chonrogenesis AMIC® Geistlich Biomaterials15 Matrix modulated marrow stimulation BST CarGel™ BioSyntech16 GelrinC™ Regentis Biomaterials17 PGA, Hyaluronan, Autologous Serum (combination) ChonDux™ Cartilix18 (subsidiary of Biomet) TRUFIT◊ CB Plug™ Smith & Nephew19 MaioRegen® Finceramica20 Chondromimetic™ Orthomimetics21 CR-Plug® RTI Biologics22 ASEED® Scaffold Interface Biotech23 Multiphase scaffold to fill osteochondral defect Table 2 Scaffolds With Seeded Cells (Single-Stage) Product Type Product Name Manufacturer Collagen patch seeded ACT-Cs: ACT (Autologous Chondrocyte Transplant) (combination) Cartilage Autograft Implant System CAISTM DePuy/Mitek, Inc.24 Cell replacement technology Cell Replacement Technology™ (CRT) Instruct ™ Products CellCoTecTM25 Table 3 Scaffolds With Cells Cultured On/Within Scaffold (Two-Stage) Product Name Manufacturer MACI ™ (Matrix Associated ACI) Genzyme26 CartiGro® ACT on Chondro-Gide Stryker27/Geistlich Surgery15 NeoCart™ Histogenics28 CaRes® ArthroKinetics29 Hyalograft C™ (Hyaff-11 HA Polymer) Fidia Farmaceutici S.p.A.30 Bioseed C® BioTissue Technologies GmbH31 Cartipatch® TBF Banque de tissues32 Novocart 3D® TETEC® Tissue Engineering Technologies AG33 The BioCart™ ProChon Biotech, LTD34 Cartilink®-3 for Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation (ACI) Interface Biotech23 46 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Current and Future Trend in Articular Cartilage Restoration (continued) References Selected Reading in Cartilage Restoration 1. Farr J, Yao J. Chondral defect repair with particulated juvenile cartilage allograft. Cartilage. Submitted 2010. 2. Farr J. Allograft particulate cartilage transplantation: DeNovo® Natural Tissue Graft in Cartilage SurgeryAn Operative Manual. Submitted 2010. 3. Maj. Slabaugh MA, Capt. Hess DJ, Bajaj S, Farr J, Cole BJ. Management of chondral injuries associated with patellar instability. Op Tech Sports Med. Submitted 2009. 4. Farr J, Cole B, Salata M, Collarile M, Bajaj S. Cartilage restoration in the patellofemoral joint in Anterior Knee Pain and Patellar Instability, 2nd ed. (Sanchis-Alfonso, ed.). London: Springer-Verlag; Submitted 2009 (ahead of print). 5. Farr J, Gomoll AH. Articular cartilage repair with bioscaffolds. In Insall & Scott, Surgery of the Knee. 5th ed. (Diduch, ed.). 2009 (ahead of print). 6. Gomoll AH, Farr J. Future developments in cartilage repair. In Biologic Joint Reconstruction: Alternatives to Joint Arthroplasty (Cole BJ and Gomoll AH, eds). Thorofare, NJ: SLACK Inc; 2009. 7. Gomoll AH, Probst C, Farr J, Cole BJ, Minas T. Use of a type I/III bilayer collagen membrane decreases reoperation rates for symptomatic hypertrophy after autologous chondrocyte implantation. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37:20S-23S. 8. Zaslav K, Cole BJ, Brewster R, DeBarardino T, Farr J, Fowler P and Nissen C. A prospective study of autologous chondrocyte implantation in patients with failed prior treatment for articular cartilage defect of the knee: results of the study of the treatment of articular repair (STAR) clinical trial. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37:42-55. 9. Farr J. Specific considerations for patellofemoral chondral disease. In Biologic Joint Reconstruction: Alternatives to Joint Arthroplasty (Cole BJ and Gomoll AH, eds). Thorofare, NJ: SLACK Inc; 2009. 10. Farr J. Autologous chondrocyte implantation and anteromedialization in the treatment of patellofemoral chondrosis. Orthop Clin N Am. 2008; 39:329-35. 11. Farr J. Autologous chondrocyte implantation improves patellofemoral cartilage treatment outcomes. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2007; 463: 187-94. 12. Gomoll AH, Minas T, Farr J, Cole BJ. Treatment of chondral defects in the patellofemoral joint. J Knee Surg. 2006;19:285-95. 13. Farr J. Patellofemoral articular cartilage treatment. AAOS Monograph Series 29: Common patellofemoral problems. 2005 ; 85-99. 14. Cole BJ, Farr J. Putting it all together. Op Tech Orthop. 2001; 11:151-4. 47 1. Görtz S, De Young AJ, Bugbee WD. Fresh osteochondral allografting for steroid-associated osteonecrosis of the femoral condyles. Clin Orthop Rel Res. In press. 2. Pallante AL, Bae WC, Chen AC, Görtz S, Bugbee WD, Sah RL. Chondrocyte viability is higher after prolonged storage at 37 degrees C than at 4 degrees C for osteochondral grafts. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37 Suppl 1:24S-32S. 3. Pylawka TK, Wimmer M, Cole BJ, Virdi AS, Williams JM. Impaction affects cell viability in osteochondral tissues during transplantation. J Knee Surg. 2007; 20:105-10. 4. Sirlin CB, Brossmann J, Boutin RD, Pathria MN, Convery FR, Bugbee W, Deutsch R, Lebeck LK, Resnick D. Shell osteochondral allografts of the knee: comparison of MR imaging findings and immunologic responses. Radiology. 2001; 219:35-43. 5. Steadman JR, Rodkey WG, Briggs KK. Microfracture to treat full-thickness chondral defects: surgical technique, rehabilitation, and outcomes. J Knee Surg. 2002; 15:170-6. 6. Chen H, Sun J, Hoemann CD, Lascau-Coman V, Ouyang W, McKee MD, Matthew S, Buschmann MD. Drilling and microfracture lead to different bone structure and necrosis during bone-marrow stimulation for cartilage repair. J Orthop Res. 2009; 27:1432-38. 7. Huang Z, Ryu W, Ren P, Fasching R, Goodman SB. Controlled release of growth factors on allograft bone in vitro. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2008; 466:1905-11. 8. Vladimir Bobic, Craig Morgan, Thomas Carter. Osteochondral autologous graft transfer. Op Tech Sports Med. 2000; 8:168-78. 9. Hangody L, Füles P. Autologous osteochondral mosaicplasty for the treatment of full-thickness defects of weight-bearing joints: ten years of experimental and clinical experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85-A Suppl 2:25-32. 10. Garretson R, Katolik L, Verma N, Beck P, Bach B, Cole B. Contact pressure at osteochondral donor sites in the patellofemoral joint. Am J Sports Med. 2004; 32:967-74. 11. Gomoll A, Probst C, Farr J, Cole B, Minas T. Use of a Type I/III Bilayer Collagen Membrane Decreases Reoperation Rates for Symptomatic Hypertrophy After Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37:205-35. 12. Steinwachs M. New technique for cell-seeded collagen-matrix-supported autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Arthroscopy. 2009; 25:208-11. 13. Farr J, Binnete F, Hwang J, Cook S, Smith T. The Cartilage Autograft Implantation System (CAIS) is being investigated in the US as a primary surgical treatment of articular cartilage lesion(s) located on the femur (medial and lateral condyles or trochlea). In: Proceedings of the International Cartilage Restoration Society; Oct. 1, 2007; Warsaw, Poland. 14. Farr J, Cole B. Articular Cartilage Repair with Bioscaffolds. In: Diduch D, eds. Insall & Scott Surgery of the Knee. Elsevier; 2010 (ahead of print). 15. Geistlich Group. Geistlich Surgery. Available at: http://www.geistlich.com/?dom=3&rub=1477. Accessed March 30, 2010. 16. BioSyntech. BST-CarGel for Cartilage Repair. Available at: http://www.biosyntech.com/en/ expertise/orthopedics/?BST=CarGel. Accessed March 30, 2010. 17. Regentis Biomaterials. GelrinC. Available at: http://gelrin.com/product.asp?ID=1. Accessed March 30, 2010. 18. Biomet. Biomet Orthopedics. Available at: http://www.biomet.com/orthopedics/. Accessed March 30, 2010. 19. Smith & Nephew. TruFit Plug. Available at: http://global.smith-nephew.com/us/product23822. htm. Accessed March 30, 2010. 20. Finceramica. Finceramica Biomedical Solutions. Available at: http://www.finceramica.it/view. jsp?s=10&p=1. Accessed March 30, 2010. 21. Orthomimetics. Chondromimetic. Available at: http://www.orthomimetics.com/chondromimetic. htm. Accessed March 30, 2010. 22. RTI Biologics. RTI Biologics. Available at: http://www.rtix.com/. Accessed March 30, 2010. 23. Interface Biotech. Interface Biotech. Available at: http://www.interfacebio.com/index.php?aci_ physicians. Accessed March 30, 2010. 24. Johnson & Johnson. DePuy Mitek Inc. Available at: http://www.depuymitek.com/. Accessed March 30, 2010. 25. CellCoTec. CellCoTec: A revolutionary approach to cartilage repair. Available at: http://www. cellcotec.com/. Accessed March 30, 2010. 26. Genzyme. Matrix-induced Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation (MACI). Available at: http:// www.genzyme.com.au/prod/maci/au_p_hcp_bio-maci.asp. Accessed March 30, 2010. 27. Stryker. Stryker. Available at: http://www.stryker.com/en-us/index.htm. Accessed March 30, 2010. 28. Histogenics. NeoCart autologous engineered neocartilage. Available at: http://www.histogenics. com/neocart.html. Accessed March 30, 2010. 29. ArthroKinetcs. ArthroKinetics. Available at: http://www.arthro-kinetics.com/. Accessed March 30, 2010. 30. Fidia Farmaceutici S.P.A. Fidia Farmaceutici S.P.A. Available at: http://www.fidiapharma.com/ files/index.cfm. Accessed March 30, 2010. 31. BioTissue Technologies. Bioseed C Introduction. Available at: http://www.biotissue-tec.com/enProductsPatientsBioSeedCIntroduction.html. Accessed March 30, 2010. 32. TBF Tissue Engineering. Cartipatch. Available at: http://www.tbf-lab.com/ortho/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76&Itemid=38&lang=fr. Accessed March 30, 2010. 33. TETEC. What is NOVOCART 3D? Available at: http://www.tetec-ag.de/en/physicians/products/ novocart_3d.htm. Accessed March 30, 2010. 34. ProChon Biotech L. The Product BioCart Overview. Available at: http://www.prochon.com/. Accessed March 30, 2010. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Minimum 10-Year Results after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: How the Loss of Normal Knee Motion Compounds Other Factors Related to the Development of Osteoarthritis after Surgery K. Donald Shelbourne, MD, Tinker Gray, MA This report is a summary of a paper that was previously published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine and received the 2010 Hughston Award for the most outstanding article in AJSM for 2009. Citation: Shelbourne KD, Gray T. Minimum 10-year Results after Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction: How the Loss of Normal Knee Motion Compounds other Factors Related to the Development of Osteoarthritis after Surgery. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37:471–480. Reprinted with permission. Introduction There are very few studies reporting the results of ACL reconstruction at 10 years or more after surgery. Some studies have shown that patients who have meniscus loss, articular cartilage damage, or both, have lower subjective scores and more radiographic evidence of arthritis when compared to patients who have very little joint damage at the time of ACL reconstruction. Few studies have examined how the loss of range of motion (ROM) affects the long-term results of ACL reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to examine how the loss of normal knee hyperextension, flexion, or both, affected the results of ACL reconstruction at longer than 10-year follow-up. Methods The study group included patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with an ipsilateral patellar tendon graft between 1982 and 1994. Patients were evaluated objectively according to the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) criteria including evaluation of ROM, isokinetic strength scores, KT-1000 stability testing, and radiographs. Using the IKDC criteria for grading ROM, knee extension was considered normal if it was within 2˚ of the normal knee, and knee flexion was considered normal if it was within 5˚ of the normal knee. Patients were evaluated subjectively using a modified Noyes knee questionnaire. Regression analysis was performed to determine what factors affected subjective scores. Regression analysis showed that loss of normal knee extension was the most significant factor relating to lower subjective scores (p<.001); loss of normal knee flexion was also significant (p=.0034). The overall IKDC objective grade was normal in 48%, nearly normal in 42%, abnormal in 9%, and severely abnormal in 0.5%. Most patients (73%) had normal knee ROM at long-term follow-up, while 10% of patients demonstrated loss of normal extension alone, 11% demonstrated loss of normal flexion alone, and 6% demonstrated loss of both knee extension and flexion. Of the 502 patients in the study, 367 (73%) had normal knee extension and flexion, and 135 (27%) had less than normal extension or flexion. In the group of patients who had normal knee extension and flexion, 29% had less than normal radiographic ratings. By comparison, in the group of patients who had less than normal ROM, 71% had less than normal radiographic ratings. (p<.001) Current literature theorizes that the development of osteoarthritis leads to a loss of ROM. However, the percentage of patients who were lacking ROM at ≥ 10 years after surgery was not statistically significantly different than what was observed at the 2 and 5 years post-operative times. Therefore, the results from this study indicate that a loss of ROM may contribute to the development of osteoarthritis. When looking at the group of patients who had intact menisci, normal articular cartilage, and normal knee extension and flexion, 98% of them had normal radiographs. Patients who had normal knee extension and flexion had significantly higher modified Noyes scores than patients who lacked knee ROM. (p<.001) (Figure 1) Results and Discussion Objective follow-up was obtained on 502 patients at a mean of 14.1 ± 3.4 years (range 10.0-24.3 years) postoperatively, and subjective follow-up was obtained on 1113 patients at a mean of 15.9 ± 3.6 years (range 10.0-24.0 years) postoperatively. Subjective scores were not statistically significantly different between patients who returned for objective follow-up and those who returned a survey only. (p=.4747) Figure 1. Patients who had normal knee hyperextension and flexion had significantly higher modified Noyes knee questionnaire scores than patients who lacked normal knee ROM. 48 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Minimum 10-Year Results after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: How the Loss of Normal Knee Motion Compounds Other Factors Related to the Development of Osteoarthritis after Surgery (continued) Patients who had meniscectomy or articular cartilage damage had significantly lower subjective survey scores if they also had less than normal ROM. Patients with intact menisci and loss of ROM had statistically significantly lower subjective scores than patients with intact menisci and normal ROM. However, patients who had meniscectomy but were able to maintain normal ROM fared just as well. (Figure 2) When patients have normal ROM, their subjective scores remain high even if articular cartilage damage is present at the time of surgery. However, subjective scores are significantly lower when ROM is less than normal. (Figure 3) Conclusions • At an average of 14.1 years after ACL reconstruction, 90% of patients had an overall IKDC grade of normal or nearly normal. • Even 3° to 5° of knee extension loss compared with the opposite knee can cause adverse symptoms, especially when other damage is present in the knee Figure 2. Modified Noyes knee questionnaire scores based on ROM and meniscus status. Patients who had less than normal ROM had statistically significantly lower modified Noyes scores. • Patients who had normal knee extension and flexion had significantly better survey scores than patients who had ROM loss Patients who had a loss of normal ROM had worse results and more radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis. Almost all patients (98%) who had intact menisci, normal articular cartilage, and normal knee extension and flexion had normal radiographs at follow-up. Although the surgeon and patient cannot control the damage sustained to the knee joint after ACL injury, results following ACL reconstruction can be maximized by ensuring that full ROM is achieved and maintained. By having patients achieve full, symmetric ROM compared to the opposite knee before and after ACL reconstruction, we may be able to prevent the development of osteoarthritis, especially in patients with meniscus or cartilage damage. 49 Figure 3. Modified Noyes knee questionnaire scores based on ROM and articular cartilage status at the time of surgery. Patients with normal ROM have high subjective scores even if articular cartilage damage is present; however, subjective scores are significantly lower when ROM is less than normal. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 The Use of Implantable Bone Stimulators in Nonunion Treatment Michael S. Hughes, MD, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri-Columbia Jeffrey O. Anglen, MD, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Indiana University Copyright © SLACK Incorporated. This article originally published at: www.orthosupersite.com/view.aspx?rid=61003. Reprinted with permission. Abstract Background: Delayed or failure of bone healing in fracture, osteotomy, and arthrodesis patients continues to be a clinical dilemma. Electromagnetic stimulation is one modality demonstrated in many studies to aid bone healing, however relatively few studies depict the use and complications associated with direct current implantable bone stimulators (IBS). Methods: Over a 9 year period, we studied a consecutive series of 120 adult patients who underwent implantation of a direct current bone stimulator. The goals of this study were to determine the time until healing, the presence of infection, and the need for additional nonunion surgery or salvage procedure following internal bone stimulator placement for nonunion treatment. Results: Of the factors affecting the time until healing, tobacco smoking was a significant factor associated with increased time until healing. Tobacco smoking and duration of nonunion prior to implantable bone stimulator placement were both significant factors in the need for revision nonunion surgery or salvage procedure after IBS placement. Deep soft tissue infection or osteomyelitis was a significant factor predicting prolonged time to healing, subsequent infection following IBS placement, and the need for revision or salvage surgery. Conclusion: There are several studies detailing the beneficial effects of electromagnetic stimulation in the peer reviewed literature. With the relative lack of complications directly attributable to electromagnetic implantable bone stimulators, their use may be an effective adjuvant to stable internal fixation and autogenous bone grafting in healing nonunions. However, the use of IBS in nonunion patients with prior deep soft tissue infection or osteomyelitis exhibited an increased rate of post-operative infection in this series. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I Introduction In 2004, an estimated 15 million fractures occurred in the United States.1 A report from five years earlier estimated that 5-10% of fractures resulted in delay or failure of fracture union.2 Because recent data indicates that a fracture requiring hospitalization costs an average of $27,000 and results in an average of 27 days out of work, it is obvious that recalcitrant fracture healing may have significant impact on patients and health care resources.1 The importance of this clinical dilemma continues to prompt basic science and clinical research to improve methods of fracture repair. This includes research into devices that generate physical forces in the form of electric or ultrasonic fields to stimulate fracture healing. The utilization of electricity as a treatment for fracture nonunions is thought first to have been described in 1814 by Boyer, but little scientific evidence beyond case reports were initially published.3,4 The discovery of piezoelectric potentials by Fakuda and Yasuda in 1957 and further study of the relationship between electrical fields and mechanical stress in bone by Bassett prompted a resurgence of interest in bone-healing stimulation therapies.5-7 Several clinical and laboratory studies followed, demonstrating a positive effect of electrical stimulation on bone healing. There are several methods of delivering electrical stimulation including direct current, inductive coupling, and capacitive coupling.8-11 One common pathway through which these methods of electrical stimulation delivery appear to exert their effects involves increasing cytosolic calcium ions and increasing activated cytoskeletal calmodulin.12 Despite hundreds of articles in the literature describing the effects of electromagnetic stimulation on bone healing, there are few blinded, randomized controlled clinical trials detailing its use in delayed bone healing.4,11,13,14 A meta-analysis of these trials was unable to determine the impact of electrical stimulation based on pooled analysis of available data, and its appropriate role in orthopaedic surgery continues to be debated 15 This study retrospectively examines a single surgeon’s cohort of patients who underwent surgical implantation of direct current electric bone stimulators for nonunion of fractures, arthrodesis or osteotomies in an effort to delineate the duration of time until healing of the nonunion occurred. The presence of infection or other implant related complications following implantable bone stimulator placement and the need for additional nonunion surgery or salvage procedure to address recalcitrant nonunion were also investigated. Materials and Methods A retrospective study of consecutive patients treated by a single surgeon (JOA) with an implantable bone stimulator (IBS) as an adjunct for achieving osseous union was performed. A total of 121 internal bone stimulators were placed in 120 patients, as one patient had 2 separate stimulators for two different locations of nonunion, by the senior author between the dates of 1995 to 2004 at a tertiary hospital with an established nonunion referral practice. Indications for internal bone stimulator placement included fracture nonunion (105), arthrodesis nonunion (4), osteotomy nonunion (3), malunion osteotomy (5), and primary fixation of open fractures with large segmental bony defects (4). Nine subjects within the primary fracture and malunion osteotomy groups were excluded from the statistical analysis to reduce the heterogeneity of indications of internal bone stimulator placement. Two fracture nonunion patients had a second internal stimulator placed due to serial need for nonunion fixation secondary to early hardware failure but for statistical purposes the total duration of IBS placement was recorded. One patient in the fracture nonunion group had two separate stimulators placed for two different locations of fracture nonunion and this patient was included twice in the statistical analysis. One elderly patient in the fracture nonunion group died in the post-operative period from a pulmonary embolus and was excluded from the analysis. Thus, statistical analysis included a total of 111 patients undergoing IBS placement for nonunion treatment. 50 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 The Use of Implantable Bone Stimulators in Nonunion Treatment (continued) The diagnostic criterion for a bony nonunion is variable throughout the literature, and for the purposes of this study the definition was derived in part from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s definition.16 In this study a nonunion was diagnosed when there was a lack of progression in radiographic and clinical healing after a three month period, necessitating clinical intervention. Fracture, arthrodesis, and osteotomy nonunions were categorized as atrophic, hypertrophic, or oligotrophic.17 A healed nonunion was determined by the presence of at least three cortices with bridging callus and absence of significant pain or instability with weightbearing activities. Patient demographics collected included age, medical comorbidities (diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, peripheral vascular disease, hypothyroidism) and patient use of drugs that have demonstrated effects on bone healing (nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, tobacco and alcohol).18 The anatomic site of internal bone stimulator placement was categorized using the AO/OTA fracture classification.19 The Gustilo classification was used to classify open fractures and the number of irrigation and debridements performed for initial treatment were recorded.20,21 The occurrence of superficial cellulitis, osteomyelitis, pin site and deep soft tissue infections at any time in the history was recorded. For the purposes of this paper an “intervention” is considered any procedure performed or treatment provided in the attempt to achieve osseous union. “Operative interventions” include external fixation, intramedullary nail dynamization, internal fixation, autogenous bone grafting, allograft or synthetic bone use, recombinant growth factors, or osteotomies. “Nonoperative interventions” include bracing, casting, external ultrasound, or external electric bone stimulators. Additionally, the number of trips to the operative suite needed to facilitate fracture healing were documented and referred to as “operative periods.” The number of fracture interventions and operative periods performed were recorded and divided into one of three chronological groups for further analysis. These included those interventions and surgical trips during initial fracture fixation, nonunion treatment prior to implantable bone stimulator, and nonunion treatment simultaneous with the placement of the IBS. A salvage procedure was defined as an amputation, arthrodesis, or joint arthroplasty indicated for failed bone union or progressive infection. The Osteogen® implantable direct current bone growth stimulator (Biomet Trauma, Parsippany, NJ) was used in each case. The Osteogen has the anode directly on the battery and a single or double titanium cathode wire, which is implanted at the nonunion site. Patients were counseled preoperatively that the battery would be removed approximately one year after implantation. The cathode wire was coiled into the nonunion gap and buried into host bone and/ or bone graft, usually with the ends anchored into 2.0 mm drill holes in living bone. Care was taken to avoid cathode contact with metal implants. The battery was placed in an extrafascial, subcutaneous pocket in each of the 121 cases. The removal of the bone stimulator battery and its duration of implantation were recorded. Complications that could be directly attributable or even remotely linked to the implantable bone stimulator placement including infection, implant failure, point tenderness at the battery site, and neurologic deficit were recorded. 51 Statistical analysis was performed on the remaining 111 bone nonunion subjects with SAS v9 software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). To evaluate the time until healing of the nonunion, the variable lengths of follow-up between the patients that healed their nonunion and those that had a persistent nonunion were addressed, as those subjects with longer follow-up are more likely to have healing take place or a complication to occur. Thus, survival analysis methods using the LIFETEST procedure and the PHREG procedure for Cox Proportional Hazards model analysis were utilized. Evaluation of post-implantable bone stimulator infection and need for post-implantable bone stimulator nonunion surgery or salvage procedure included use of a Poisson distribution and a generalized linear model (GENMOD in SAS). Significance was set at an alpha level of 0.05. One subject was excluded from the analysis secondary to death from a medical complication in the immediate postoperative period. This investigation was approved by our local Institutional Review Board. Source of Funding None of the authors received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. A commercial entity (EBI/Biomet) paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, benefits less than $10,000 to a research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated. Results In the 111 patients analyzed who underwent IBS for nonunion following fracture, osteotomy, or arthrodesis, the average age was 47 years. Forty-four percent of patients smoked cigarettes, with an average of 1.08 packs per day (Table 1). The duration of follow-up after initial fracture or index procedure was 45.1 months (range, 7-182). The mean duration of time that the patient had an ununited bone prior to IBS implantation was 17.9 months (range, 3-137). The mean follow-up time after IBS placement in the 105 patients that returned for a three- month postoperative visit was 28.7 months (range, 3-141). TABLE 1. Demographic Data for fracture, osteotomy, or arthrodesis nonunion subjects Parameter Age Mean (range or percentage) 47.4 mths (18-69) Tobacco smoking 49 (44%) Chronic Medical Illness 33 (30%) Prescription medications that affect bone healing 22 (19%) Follow-up duration after index procedure or fracture 45.1 mths (7-182) Duration of unhealed fracture, osteotomy or arthrodesis 17.9 mths (3-137) Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 The Use of Implantable Bone Stimulators in Nonunion Treatment (continued) TABLE 2. Nonunion Characteristics for fracture, osteotomy, or arthrodesis nonunions Parameter N = (mean or percentage) Open fracture (n = 104 fracture nonunions) 36 (35%) Atrophic nonunion Initial interventions prior to IBS - Operative fixation Nonunion interventions prior to IBS - Hardware exchange with repeat fixation - Bone autografting of nonunion Initial and nonunion operative periods prior to IBS History of any infection prior to IBS History of deep infection (deep soft tissue or osteomyelitis) Iliac crest bone grafting intervention prior to IBS Interventions simultaneous to IBS Iliac crest bone grafting intervention simultaneous to IBS 78 (69%) 159 (1.43) 108 (68%) 152 (1.36) 94 (62%) 35 (23%) 185 (1.66) 22 (20%) 13 (12%) 34 (31%) 253 (2.3) 103 (93%) A total of 94 patients (85%) healed their nonunion after IBS placement at a mean time of 7.1 months (range, 3-35). Additional nonunion characteristics are outlined in Table 2 and radiographs are presented in Figure 1. The locations of the nonunions and open fractures according to the AO/OTA fracture classification are reported in Table 3. Complications directly associated with IBS placement included three asymptomatic cathode wire breakages (2.7%) and one patient with tenderness at the site of the battery (0.9%). PostIBS placement complications in which bone stimulator culpability could not be clearly excluded consisted of three transient nerve palsies (2.7%) and 11 infections (9.9%). The infections involved the fracture or nonunion site and not the subcutaneous site of the IBS battery. To our knowledge only 65 patients (59%) had their battery removed at an average of 10.9 months after placement. Results of the survival analysis for nonunion time to healing in the subjects with nonunions revealed that tobacco smoking was a significant covariate for continued nonunion or need for a salvage procedure to address the nonunion. (p=0.013) (Figure 2) The history of a deep infection, consisting of either a deep soft tissue infection requiring surgical treatment or osteomyelitis, was a significant factor contributing to recalcitrant nonunion. (p= 0.0336) Additionally, the femur and hip location of nonunion compared to 1A upper extremity and leg/ankle regions locations was a statistically significant covariate for continued nonunion following bone stimulator placement. (p=0.0367) Patient age, medical comorbidity, use of autogenous bone graft, and history of active infection during the nonunion treatment were not statistically significant factors contributing to healing time. The presence of an infection following implantation of the bone stimulator was statistically similar when compared to age, tobacco smoking, medical illness, and area of implantation. However, just as seen with analysis of nonunion time to healing, the history of deep soft tissue infection or osteomyelitis was a statistically significant factor contributing to an infection following IBS placement. (p=0.0275, 95% C.I.= 0.165-2.8) Analysis of the need for revision nonunion surgery or a salvage procedure following the bone stimulator placement revealed that the duration of the nonunion prior to IBS placement was a significant factor. (p=0.0041, 95% C.I.= 0.0067- 0.0356) The longer the nonunion had been present prior to IBS implantation, the higher the likelihood of needing a revision or salvage procedure. The presence of tobacco smoking not only affected the outcome of time to healing but also had a significant impact on the need for revision or salvage procedure. (p=0.0293, C.I.= 0.134- 2.53) Similarly, the history of a 1B 1C 1D 1E Figure 1. Case #90 with distal femur nonunion (A) and postoperative radiographs following hardware removal, blade plating, iliac crest bone grafting and IBS placement (B,C). Radiographs at time of 7-month follow-up with fracture consolidation and patient with clinical signs of healing (D,E) 52 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 The Use of Implantable Bone Stimulators in Nonunion Treatment (continued) AO/OTA location Number of nonunions Number of open fractures 8 11 12 13 21 22 31 32 33 41 42 43 44 62 Total 1 1 12 5 1 2 17 14 4 11 21 18 2 2 111 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 3 0 4 15 10 0 0 36 deep infection or osteomyelitis was a significant factor leading to nonunion revision or salvage procedure. (p=0.0037, C.I.=0.57- 2.98) However, the age of the patient, history of an active infection during the nonunion treatment, or the presence of an atrophic nonunion were not statistically significant covariates in the risk of requiring revision or salvage procedures. Based on the survival analysis data, with outcome being any complication (direct or indirect), it is estimated that 17% of the patients will have a complication within the first 12 months after IBS placement (95% C.I.= 9-30%). There was a significantly higher proportion of patients undergoing iliac crest bone grafting at the time of IBS placement (93%) than during previous nonunion surgeries (31%). (p<0.0001 using McNemar’s test) Discussion Fracture nonunion is a dilemma that consumes considerable resources and can cause significant patient disability. Electromagnetic and ultrasound bone stimulators have been have been studied as adjuncts for fracture healing. Numerous basic science studies have detailed the effects that electromagnetic stimulation has on biological pathways. At a cellular level, electromagnetic stimulation has been shown to increase production of bone morphogenetic protein 2, alkaline phosphatase, cytosolic calcium, and activated cytoskeletal calmodulin. 12,22,23 Capacitative coupled electromagnetic stimulation has also been shown to increase osteoprogenitor cell proliferation, osteoblast proliferation and differentiation, increased arteriolar vasodilation and neoangiogenesis, and modulate bone resorption.24-27 Additionally, there are several clinical studies describing the use of an implantable bone stimulator as an adjunct to achieve primary spinal and foot fusions as well as congenital pseudarthrosis unions.28-31 To the best of our knowledge there is only one cohort of patients identified in the literature that describes the use of an 53 implantable bone stimulator for recalcitrant nonunions. Paterson et al. published a prospective multicenter trial almost three decades ago using a implantable direct current stimulators in 84 nonunions and a subsequent report on the same group which had a 10 year average follow-up of those patients.32 They found that the use of a bone stimulator led to an 84% rate of union and that there were zero complications associated with the implanted stimulator. Of considerable note is that nearly 50% of their patient had undergone no previous surgeries, and 81% had only one prior surgical procedure performed to achieve union prior to IBS placement. Our patients had considerably more previous interventions and trips to the operating room than those of Patterson et al. prior to the implantation of the bone stimulator (mean of 1.66 operative period and 2.82 operative and nonoperative interventions). Unfortunately their study did not utilize a concomitant comparison group, which is a weakness of our study as well. The survival analysis including an adjustment for duration of follow-up revealed that tobacco smoking had a significant effect on time to healing as well as need for revision surgery or a salvage procedure. Tobacco smoking has had a long association with wound and fracture healing problems so this data further reiterates smoking as a risk factor and the possible benefits in smoking cessation.33,34 An important finding of this study is that a deep soft tissue infection or osteomyelitis was a significant factor predicting prolonged time to healing, subsequent infection following IBS placement, and the need for revision or salvage surgery. Both actively draining and indolent infections of long bones have been associated with the presence of nonunion and the appropriate diagnosis and management is a challenging clinical problem.35-37 One of the components in determining the utility of the IBS as a modality is the potential complications that could result with the intervention. Survival analysis demonstrated a 17% rate of complications at the 12-month interval. Our cohort revealed three cathode wire breakages that, although asymptomatic, did create a potential for harm, or at least ineffective treatment. Though symptoms of tenderness at the site of the generator can be directly attributable to the implantation of the stimulator, the three postoperative nerve palsies and eleven cases of post-operative infection cannot be directly attributed to the implant. It is plausible that the increased rate of post IBS infection in patients with a history of deep 1.00 Survival Distribution Function TABLE 3. Distribution of Nonunion location and open fracture location 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Time No tabacco use Tobacco use Figure 2. Time from IBS placement to nonunion healing versus tobacco smoking Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 The Use of Implantable Bone Stimulators in Nonunion Treatment (continued) infection was due in part to the additional cathode wires and anode battery pack serving as a foreign body to facilitate the infection. However, due to this study’s design infection cannot be directly attributed to the presence of the internal bone stimulator. We believe it is unlikely that the stimulator placement itself had a significant effect on the incidence of infection or on the nerve palsies, as they were placed in conjunction with more significant and risky operative manipulations: removal of broken or failed hardware, correction of deformity, bone grafting and repeat fixation. This study serves well at presenting the potential complications that implantation of direct current bone stimulators. The use of a single surgeon in this investigation as opposed to 30 surgeons in the study by Paterson et al. may well serve as a constant factor when treating the often heterogenous problem of nonunions. A significant limitation with a retrospective cohort study is the inability to draw conclusion regarding treatment effectiveness, due to lack of a comparable control group. This study in no way can determine whether implantable bone stimulators are a factor that contribute to nonunion healing directly, however it does identify the direct and possible indirect complications that additional implanted hardware may cause. As in many studies of fracture and nonunion patients, the group was highly heterogenous with regard to both patient and injury factors. Because most of these patients were referral patients to a tertiary center, the variable lengths of followup may underestimate the complications that occur and would be discovered with longer duration of follow-up. Future investigations are needed with control groups to determine efficacy of the internal bone stimulators to heal nonunion. However, with the largely supportive foundation of evidence that currently exists regarding the electromagnetic stimulation in the literature and the relative lack of direct complications, implantable bone stimulators may be an effective adjuvant to stable internal fixation and autogenous bone grafting in healing fracture, osteotomy, and arthrodesis nonunions. References 1. Burden of Musculoskeletal Diseases in the United States: Prevalence, Societal and Economic Cost. 1st ed. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2008. 2. Praemer A, Furner S, Rice D. Musculoskeletal Conditions in the United States. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 1999, p. 182. 3. Peltier, LF. A brief historical note on the use of electricity in the treatment of fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1981; 161:4-7. 4. Scott G, King JB. A prospective, double-blind trial of electrical capacitive coupling in the treatment of non-union of long bones. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1994; 76(6):820-6. 5. Fukada E, Yasuda I. On the piezoelectric effect of bone. J Phys Soc Japan. 1957; 12: 1158-1162. 6. Bassett CA, Becker RO. Generation of electric potentials by bone in response to mechanical stress. Science. 1962; 137:1063-4. 7. Bassett CA, Pawluk RJ, Becker RO. Effects of Electric Currents on Bone in Vivo. Nature. 1964; 204:652-4. 8. Brighton CT, Black J, Friedenberg ZB, et al. A multicenter study of the treatment of non-union with constant direct current. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981; 63(1):2-13. 9. Baranowski TJ Jr, Black J, Brighton CT, et al. Electrical osteogenesis by low direct current. J Orthop Res, 1983; 1(2):120-8. 10. Rubinacci A, Black J, Brighton CT, et al. Changes in bioelectric potentials on bone associated with direct current stimulation of osteogenesis. J Orthop Res. 1988; 6(3):.335-45. 11. Sharrard, WJ. A double-blind trial of pulsed electromagnetic fields for delayed union of tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990; 72(3):347-55. 12. Brighton CT, Wang W, Seldes R, et al. Signal transduction in electrically stimulated bone cells. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001. 83(10):1514-23. 13. Barker AT, Dixon RA, Sharrard WJ, et al. Pulsed magnetic field therapy for tibial non-union. Interim results of a double-blind trial. Lancet. 1984; 1(8384):994-6. 14. Simonis RB, Parnell EJ, Ray PS, et al. Electrical treatment of tibial non-union: a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial. Injury. 2003; 34(5):357-62. 15. Mollon B, da Silva V, Busse JW, et al. Electrical stimulation for long-bone fracture-healing: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2008; 90(11):2322-30. 16. Health, U.S.F.a.D.A.C.f.D.a.R. Guidance document for industry and CDRH staff for the preparation of investigational device exemptions and premarket approval applications for bone growth stimulator devices. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1998. 17. Weber B, Czech O. Pseudarthrosen. Wien, Germany: Bern Stuttgart, 1973. 18. Gaston MS, Simpson AH. Inhibition of fracture healing. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2007; 89(12):1553-60. 19. Fracture and dislocation compendium. Orthopaedic Trauma Association Committee for Coding and Classification. J Orthop Trauma/ 1996; 10 Suppl 1:v-ix, 1-154. 20. Gustilo RB. Anderson JT. Prevention of infection in the treatment of one thousand and twentyfive open fractures of long bones: retrospective and prospective analyses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976; 58(4):453-8. 21. Gustilo RB, Mendoza, RM, Williams DN. Problems in the management of type III (severe) open fractures: a new classification of type III open fractures. J Trauma, 1984; 24(8):742-6. 22. Aaron RK, Boyan BD, Ciombor DM, et al. Stimulation of growth factor synthesis by electric and electromagnetic fields. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 419:30-7. 23. Wang Q, Zhong S, Ouyang J, et al. Osteogenesis of electrically stimulated bone cells mediated in part by calcium ions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998; 348:259-68. 24. Chang K, Chang WH, Huang S, et al. Pulsed electromagnetic fields stimulation affects osteoclast formation by modulation of osteoprotegerin, RANK ligand and macrophage colonystimulating factor. J Orthop Res, 2005; 23(6):1308-14. 25. Tsai MT, Chang WH, Chang K, et al. Pulsed electromagnetic fields affect osteoblast proliferation and differentiation in bone tissue engineering. Bioelectromagnetics, 2007; 28(7):519-28. 26. Smith TL, Wong-Gibbons, D, Maultsby J. Microcirculatory effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields. J Orthop Res, 2004; 22(1):80-4. 27. Yen-Patton GP, Patton WF, Beer DM, et al. Endothelial cell response to pulsed electromagnetic fields: stimulation of growth rate and angiogenesis in vitro. J Cell Physiol, 1988; 134(1):37-46. 28. Paterson DC, Simonis RB. Electrical stimulation in the treatment of congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1985; 67(3):454-62. 29. Kane WJ. Direct current electrical bone growth stimulation for spinal fusion. Spine, 1988; 13(3):363-5. 30. Saxena A, DiDomenico LA, Widfelt A, et al. Implantable electrical bone stimulation for arthrodeses of the foot and ankle in high-risk patients: a multicenter study. J Foot Ankle Surg, 2005; 44(6):450-4. 31. Donley BG, Ward DM. Implantable electrical stimulation in high-risk hindfoot fusions. Foot Ankle Int. 2002; 23(1):13-8. 32. Paterson DC, Lewis GN, Cass CA. Treatment of delayed union and nonunion with an implanted direct current stimulator. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980; 148:117-28. 33. Castillo RC, Bosse MJ, MacKenzie EJ, et al. Impact of smoking on fracture healing and risk of complications in limb-threatening open tibia fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2005; 19(3):151-7. 34. Porter SE, Hanley EN Jr. The musculoskeletal effects of smoking. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2001; 9(1):9-17. 35. Jain AK, Sinha S. Infected nonunion of the long bones. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005; 431:57-65. 36. Motsitsi NS. Management of infected nonunion of long bones: the last decade (1996-2006). Injury. 2008; 39(2):155-60. 37. Struijs PA, Poolman RW,Bhandari M. Infected nonunion of the long bones. J Orthop Trauma. 2007; 21(7):507-11. 54 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Pediatric Diaphyseal Femur Fractures: A Comparison of Flexible Versus Rigid Intramedullary Nailing Daniel J. Cuttica, DO, Doctors Hospital, Columbus, OH; Allan C. Beebe, MD, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH; John R. Kean, MD, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH; Jan E. Klamar, MD, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH and Kevin E. Klingele, MD, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH Introduction Corresponding Author: Fractures of the femoral shaft are common injuries in the pediatric population, with a reported incidence of 19 per 100,000.1 The etiology of these fractures varies. Causes include: child abuse, motor vehicle collisions, motor vehicle-pedestrian accidents, falls, and other high-energy injuries. Kevin E. Klingele, MD Department of Orthopedics Nationwide Children’s Hospital 700 Children’s Drive, Suite A-2630 Columbus, OH 43205-2696 T: 614-722-3393 F: 614-722-3373 Email: [email protected] No financial support or funding was received for this work. Background: Fractures of the femoral shaft are common injuries in the pediatric population. Multiple treatment options for these fractures exist. In the older child or adolescent who is not skeletally mature, two common treatment methods include flexible intramedullary nailing and rigid intramedullary nailing. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of pediatric diaphyseal femur fractures managed via intramedullary nailing in skeletally immature patients aged eight years or older. Multiple treatment options for these fractures exist, such as closed reduction with immediate or delayed spica casting, external fixation, open or submuscular plate fixation, and intramedullary nailing. Patient age, fracture location and pattern, and experience and surgeon preference are all factors to consider when choosing a particular treatment. Methods: A comparative, retrospective chart and radiographic review of skeletally immature patients aged eight and older who were treated by flexible or rigid intramedullary nails were performed. A minimum of 12-week follow-up was required. Outcomes evaluated included time to union, incidence of malunion, time to full weightbearing, residual limp, limb length discrepancy, presence of heterotopic ossification, avascular necrosis, infection, and painful hardware or nail tip irritation. In the older child or adolescent who is not yet skeletally mature, two common treatment methods include flexible intramedullary nailing and rigid intramedullary nailing. Each method has its advantages and disadvantages. Reported advantages of flexible intramedullary nailing include rapid fracture stabilization and patient mobilization, metaphyseal entry with avoidance of the physis, small incisions, and short hospital stays.2-8 Disadvantages include soft tissue irritation by the nail tip and loss of reduction in unstable fractures or in large children.2,4,8-12 Rigid intramedullary nailing also allows for rapid patient mobilization, but has the advantage of increased stability. This aids in the prevention of angular and rotational malalignment and shortening at the fracture site.2,8,13-16 In the past, a piriformis entry point was commonly used for rigid, antegrade intramedullary nailing of pediatric femur fractures. This technique has been shown to have an incidence of avascular necrosis (AVN) of the femoral head.13,17-19 A trochanteric starting point has lessened the risk of AVN, but several case reports of AVN do still exist.20,21 Results: There were a total of 77 fractures in 75 patients included in the study. There were 43 fractures treated with flexible nails (Group F) and 34 fractures treated with rigid nails (Group R). There was no difference between the two groups in time to union, residual limp, or limb length discrepancy. Group R had a significantly shorter time to full weight-bearing and a significantly greater incidence of heterotopic ossification. Group F had a significantly greater incidence of malunion (p = 0.022) and hardware irritation (p = 0.008). No cases of avascular necrosis were identified. The purpose of this retrospective review is to compare the outcomes of pediatric diaphyseal femur fractures treated by flexible intramedullary nailing to those treated via rigid, antegrade intramedullary nailing using a trochanteric entry point in skeletally immature patients aged eight years and older. Outcomes include: time to union (including incidence of delayed union and nonunion), incidence of malunion, time to full weight-bearing, incidence of residual limp and deformity, limb shortening, incidence of heterotopic ossification, and incidence of painful hardware or nail tip irritation. Conclusion: Rigid intramedullary nailing of pediatric femur fractures through a trochanteric starting point has a lower incidence of malunion, shorter time to full weight-bearing, and decreased incidence of hardware-related complications compared to flexible intramedullary nailing of pediatric femoral shaft fractures in children aged eight years and older. There is a higher incidence of heterotopic ossification at the proximal end of the femur with this method, however its effects clinically are negligible. Future prospective studies are necessary to further compare these methods. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective, comparative study 55 Materials and Methods Approval from the Institutional Review Board at our hospital was obtained prior to initiating this study. We retrospectively reviewed consecutive femoral shaft fractures treated by intramedullary nailing at our institution from January 1, 2001 to August 1, 2006. 101 patients were initially identified. Inclusion criteria included: patients treated with either a flexible titanium nails or stainless steel Enders nails or with a rigid antegrade trochanteric entry rod; skeletal immaturity with a minimum age of eight years; and a minimum follow-up of 12 weeks. Exclusion criteria included: nails using a piriformis starting point, age less than eight years, skeletal maturity (closed femoral physes), Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Pediatric Diaphyseal Femur Fractures: A Comparison of Flexible Versus Rigid Intramedullary Nailing (continued) and follow-up less than 12 weeks. After applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 77 fractures in 75 patients were identified. There were 43 fractures treated by flexible intramedullary nailing (Group F) and 34 fractures were treated by antegrade, rigid intramedullary nailing with a trochanteric starting point (Group R). All patients had preoperative anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of the femur identifying the fracture. Fractures were classified as transverse, short oblique, long oblique, or comminuted. All patients were followed at regular intervals with clinical and radiographic evaluations, and charts and radiographs were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical outcome measures included time to full weight-bearing, incidence of residual limp, incidence of clinically detectable limb length discrepancy, incidence of painful hardware or nail tip irritation, and incidence of postoperative infection. Radiographic evaluation included assessment of time to union, incidence of delayed union and nonunion, incidence of malunion, incidence of heterotopic ossification, and incidence of avascular necrosis of the femoral head. Union was defined as bridging callus across three cortices. Delayed union was defined as lack of complete healing at 12 weeks. Nonunion was defined as absence of complete healing at six months. Malunion was defined as angulation in the coronal plane greater than 5 degrees and in the sagittal plane greater than 10 degrees at the time of union.22 Treatment group comparisons for categorical outcomes were statistically evaluated using Fisher’s exact test. For the time to event outcomes, Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate survival probabilities. Survival curves were compared using the log-rank test. Results A total of 77 fractures in 75 patients were treated. Average patient age was 11.6 years old (range, 8-16 years). Average followup was 47.5 weeks (range. 13-177 weeks). There were 43 fractures treated with flexible intramedullary nailing (Group F), including 27 fractures treated with stainless steel Enders nails and 16 fractures treated with titanium flexible nails. There were 34 fractures treated with a rigid, antegrade, trochanteric intramedullary nail (Group R). In Group F, fractures were classified as transverse in 27 patients, short oblique in eight patients, long oblique in five patients, and comminuted in three patients. In Group R, fractures were classified as long oblique in 12 patients, transverse in nine patients, short oblique in seven patients, and comminuted in six patients. As shown in Table 1, there was a statistically significant association between treatment and fracture pattern (p=0.006), with a greater proportion of transverse fractures treated with flexible nails. The median time to full weight-bearing for Group F was 12 weeks (range, 6-26 weeks). In Group R the median time to full weight-bearing was 10 weeks (range. 4-13 weeks). The estimated survival curves were significantly different (log-rank p = 0.0013). In Group F there were six patients with a residual limp at final follow-up. Two of these patients had a malunion of their fracture, while one other patient had a malunion and limb length discrepancy. Postoperative radiographs were not available for one of these patients. The final two patients in Group F with a residual limp had an otherwise uncomplicated course. In Group R, there were nine patients with a residual limp at final follow-up. Five of these patients had associated polytrauma, one with a gunshot wound to the thigh. There were two cases of clinically detectable limb length discrepancy on physical exam in both groups. In Group F, there were 13 occurrences of hardware irritation, all occurring at the nail tip insertion sites, including seven treated by stainless steel Enders nails and six treated by flexible titanium nails. Removal of the nails after fracture union provided relief of symptoms in all 13 patients. In Group R there were two instances of hardware irritation. In one patient, there was pain at a prominent distal locking screw. The prominent screw was removed after fracture union and provided relief of symptoms. The second patient had persistent anterior thigh pain after fracture union. Removal of the nail relieved the patient’s symptoms. There was a significantly greater incidence of hardware-related symptoms in Group F. (p = 0.008) A total of 64 fractures were available for the radiographic review. All fractures in both groups went on to union. In Group F the median time to union was 7 weeks (range, 4-13 weeks). A delayed union occurred in one patient, which healed uneventfully at 13 weeks. In Group R, the median time to union was 7 weeks (range, 3-13 weeks). A delayed union occurred in one patient, which healed uneventfully at 13 weeks. There was no statistically significant difference in the time to union outcome between the two groups. There were nine malunions in Group F. Four of these malunions had valgus angulation (range, 7-15 degrees) (see Figure 1), four had varus angulation (range, 6-9 degrees), and one had apex anterior angulation (12 degrees). Five of these fractures were classified as transverse, two were short oblique, one was comminuted, and one was long oblique. In Group R there were two malunions, both with valgus angulation (7 and 10 degrees). One fracture was classified as short oblique and the other as comminuted. The incidence of malunion was significantly greater in Group F (p = 0.022). These results are summarized in Table 2. TABLE 1. Comparison of Fracture Pattern and Procedure Fracture pattern Comminuted Long oblique Short oblique Transverse Total Flexible nail Troch nail Total 3 5 8 27 43 6 12 7 9 34 9 17 15 36 77 56 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Pediatric Diaphyseal Femur Fractures: A Comparison of Flexible Versus Rigid Intramedullary Nailing (continued) Heterotopic ossification did not occur in any patient in Group F. In Group R, heterotopic ossification occurred in 12 patients. This difference was statistically significant. (p < 0.001) No cases of avascular necrosis were identified in either group. There was one case of postoperative wound infection in Group R, which was successfully treated with irrigation and debridement and antibiotics. Discussion In the older child or adolescent who is not yet skeletally mature, two commonly used treatment methods of femur fracture stabilization include flexible intramedullary nailing and rigid, antegrade intramedullary nailing via a trochanteric entry point. Reported advantages of flexible intramedullary nailing include rapid fracture stabilization and patient mobilization, metaphyseal entry with avoidance of the physis, small incisions, and short hospital stays.2-8 There have been several studies demonstrating the effectiveness of flexible intramedullary nailing. Heinrich et al, in a prospective analysis, noted favorable results with flexible nailing as well as shorter hospital stays and less disruption to family life when compared to nonoperative treatment methods.6 In a multicenter study on the early use of flexible titanium nails, excellent to satisfactory results were seen in 57 of the 58 cases, with the most common complication being soft tissue irritation at the nail tip.3 Flynn et al compared titanium elastic nailing to traction and spica Figure 1. A. Initial postoperative radiographs of an 8-year-old male with a comminuted femoral shaft fracture treated by titanium flexible intramedullary nailing. 57 Figure 1. B and C. Five and 11 weeks post- op radiographs, respectively, demonstrating increased valgus angulation. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Pediatric Diaphyseal Femur Fractures: A Comparison of Flexible Versus Rigid Intramedullary Nailing (continued) motion, and to return to school than the external fixation group with fewer complications.23 Rigid intramedullary nailing also allows for rapid patient mobilization and aids in the prevention of angular and rotational malalignment and fracture shortening.2,8,13-16 The major reported complication of this treatment method has been avascular necrosis of the femoral head, related to a piriformis starting point. The use of this entry point is believed to be responsible for disruption of the blood supply to the femoral head. 13.17-19 The use of an entry point at the tip of the greater trochanter, or lateral to the tip of the greater trochanter, can help to decrease the risk of this complication.20,21 There has been concern over growth disturbances of the proximal femur, particularly coxa valga, due to disruption of the greater trochanter apophysis when a trochanteric entry point has been used.24 Gage et al demonstrated that arrest of the greater trochanter apophysis after age eight years had no effect on trochanteric growth. A more recent radiographic review following intramedullary nailing via trochanteric entry in pediatric patients with a mean age of 10 years demonstrated no clinically significant proximal femoral changes. The authors concluded that intramedullary nailing through a trochanteric starting point in children age nine and older does not produce a clinically significant proximal femoral deformity.26 Figure 1. D. Six-months post-op radiograph. casting in a prospective cohort study. The group treated with flexible nailing had a shorter hospital stay, walked sooner with and without support, and returned to school earlier than the spica casting group. Both groups had similar complication rates.4 In a prospective, randomized study, Bar-On et al compared flexible intramedullary nailing to external fixation in pediatric femoral shaft fractures. The authors found a shorter time to full weight-bearing, to full range of Multiple studies have shown the efficacy of rigid nailing using a trochanteric starting point.15,16,27 Townsend and Hoffinger reported satisfactory results in their series of 34 patients, who were between the ages 10-17 years. All fractures went on to union, and no infections, rotational deformities, implant failures or avascular necrosis occurred.16 Momberger et al reported on 50 patients, age range of 10-16 years, treated with a rigid intramedullary nail through a trochanteric starting point. No patient had angular or rotational deformities, avascular necrosis, or proximal femoral deformities.27 In another series, favorable outcomes in 20 patients with an age range of 11-16 years were reported, with all fractures healing and all patients returning to pre-injury function.15 However, malunion was not defined in these three studies. TABLE 2. Comparison of Malunions Patient Age Height (cm) Weight (kg) Fracture type 1 2 3 4 5 6 12 8 12 10 10 9 142 126 168 NR 140 NR 30 23 50 50 50 35 Transverse Proximal 1/3 Short oblique Middle 1/3 Transverse Proximal 1/3 Transverse Middle 1/3 Transverse Middle 1/3 Transverse Middle 1/3 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 8 15 11 152 132 140 NR 159 52 34 22 110 81 Comminuted Long oblique Short oblique Comminuted Short oblique NR = not recorded 58 Fracture location Middle 1/3 Middle 1/3 Middle 1/3 Distal 1/3 Middle 1/3 Treatment Deformity Enders Titanium Enders Enders Titanium Enders 9˚ Varus 15˚ Valgus 6˚ Varus 7˚ Varus 10˚ Valgus 12˚ Apex anterior 8˚ Varus 7˚ Valgus 10˚ Valgus 10˚ Valgus 7˚ Valgus Enders Titanium Enders Troch nail Troch nail Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Pediatric Diaphyseal Femur Fractures: A Comparison of Flexible Versus Rigid Intramedullary Nailing (continued) The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of flexible intramedullary nailing to rigid intramedullary nailing through a greater trochanteric starting point in the treatment of pediatric diaphyseal femur fractures. We found a significantly higher incidence of hardware irritation and malunion in those patients treated with flexible rods. There was a significantly increased incidence of heterotopic ossification and shorter time to full weight-bearing in those managed with rigid nails. There was no significant difference in time to union, residual limp, or shortening between the two groups. Hardware irritation from the nail tips is the most commonly reported complication in flexible intramedullary nailing of pediatric femur fractures, with an incidence of 7-51% reported.2-5,10-12 An incidence of 30 percent was found in our study, which is consistent with previous studies. All of these patients had relief of the symptoms after nail removal. The incidence of hardware related symptoms was significantly less in Group R. Angular deformity is another complication that has been reported with flexible nailing. Factors associated with an increased risk of angular deformity include length, unstable fractures, mismatched nails, and larger patient size.10-12 A recent biomechanical analysis of titanium elastic nail fixation in pediatric femur fractures demonstrated an increased risk for loss of reduction in patients weighing more than 40 to 45 kg.28 In our study, there was a 29 percent (nine fractures) incidence of malunion in Group F and only a six percent (two fractures) incidence in Group R. In Group F, two of these malunions occurred in length unstable fractures. Also, there were three malunions in patients weighing more than 45 kgs in Group F, one of which was associated with a length unstable fracture. Six of these malunions occurred in patients treated by stainless steel Enders nails, while three occurred in patients treated by flexible titanium nails. Of the three malunions in Group F in patients weighing more than 45 kgs, all were treated by Enders nails. Of the length unstable fractures in Group F that went on to malunion, one was treated by Enders nails and one was treated by flexible titanium nails. Based on these results, there did not appear to be an association between malunion and the type of flexible nail used in our study. Finally, there were no cases of mismatched flexible nails. A lower incidence of malunion was seen in Group R. All nails were either statically- or dynamically-locked based on the fracture pattern, resulting in more stability and increased resistance to length, angular, and rotational forces. Of the malunions in Group F, seven fractures progressed from a well-aligned position to a malaligned position over time, while two were malaligned after initial treatment. Both of the fractures in Group R that went on to malunion were stabilized in a malaligned position and did not progress as in Group F. There are several limitations of the current study. These include the retrospective design and variable length of follow-up. However, this reflects what is seen in the clinical setting,as many patients with femoral shaft fractures in this age group return to preoperative function by 12 weeks postoperatively and are subsequently lost to follow-up. Finally, not all patients had radiographs available for follow-up, as only 64 of 77 fractures were available for the radiographic review. In summary, we conclude that rigid intramedullary nailing of pediatric femur fractures through a trochanteric starting point 59 has a lower incidence of malunion, shorter time to full weightbearing, and decreased incidence of hardware related complications compared to flexible intramedullary nailing of pediatric femoral shaft fractures in children aged eight years and older. There is a higher incidence of heterotopic ossification at the proximal end of the femur with this method, however, its effects clinically are negligible. Future prospective studies are necessary to further compare these methods. References 1. Hinton RY, Lincoln A, Crockett MM, et al. Fractures of the femoral shaft in children: Incidence, mechanisms, and sociodemographic risk factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999; 81:500-9. 2. Anglen JO, Choi L. Treatment options in pediatric femoral shaft fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2005; 19:724-33. 3. Flynn JM, Hresko T, Reynolds RA, et al. Titanium elastic nails for pediatric femur fractures: A multicenter study of early results with analysis of complications. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001; 21:4-8. 4. Flynn JM, Luedtke LM, Ganley TJ, et al. Comparison of titanium elastic nails with traction and a spica cast to treat femoral shaft fractures in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86:770-7. 5. Flynn JM, Schwend RM. Management of pediatric femoral shaft fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004; 12:347-59. 6. Heinrich SD, Drvaric DM, Darr K, et al. The operative stabilization of pediatric diaphyseal femur fractures with flexible intramedullary nails: A prospective analysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1994; 14:501-7. 7. Rathjen KE, Riccio AI, De La Garza D. Stainless steel intramedullary fixation of unstable femoral shaft fractures in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007; 27:432-41. 8. Routt ML, Schildhauer TA. Fractures of the Femoral Shaft. In: Green NE, Swiontkowski MF. Skeletal Trauma in Children. 3rd ed. Saunders; 2003:407-38. 9. Ho CA, Skaggs DL, Tang CW, et al. Use of flexible intramedullary nails in pediatric femur fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006; 26:497-504. 10. Luhman SJ, Schootman M, Schoenecker PL, et al. Complications of titanium elastic nails for pediatric femoral shaft fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 2003; 23:443-7. 11. Narayanan UG, Hyman JE, Wainwright AM, et al. Complications of elastic stable intramedullary nail fixation of pediatric femoral fractures, and how to avoid them. J Pediatr Orthop. 2004; 24:363-9. 12. Sink EL, Gralla J, Repine M. Complications of pediatric femur fractures treated with titanium elastic nails: A comparison of fracture types. J Pediatr Orthop. 2005; 25:577-80. 13. Beaty JH, Austin SM, Warner WC, et al. Interlocking intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures in adolescents: preliminary results and complications. J Pediatr Orthop. 1994; 14:178-83. 14. Galpin RD, Willis RB, Sabano N. Intramedullary nailing of pediatric femoral fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 1994; 14:184-9. 15. Kanellopoulos AD, Yiannakopoulos CK, Soucacos PN. Closed, locked intramedullary nailing of pediatric femoral shaft fractures through the tip of the greater trochanter. J Trauma. 2006; 60:217-23. 16. Townsend DR, Hoffinger S. Intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures in children via the trochanter tip. Clin Orthop. 2000; 376:113-8. 17. Astion DJ, Wilber JH, Scoles PV. Avascular necrosis of the capital femoral epiphysis after intramedullary nailing for a fracture of the femoral shaft: A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995; 77:1092-4. 18. O’Malley DE, Mazur JM, Cummings RJ. Femoral head avascular necrosis associated with intramedullary nailing in an adolescent. J Pediatr Orthop. 1995; 15:21-3. 19. Thometz JG, Lamdan R. Osteonecrosis of the femoral head after intramedullary nailing of a fracture of the femoral shaft in an adolescent: A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995; 77:1423-6. 20. Sanders JO, Browne RH, Mooney JF, et al. Treatment of femoral fractures in children by pediatric orthopedists: Results of a 1998 survey. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001; 21:436-41. 21. Stans AA, Morrissy RT, Renwick SE. Femoral Shaft Fracture Treatment in Patients Age 6 to 16 Years. J Pediatr Orthop. 1999; 19:222-8. 22. Kasser JR, Beaty JH. Femoral Shaft Fractures. In: Beaty JH, Kasser JR eds. Rockwood and Wilkins’ Fractures in Children. 6th ed. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2006:893-936. 23. Bar-On E, Sagiv S, Porat S. External fixation or flexible intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures in children: A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997; 79:975-8. 24. Raney EM, Ogden JA, Grogan DP. Premature greater trochanteric epiphysiodesis secondary to intramedullary rodding. J Pediatr Orthop. 1993; 13:516-20. 25. Gage JR, Cary JM. The effects of trochanteric epiphysiodesis on growth of the proximal end of the femur following necrosis of the capital femoral epiphysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1980; 62:785-94. 26. Gordon JE, Swenning TA, Burd TA, et al. Proximal femoral radiographic changes after lateral transtrochanteric intramedullary nail placement in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85:1295-301. 27. Momberger N, Stevens P, Smith J, et al. Intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures in adolescents. J Pediatr Orthop. 2000; 20:482-4. 28. Li Y, Stabile KJ, Shilt JS. Biomechanical analysis of titanium elastic nail fixation in a pediatric femur fracture model. J Pediatr Orthop. 2008; 28:874-8. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Associated With Consumer Products Randall T. Loder, M.D. From the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Indiana School of Medicine, Indiana University, and the James Whitcomb Riley Children’s Hospital, Indianapolis, Indiana Address all correspondence to: Randall T. Loder, M.D. Riley Children’s Hospital, Room 4250 702 Barnhill Drive Indianapolis, Indiana 46202 317-278-0961 FAX 317-274-7197 [email protected] This research was supported in part by the Garceau Professorship Endowment, Indiana University, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, and the Rapp Pediatric Orthopaedic Research Endowment, Riley Children’s Foundation, Indianapolis, Indiana. Abstract Background: Children with slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) frequently present to the emergency department (ED). It was the purpose of this study to review those SCFEs that present to the ED due to consumer product events using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System database. Materials and Methods: ED visits 2002 through 2006 involving the lower trunk, pubic region, and upper leg were analyzed. A p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of 20,594 ED visits for children 9-16 years old, 33 had a diagnosis of SCFE. Those with a SCFE were more frequently male (78% vs. 61.6%) and more often admitted to the hospital (85% vs. 7.6%). Race was known for 25 children; there were 19 (63%) White; 5 (28%) Black, and 1 (9%) Amerindian child. With 19 White children, the expected number of Blacks and Amerindian children would be 33 and 7, respectively, based on prior demographic distributions of children diagnosed with SCFE. (p = 0.001) The average incidence was 8.7/100,000 children 9-16 years, with an increase over time: 2.7/100,000 in 2002 increasing to 13.0/100,000 in 2006 (p = 0.015). The consumer products associated with the SCFE children were sports and recreational equipment in 27 and falls in 6. The most frequent sports related activity was basketball in 11 (33%) children, higher than the control group of children of the same age without SCFE in the database (6.7%). (p = 1 x 10-6). Conclusions: There was an increasing incidence of SCFE over the 5-year study period. SCFE associated with presentation to the ED with an injury related to consumer products was higher than expected in White children. The sport most frequently associated with injuries in children with SCFE was basketball (33%). The proximal femoral physis seems to be very vulnerable to biomechanical stresses in basketball. Level of Evidence: Level II Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is a common adolescent hip disorder, and children with this disorder frequently present to the emergency department (ED). The child’s onset of symptoms may be associated with a particular event, such as a sporting/recreational activity or a fall involving a particular product. The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) collects patient information from the NEISS hospitals for all ED visits associated with consumer products. Since sporting/recreational activities and falls often involve a consumer product, cases of SCFE associated with such products will be identified by the NEISS. It was the purpose of this study to review cases of SCFE presenting to the ED associated with consumer product events using the NEISS database. Materials and Methods The detailed NEISS data for ED visits for the 5-year period, 2002 through 2006, involving the lower trunk, pubic region, and upper leg (NEISS body part codes 79, 38, and 81) were downloaded from the NEISS website. Further details regarding the acquisition of NEISS data is in Addendum I. Three data columns (those titled diag_other and narr1 and narr2 [narrative columns describing the details for each ED visit]) were searched for the following terms: epiphysis, epiphysiolysis, SCFE, slipped epiphysis, slipped capital femoral epiphysis. When encountered, the narrative columns were specifically read to confirm the diagnosis of SCFE. These cases were considered to be SCFEs; the others were considered not to be SCFEs and comprise the control group. The data was then analyzed by gender, race, where the injury occurred, associated consumer product (for SCFE cases), and disposition from the ED. Race was classified according to Eveleth and Tanner1 as White, Black, and Amerindian (Hispanic and Native American). This study was determined to be exempt by the local Institutional Review Board. Statistical Analyses Continuous data are reported as the mean ±1 standard deviation. Discrete data are reported as frequencies and percentages. Analyses between groups of continuous data 60 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Associated With Consumer Products (continued) were performed with the Student’s t-test (2 groups) or ANOVA (3 or more groups). Differences between groups of discrete data were analyzed by the Pearson’s χ2 test. Statistical analyses were performed with Systat 12 software� (San Jose, CA, 2007). A p < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results All cases of SCFE were between the ages 9 – 16 years. There were 20,594 ED visits for children ages 9-16 years involving the lower trunk, pubic region, and upper leg; 33 had a diagnosis of SCFE and 20,561 without SCFE. Those children with a SCFE were more frequently male (78 vs. 61.6%) and admitted to the hospital (85% vs. 7.6%). There were no differences between those with and without SCFE by age, race, or where the injury occurred (Table I). There was a significant increase in SCFE cases over the 5 year span compared to the non SCFE cases (Cochran’s linear trend, χ2 = 5.87, df = 1, p = 0.015) (Figure 1). Table 1 Children Presenting To The Ed For Injuries Involving The Trunk, Pelvis, And Upper Leg: Those With And Without A SCFE Variable Age (yrs) Gender M F Race Amerindian Black White ED Disposition Admit Release Injury Location Home Public Property School With SCFE 12.6 + 1.6 Without SCFE 12.6 + 2.2 26 (79) 7 (21) 12667 7886 1 (9)0 5 (28) 19 (63) 1457 (9.2)0 4413 (28.0) 9913 (62.8) 28 (85) 5 (15) 1543 (7.6)0 18865 (92.4) 6 (30) 11 (55) 3 (15) 6542 (43.8) 5023 (33.6) 3364 (22.5) Figure 1: The changing incidence of SCFE in children presenting to the emergency department due to consumer products for injuries involving the lower trunk, pelvis, and upper leg. The open black box represents the annual number of SCFE cases and the closed black rhomboids represent the annual incidence of SCFE in this study. The solid black line represents the incidence of SCFE in the study of Lehmann et al. (2), the short hatched black line the incidence in the study of Kelsey (3), and the long hatched black line the average incidence in the present study over the 5 year span. The increasing incidence of SCFEs was statistically significant (Cochran’s linear trend, χ2 = 5.87, df = 1, p = 0.015). p value 0.92 average incidence was 8.7/100,000 children ages 9-16. There was a rapid increase between 2002 (2.7/100,000) and 2006 (13.0/100,000) (Table II, Figure 1). This increase was statistically significant (Cochran’s linear trend, p = 0.015). 0.03 Discussion 0.37 < 10 Several interesting findings were noted in this study. Although the average incidence was 8.7/100,000 children ages 9 through 16, similar to the 10.8 and 10.08 in the studies of -6 Table 2 Changing Incidence Of SCFE Cases Presenting To The Emergency Department And Associated With Consumer Products 0.13 The consumer products associated with the 33 SCFEs were sports and recreational equipment in 27 and falls in 6. The sports and recreational activities were basketball in 11, gymnastics in 2, skateboards in 2, bicycles in 2, and band, dancing, football, kickball, playground equipment, scooter, skiing, sledding, trampoline, and wrestling in one each. The 6 falls were associated with crutches in 3, with one fall each in the shower, off a porch, and off a couch. All the falls occurred in males, although this was not statistically significant (Fisher exact test, p = 0.30). The entire number of ED visits for the years 2002 through 2006 for children 9-16 years old was used to calculate the annual and 5-year average incidence of SCFE. The 5-year 61 Year Number ED visits ages 9 through 16 years # SCFE cases Incidence per 100,000 2002 75414 2 2.7 2003 76016 5 6.6 2004 75826 7 9.2 2005 73996 9 12.2 2006 77220 10 13.0 Total 378472 33 8.7 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Associated With Consumer Products (continued) Lehmann (2) and Kelsey (3), there was about a 5-fold increase in incidence over the 5-year study period. The numbers in this study are small and a limitation of this study, yet this increase was statistically significant. This differs when comparing the incidence between the 30-year time span before 2000. The incidence of SCFE for children ages 9 through 16 in 1970 (3) was 10.08/100,000 and 10.8/100,000 in 2000 (2). Reasons for the increase is not known but could possibly be due to better or more accurate coding in the database. The racial composition of the SCFE children was different when compared to other studies. SCFEs are more prevalent in Black and Amerindian children2-5, yet in this study 76% of the SCFEs were in White children with 28% in Black and 9% in Amerindian children. The racial composition of the SCFE group and control group was not statistically different (9913 White - 62.8%, 4413 Black – 28.0%, 1457 Amerindian – 9.2%) (p = 0.37) and similar to the general US population < 18 years of age in the year 2000 (67.3% White, 14.8% Black, and 17.9% Amerindian when excluding other racial groups for the purposes of comparison).6 Using the racial prevalence for SCFE2 of 1.0 for White, 3.94 for Black, and 2.53 for Hispanic children, the expected number of Black and Amerindian SCFE patients for a group of 19 White SCFE patients in a population having the same racial proportion as the control group is 33 Black and 7 Amerindian children, statistically different than the 5 Black and 1 Amerindian child in this study (χ2 = 13.60, df = 2, p = 0.001). (Figure 2) These differences will require further investigation. Figure 2: Observed and expected differences in the racial proportions of SCFE in children presenting to the emergency department associated with consumer products. There was a high association of SCFE with sports injuries; 27 of 33 (81%). The stresses placed across the physis with these activities are likely a causative factor of SCFE. The contribution of physical activity to SCFE has been previously noted, where the stress imposed on the proximal femoral physis in an obese running adolescent is sufficient to result in a SCFE.7 Most interesting was that 33% of the consumer products associated with SCFE was basketball, significantly greater than the 6.7% in the non-SCFE control group (Fisher exact test, p = 1 x 10-6). It could be postulated that football and bicycling would also induce SCFE due to the significant vertical stresses placed on the proximal femoral physis during biking and the impacts on the knees during football. However, there was no difference in the proportion of children in the nonSCFE NEISS group involved in football when compared to the SCFE group (11.l% [2282/20561] vs. 3% [1/33], Fisher exact test, p = 0.086) or in biking (10.1% [2073/18488] vs. 6% [2/31], Fisher exact test, p = 0.77). Thus the proximal femoral physis seems to be remarkably vulnerable to slipping when exposed to the biomechanical stresses from basketball. We postulate that the three-dimensional force vector(s) in basketball compared to other sports are particularly likely to result in physeal failure. Basketball involves significant running and twisting of the trunk and lower extremities, and perhaps the proximal femoral physis is more sensitive to this combination of vertical and rotational forces. This may support the concept (8) that SCFE is not a true slipping but rather a rotational displacement of the proximal femoral physis. The relationship between athletic activities and SCFE was studied by Murray and Duncan (9), who reviewed three groups of English males aged 17 to 21 years old. Group A consisted of 94 males from a boarding school with a strong emphasis on sports; group B consisted of 77 males from a boarding school with a stronger emphasis on academics compared to sports; and group C consisted of 80 males from public schools where sporting activities were voluntary. Evidence of SCFE in adolescence, defined as a tilt deformity of the femoral head, was noted in 24% (23 boys) of group A, 9% (7 boys) of group B, and 15% (12 boys) of group C. These differences were statistically different. There was a suggestion that jumping activities were more frequent in those with a tilt deformity compared to other athletic activities. Since basketball was not one of the English sports, no comparisons can be made between this study and that of Murray (9). There are limitations in this study. The first is the small number of SCFE cases. Another is the absence of other demographic data commonly reviewed in SCFE studies: symptom duration, nature of SCFE (stable vs. unstable), body weight / height / body mass index, laterality, and unilateral/ bilateral nature. However, the strong association between SCFE and basketball in this study suggest further areas for investigation. Addendum 1 The NEISS, operated by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (USCPSC), is a probability sample of hospitals in the U.S. and its territories that have at least six beds and an emergency department (ED). The sample is stratified based on ED size and geographic location. Patient information is collected daily from each NEISS hospital for every patient 62 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Associated With Consumer Products (continued) treated in the ED due to an injury associated with consumer products. National estimates are made of the total number of product-related injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs based on the NEISS data collected from these hospitals. These estimates can be tailored by year of injury, product involved in the injury, gender and age of the injured patient, diagnosis, disposition, location and mechanism of injury, and body part injured. This data base is in the public domain and can be found at www.cpsc.gov/library/neiss.html. Further details regarding NEISS, the sample design, and the coding manual are available at the same web site. Detailed injury data, available from 2002 on, gives a narrative description of each case, allowing for specific analyses of the injuries. The data is given in codes, with detailed descriptions at the NEISS web site. The NEISS codes for the geographical location of the injury are 1 (home), 2 (farm), 4 (street or highway), 5 (other public property), 6 (mobile home), 7 (place of industry), 8 (school), 9 (recreational or sporting facility), or 0 (unknown). Codes 1, 2, 4, and 6 were grouped into the home group, codes 5 and 9 into the public property group, and 8 as school. Code 7 was ignored due to the extremely small number in that group. The NEISS codes for emergency room disposition are 1 (treated and released), 2 (treated and transferred to another hospital for admission), 4 (treated and admitted), 5 (observed), 6 (left without being seen), and 8 (fatality). Codes 2, 4, and 5 were grouped together as an admission, and code 1 was considered a release. 63 References 1. Eveleth PB, Tanner JM. Worldwide variation in human growth. 2nd ed. Cambridge: University Press, 1990. 2. Lehmann CL, Arons RP, Loder RT, Vitale MG. The epidemiology of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an update. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006; 26:286-290. 3. Kelsey JL, Keggi KJ, Southwick WO. The incidence and distribution of slipped capital femoral epiphysis in Connecticut and southwestern United States. J Bone Joint Surg AM. 1970; 52A:1203-1216. 4. Kelsey JL. The incidence and distribution of slipped capital femoral epiphysis in Connecticut. J Chron Di.s 1971; 23:567-578. 5. Loder RT, and 47 coinvestigators from 33 orthopaedic centers and 6 continents. The demographics of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. An international multicenter study. Clin Orthop. 1996; 322:8-27. 6. US Census Bureau. Quick Tables - American Fact Finder. In:: Census 2000 Summary File 2, Matrices PCT3 and PCT4; 2000. Accessed March 4, 2008. 7. Pritchett JW, Perdue KD. Mechanical factors in slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1988; 8:385-388. 8. Tayton K. Does the upper femoral epiphysis slip or rotate? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89B:1402-1406. 9. Murray RO, Duncan C. Athletic activity in adolescence as an etiological factor in degenerative hip disease. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1971; 53-B:406-419. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options Craig F. Shank, MD,* Eric J. Thiel, MD,* and Kevin E. Klingele, MD† © 2010, Wolters Kluwer Health/ Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins. Shank CF, Thiel EJ, Klingele KE. Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options. J Pediatr Orthop. 2010; 30(2):140-146. Background: Valgus slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE), defined as posterolateral slippage of the proximal femoral epiphysis on the metaphysis, is an uncommon occurrence. The purpose of this study was to review our institution’s experience with valgus SCFE to better describe its prevalence, clinical presentation, and treatment. Methods: Radiographs of patients undergoing treatment of SCFE between 1996 and 2008 were reviewed. Valgus SCFE was identified by increased prominence of the lateral femoral epiphysis relative to the lateral femoral neck and an increased anteroposterior physis shaft angle. We identified 12 patients (16 hips) with valgus SCFE and compared them with 123 cases identified as classic posteromedial SCFE. Results: The prevalence of valgus SCFE at our institution was 4.7% (12 of 258 patients). Significant differences between patients with valgus SCFE and those with classic SCFE were found for age at presentation (mean 1.1 y younger, P = 0.033), sex (58% female vs. 28% male, P = 0.044), and classification as atypical SCFE (42% vs. 3%, P < 0.001), respectively. Four patients in the valgus group had pituitary and growth hormone dysfunction, and 1 was diagnosed with Stickler syndrome. Hips of valgus patients had a significantly higher mean femoral neck shaft angle (154.3 degrees) as compared with classic SCFE patients (140.5 degrees) (P < 0.001). Difficulty placing hardware for in situ fixation was noted in 5 of 11 valgus cases, with 1 case complicated by articular surface penetration and chondrolysis. Conclusions: Valgus displacement often presents with a relatively normal appearance on anteroposterior radiographs. Valgus SCFE may be associated with obesity, coxa valga, hypopituitarism, and Stickler syndrome. Posterolateral displacement of the femoral epiphysis makes in situ fixation of valgus SCFE more difficult, due to the necessity of a more medial starting point. Level of Evidence: Case series, Level IV. Key Words: slipped capital femoral epiphysis, valgus (J Pediatr Orthop 2010;30:140–146) Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is a common disorder of the adolescent hip. Failure of the proximal femoral physis results in a deformity classically characterized as medial and posterior displacement of the proximal femoral epiphysis on the metaphysis. However, as the femoral epiphysis is relatively confined within the acetabulum, the deformity can also be described as displacement of the distal femur on the proximal epiphysis. In the majority of cases, the distal fragment is found in varus, extension, and external rotation relative to the proximal fragment.1 In 1926, Muller2 described a case of lateral and posterior displacements of the femoral epiphysis on the metaphysis, which has been termed as valgus SCFE. Since then, at least 26 cases of valgus SCFE have been described in the orthopaedic literature.3-5 The purpose of this study was to review our institution’s experience with valgus SCFE to better define its prevalence, clinical presentation, and treatment. Methods After approval by the institutional review board, a retrospective radiographic review was performed for all children undergoing operative treatment of SCFE from 1996 to 2008. The SCFE cases were classified as classic (varus) or valgus based on preoperative and intraoperative radiographs. Cases with inadequate radiographs for classification were excluded. No clear criteria defining valgus SCFE could be found in prior published reports. For the purpose of this study, a valgus SCFE was defined as apparent posterolateral slippage of the proximal femoral epiphysis in relationship to the femoral neck. A unilateral valgus SCFE was defined as a displaced, painful slip demonstrating: (1) increased prominence of the lateral femoral epiphysis in relation to the lateral femoral neck (Klein’s line) on an anteroposterior (AP) radiograph and (2) an increased AP physis shaft angle compared to the contralateral hip (Fig. 1). Bilateral valgus SCFE were defined by both apparent lateral displacement of the femoral epiphysis on the femoral neck as well as obvious prominence of the lateral femoral epiphysis compared to Klein’s line. Displaced SCFE that did not meet these criteria were classified as classic, or varus SCFE. For hips classified as valgus SCFE, measurements of proximal femoral geometry were made as described by Yngve et al.5 Measurements were based on the preoperative AP pelvis and lateral films; AP measurements are illustrated in Figure 2. Films demonstrating clear rotational differences 64 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options (continued) Statistical Analyses For statistical calculations, each patient was counted only once except for radiographic measurements, which included both hips of bilateral cases. Statistical analyses were performed with the assistance of Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA) and Statistics Online Computational Resource (UCLA, Los Angeles, CA). Continuous variables are reported as the mean ± 1 standard deviation. Differences between groups of continuous data were analyzed using both the Student t test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. The results of the nonparametric statistical method are reported for groups with 10 cases. Comparisons between affected hips and contralateral unaffected hips were analyzed using paired tests. Groups of discrete data were analyzed for differences using the Fischer exact test. Results Between 1996 and 2008, 305 patients underwent treatment of SCFE at the authors’ institution. Radiographs allowing reliable classification as classic or valgus SCFE were available for 258. From this group, 12 patients (16 hips) were defined as valgus SCFE, yielding a prevalence of 4.65%. Clinical parameters for the classic and valgus SCFE groups are summarized in Table 1. Statistically significant differences between the children with valgus and classic SCFE were found for sex (58.3% female vs. 27.5% male, P = 0.044), classification as an atypical SCFE (41.7 vs. 3.1% P = 0.013), and age at presentation (11.6 ± 3.1 vs. 12.7 ± 1.6 y, FIGURE 1. AP (A) and frog lateral (B) pelvis radiographs of a 10year-old female with a mild right valgus SCFE. Bilateral coxa valga and increased prominence of the right femoral epiphysis relative to the lateral femoral neck are demonstrated on the AP view. AP indicates anterioposterior; SCFE, slipped capital femoral epiphysis. between the extremities were excluded from measurement. Hospital and outpatient records were reviewed to record demographic, clinical, and follow-up information for each patient. Hip stability was determined by ability to bear weight, and atypical SCFE was defined as SCFE associated with endocrinopathy or syndrome. For comparison purposes, a retrospective review of hospital records and radiographs was performed for classic SCFE cases (n = 123) treated between November 2002 and December 2008, when a single, computerized hospital record system began in our institution. Radiographic measurements, as well as demographic and clinical information, were recorded in the same manner as for the valgus patients. 65 FIGURE 2. Illustration of measurements of proximal femoral geometry on anteroposterior (AP) view. Note the increased AP physis shaft angle on right valgus SCFE versus unaffected contralateral hip. a = neck shaft angle, b = neck physis angle, g = AP physis shaft angle, y = AP physeal tilt. SCFE indicates slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options (continued) TABLE 1. Clinical Characteristics of Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Parameter Classic SCFE (n = 123) Valgus SCFE (n = 12) 87/33 68/43 19/49 15/28 73/37 72/21 98/3 12.7 ± 1.6 3.3 ± 4.3 160 ± 11.3 73.7 ± 20.6 28.8 ± 7.3 5/7 8/4 5/3 3/1 6/5 10/1 7/5 11.6 ± 3.1 1.8 ± 1.4 156.4 ± 10.8 67.7 ± 20.2 28.7 ± 6.1 Sex (male/female) Unilateral/bilateral Side (right/left) Simultaneous/sequential Race (white/black) Stable/unstable Typical/atypical presentation Age at presentation (y) Symptom duration (months) Height (cm) Weight (kg) Body mass index (kg/m2) P 0.044 0.76 0.10 0.15 0.51 0.45 < 0.001 0.033 0.28 0.37 0.36 0.97 SCFE indicates slipped capital femoral epiphysis. P = 0.033). Four patients in the valgus group were diagnosed with endocrine abnormalities before or after developing SCFE. All 4 had panhypopituitarism resulting in deficiencies of growth hormone and thyroid hormone, whereas 1 had adrenal insufficiency and renal failure, as well. A fifth atypical patient in the valgus group had been diagnosed with hereditary progressive arthroophthalmopathy (Stickler syndrome). Three of the valgus SCFE patients presented with bilateral slips, and 1 patient developed a sequential SCFE, also valgus in nature. A summary of the radiographic measurements of proximal femoral geometry for the classic and valgus groups is presented in Tables 2 and 3 and illustrated in Figure 2. On the basis of the posterior physeal tilt (Southwick angle), the SCFE groups demonstrated similar slip severity (33.7 vs. 30 degrees, P = 0.30). For unilateral classic SCFE, the mean AP physis shaft angle (γ) was 49.7 degrees in the affected hip versus 60.4 degrees in the unaffected hip (P<0.001, Table 3). This difference represents an apparent varus angulation of 10.7 degrees. As expected, the affected side in unilateral valgus SCFEs demonstrated a significant increase in the AP physis shaft angle versus the normal side (84.9 vs. 70.4 degrees, P = 0.012), giving a mean valgus angulation of 14.5 degrees. The mean AP femoral neck shaft angle (α) was approximately 13 degrees greater in the valgus SCFE group than the classic SCFE group (154.3 vs. 140.5 degrees). This difference is statistically significant (P<0.001) and also was noted in unaffected hips (153 vs. 141.2 degrees, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in mean AP neck shaft angle between SCFE hips and unaffected hips (classic P<0.76, valgus P<0.50), between male and female hips (P<0.38), or between atypical and idiopathic valgus SCFE hips (P<0.33). Mean femoral geometry measurements were not significantly different between the unilateral and bilateral SCFEs within either group. Eleven of 12 valgus SCFE patients were treated with in situ fixation using 6.5 or 7.3 mm cannulated screws. Ten hips (7 patients) were treated by percutaneous in situ fixation through the anterior femoral neck, as described by Lindaman et al6 (Fig. 3). Four valgus hips (4 patients) were pinned using an open approach to the proximal femur with screws placed through the anterolateral femoral cortex, according to the preference of 1 surgeon at our facility. No significant intraoperative complications were noted in the records. However, during a number of valgus SCFE cases, surgeons encountered diffculty achieving fixation perpendicular to the physis and central in the epiphysis. One case required placement of a second guidewire and 2 cases required placement of a second screw to achieve adequate fixation. In 2 other cases, diffculty placing fixation was noted in the operative report, and final screw placement was not central on TABLE 2. Radiographic Measurements of Proximal Femoral Geometry—All Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Measurement Classic SCFE (n = 59) Posterior physeal tilt (Southwick angle), ϕ AP physis shaft angle, γ Neck physis angle, β Physeal tilt angle, θ Neck shaft angle, α 33.7 ± 12.6 50.6±10 – 0.4±10 39.8±10 140.5±7.7 Valgus SCFE (n = 16) 30 ± 12.9 84.9±12.4 20.5±10.7 6.9±10.2 154.3±7 AP indicates anterioposterior; SCFE, slipped capital femoral epiphysis. 66 P 0.3 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options (continued) TABLE 3. Radiographic Measurements of Proximal Femoral Geometry—Unilateral Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis Measurement Posterior physeal tilt (Southwick angle), ϕ AP physis shaft angle, γ Neck physis angle, β Physeal tilt angle, θ Neck shaft angle, α Classic SCFE (n = 40) 34.2 ± 12.4 49.7 ± 9.50 – 2.5 ± 10.5 40.8 ± 10.0 141.5 ± 7.70 Contralateral Hips 11.1 ± 6.9 60.4 ± 7.1 9.3 ± 5.1 26.8 ± 7.3 141.2 ± 7.3 Valgus SCFE (n = 8) Contralateral Hips 25.9 ± 9.2 84.9 ± 8.7 19.3 ± 8.9 7.7 ± 6.8 155.5 ± 9.1 9.4 ± 5.9| 70.5 ± 8.1| 6.1 ± 4.8| 19.1 ± 8 | | 153.1 ± 5.9| AP indicates anterioposterior; SCFE, slipped capital femoral epiphysis. both AP and lateral views. One patient with bilateral, stable, severe valgus SCFE was managed with staged, surgical hip dislocations and subcapital osteotomy. The average length of follow-up for valgus SCFE patients was 14.4 months (range, 1.8-44 mo). Three patients developed minor postoperative complications (periincisional numbness, superficial wound dehiscence, minor leg length discrepancy). No valgus patient developed loss of fixation, slip progression, or neurovascular injury. Two patients experienced major complications. The single patient who managed with staged, subcapital osteotomies developed segmental osteonecrosis of 1 hip requiring hardware removal. At the latest follow-up, the patient was ambulatory without substantial hip stiffness and only occasional pain. One case of atypical, stable, valgus SCFE that was managed using an open anterolateral approach required placement of 2 screws due to difficulty placing fixation lateral enough in the epiphysis. At the first postoperative visit, the patient was noted to have severe hip pain, stiffness, and joint-space narrowing. A computed tomographic (CT) scan showed evidence of chondrolysis and intra-articular hardware placement requiring revision of fixation. No other patient in the valgus group developed radiographic or clinical evidence of chondrolysis or osteonecrosis. At the latest follow-up, 5 of the remaining 10 patients reported no pain and 5 reported mild or occasional pain. None were noted to have significant restrictions in hip range of motion. Discussion In the majority of SCFE cases, the capital femoral epiphysis is displaced posterior and medial relative to the femoral neck. Muller2 was the first to describe a case of posterior and lateral displacement and to give the term valgus SCFE. At least 26 cases have been reported subsequently in the orthopaedic literature.3–5 Previous case reports and case series do not describe specific criteria used to identify a valgus slip on plain radiographs. We chose to define valgus SCFE by posterior slippage associated with both accentuation of the lateral epiphysis relative to Klein’s line and increased lateral tilt of the epiphysis relative to the femoral shaft (Figs. 1, 2). These criteria were chosen because they have notable implications regarding the diagnosis and management of valgus SCFE. Failure of Klein’s line to intersect a substantial portion of the lateral epiphysis is often advocated 67 to help practitioners recognize SCFE on an AP radiograph. However, hips with valgus SCFE will appear normal by this criterion, underscoring the importance of obtaining lateral and contralateral comparison views in children with hip pain. Lateral tilt of the epiphysis relative to the femoral shaft is also an important feature of valgus SCFE because it influences the optimal trajectory for in situ fixation. Twelve patients (16 hips) were classified as valgus SCFE, representing a 4.7% prevalence of SCFE cases at our institution. Loder and colleagues4 recently reported a similar prevalence of 4% among 105 children with idiopathic SCFE. The authors also reviewed prior case reports of valgus SCFE, calculating an incidence of 1.6% among 757 SCFEs. Thus, it appears that although valgus displacement occurs in a minority of SCFE, it is not particularly rare. In fact, it is probable that clinicians who frequently evaluate children with hip pain will encounter valgus SCFE. Awareness of its existence and differences from the classic varus form may help avoid errors in diagnosis and treatment. In most cases, the epidemiology of the valgus SCFE group was quite similar to the group of classic patients studied. Statistically significant differences between the children with classic SCFE and those with valgus SCFE were found only for age at presentation, patient sex, and proportion of atypical slips. The mean age at presentation (11.6 y) was 1.1 years younger in the valgus group (P = 0.033). This finding may be due, in part, to the higher proportion of females among the valgus patients. Loder et al4 also compared epidemiologic data of varus and valgus SCFE patients and found a younger mean age for 4 idiopathic valgus SCFEs at their institution. However, this was not statistically significant (P = 0.09) and the average age for all valgus SCFEs reported in the literature was 12.4 years,4 higher than the average age reported in 1 large SCFE study (12.2 y).7 A male predominance has been noted in reports of the epidemiology of SCFE,1,7 and this finding was confirmed among classic SCFE patients at our institution (72.5% male). However, valgus SCFE patients at our institution were more likely to be females (58.3%, P = 0.044). This is consistent with prior reports, in which 19 of 26 cases of valgus SCFE were females (72%).3–5 The etiology of SCFE is not fully understood, but a number of biomechanical and biochemical factors play important roles in its development. Obesity, endocrine changes, collagen abnormalities within the physis, as well Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options (continued) as increased obliquity and retroversion of the femoral physis have all been implicated in the pathogenesis of SCFE.1 Likewise, valgus SCFE has been associated with a number of potential etiologies. It has been suggested that the appearance of a varus or valgus SCFE is simply radiographic parallax caused by variable rotation of the proximal femur. Under this theory, external rotation of a posteriorly displaced epiphysis causes the apparent varus displacement observed in most SCFE cases. Rarely, internal rotation results in a valgus appearance.8,9 Like Yngve et al,5 we did not observe rotational differences in trochanter prominence between classic and valgus slips. Furthermore, 3-dimensional imaging has confirmed true medial or lateral epiphyseal displacement in a number of reports on SCFE.3,10–12 In our study, 3 patients underwent 3-dimensional CT imaging allowing confirmation of true valgus and posterior displacement. In 1 of these patients, the deformity was further established by direct inspection during open surgical hip dislocation. The impact of patient size on the risk of SCFE is well established. From our data, it appears likely that obesity plays a role in the valgus slip, as well. Despite a younger age and more atypical slips, the mean height, weight, and body mass index (BMI) of the valgus group did not differ significantly from the classic group. Furthermore, the means were quite high (>95th percentile) given the group’s average age.13 Endocrine changes are also recognized to be FIGURE 3. AP pelvis (A) and frog lateral (B) radiographs of a left, valgus SCFE managed with percutaneous, in situ fixation. AP (C) and frog lateral (D) radiograph status postsingle screw fixation. AP indicates anterioposterior; SCFE, slipped capital femoral epiphysis. an important factor in the pathogenesis of SCFE. Reviews of the prior literature on valgus SCFE have not noted endocrine dysfunction to be common in this condition.3,4 Only Yngve et al5 noted an association with endocrinopathy, reporting 2 patients with underdeveloped genitalia and 1 with panhypopituitarism in a series of 7 valgus patients. Four of the 12 valgus patients in our study had endocrine disorders; all 4 patients suffered from panhypopituitarism resulting in growth hormone deficiency and hypothyroidism. Both growth hormone deficiency and hypothyroidism are associated with an increased risk of SCFE,1,14,15 but we are unaware of any suggested association with either coxa valga or valgus SCFE. Interestingly, Docquier et al,15 in a review of orthopaedic complications of growth hormone therapy, present 1 case of bilateral coxa valga and valgus SCFE. We also encountered 1 case of valgus SCFE in a patient with Stickler syndrome, a collagen disorder. An increased incidence of both coxa valga and SCFE has been found in patients with this condition.16,17 Furthermore, 1 case of posterolateral SCFE has been reported in a review of orthopaedic manifestations of this condition.17 Although further investigation is necessary, the above data suggest that both hypopituitarism and Stickler syndrome may be associated with valgus SCFE. Structural differences in the proximal femur have been postulated to contribute to SCFE by increasing shear forces across the growth plate. Imaging studies of SCFE patients have demonstrated decreased femoral anteversion as well as increased slope of the physeal plate in the sagittal and coronal planes.12,18–20 Biomechanical models have confirmed that these changes could elevate shear forces beyond the strength of the proximal femoral physis.21–23 Structural abnormalities have also been postulated to contribute to valgus SCFE. Previous authors have suggested that increased femoral anteversion is associated with valgus SCFE, which could help explain the female predominance in this condition.4,10 Radiographic or range of motion data were not available to allow evaluation of this factor in the present study. Most reports of valgus SCFE have noted an association with bilateral coxa valga.3–5,10 Barrios et al18 did not find an association between classic varus SCFE and neck diaphysis angle, finding an average neck shaft angle of 141.8 degrees in both SCFE and control hips.8 In contrast, we found an average neck shaft angle (α) of 154.3 degrees in valgus SCFE hips (vs. 140.5 degrees in varus hips, P<0.001). This mean angle is very similar to those observed by Yngve et al (155 degrees)5 and Loder et al (153 degrees).4 Yngve et al5 performed a biomechanical analysis based on the proximal femoral geometry of their valgus patients. They calculated that the combination of coxa valga, lateral physeal tilt, and posterior tilt could produce posterolateral shear stresses high enough to cause growth-plate failure, particularly in obese patients.5 Our analysis of unaffected hips showed that valgus patients have a decreased medial physeal slope relative to the pelvis (θ) and femoral shaft (γ) compared with classic patients. However, this is likely secondary to the increased neck shaft angle in the valgus group. We did not find significant differences in AP physeal slope relative to the femoral neck (neck physis 68 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Valgus Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Prevalence, Presentation, and Treatment Options (continued) angle β, P = 0.12) or in posterior physeal slope (Southwick angle ϕ, P = 0.43) between the unaffected hip groups. Our review of surgical treatment of valgus SCFE at our institution found evidence of diffculty placing in situ screw fixation. Previous authors have noted that central screw positioning perpendicular to the laterally displaced physis requires a more medial soft-tissue approach and cortical entry point than the classic, varus SCFE.3–5,10 This trajectory makes percutaneous guide wire placement challenging and may even endanger the femoral neurovascular bundle.4,10 As a result, Segal et al10 recommend a limited open anteromedial approach for fixation of valgus SCFE with identification and protection of the neurovascular structures. In the present series of 16 hips, no neurovascular complications were noted. However 2 of the 4 hips in which an open approach was used, experienced diffculty with screw positioning, 1 resulting in joint penetration and chondrolysis. Percutaneous fixation did not result in major complications, but difficulty with screw positioning was still encountered in 3 of these 10 hips. Our experience with treatment of valgus SCFE underscores the importance of recognition of this variant for the purpose of preoperative planning. Preoperative 3-dimensional imaging should be considered, along with postoperative CT if doubts exist regarding screw position. With caution regarding the location of the neurovascular bundle, percutaneous fixation appears to be safe and effective. Limited follow-up data indicate that valgus SCFE patients have a good short-term prognosis, as long as major surgical complications are avoided. The use of surgical hip dislocation and corrective osteotomy may play a role in the more severe, valgus SCFE cases. The findings of this study must be tempered by its limitations. The study design was retrospective and information was not available for all patients for some clinical and radiographic data points. The small number of patients in the valgus group limits the statistical power of the study. We attempted to define specific inclusion criteria for the valgus group. The criteria are relatively objective in the case of unilateral slips but, unfortunately, identification of mild bilateral valgus slips remains quite subjective. We avoided radiographic classification or measurements based on films with obvious rotational abnormalities and found few trochanteric or neck shaft angle differences between affected and unaffected hips. However, radiographic measurements of the proximal femur in 2 planes are affected by technique, patient positioning, and deformity secondary to SCFE.24 Plain radiograph measurements of SCFE geometry have been shown to overestimate or underestimate some values compared with CT measurements.25 In conclusion, valgus displacement of the proximal femoral physis is an unusual presentation of SCFE but occurs in as many as 4.7% of SCFE patients. Valgus SCFE may be difficult to identify on the AP radiographic view due to accentuation of the lateral epiphysis relative to Klein’s line. Thus, lateral and contralateral hip views are critical to the radiographic evaluation of adolescent hip pain. Valgus SCFE 69 patients present at a slightly younger age and are more likely to be female. We found an association between valgus SCFE and panhypopituitarism, as well as a potential association with Stickler syndrome. Valgus SCFE was associated with a significantly increased AP neck shaft angle, which could increase lateral shear forces on the epiphysis. When combined with other risk factors such as obesity, endocrine dysfunction, or collagen abnormalities, physeal failure and posterolateral displacement can occur. This deformity may make screw placement for in situ fixation technically difficult. We recommend thorough preoperative evaluation of the deformity followed by cautious percutaneous in situ fixation for mild-to-moderate valgus SCFE. Severe displacement may make screw placement difficult and increase the risk of neurovascular injury if done through a percutaneous or limited open approach. Satisfactory short-term results can be expected if surgical complications are avoided. References 1. Aronsson DD, Loder RT, Breur GJ, et al. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: current concepts. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006;14: 666–679. 2. Muller W. Eie engstehung von coxa valga durch epiphysenverschiebung. Beitr Z Klin Chir. 1926;137:148–164. 3. Shea KG, Apel PJ, Hutt NA, et al. Valgus slipped capital femoral epiphysis without posterior displacement: two case reports. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2007;16:201–203. 4. Loder RT, O’Donnell PW, Didelot WP, et al. Valgus slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006;26:594–600. 5. Yngve DA, Moulton DL, Evans EB. Valgus slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2005;14:172–176. 6. Lindaman LM, Canale ST, Beaty JH, et al. A fluoroscopic technique for determining the incision site for percutaneous fixation of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1991;11:397–401. 7. Lehmann CL, Arons RR, Loder RT, et al. The epidemiology of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an update. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006; 26:286–290. 8. Griffth MJ. Slipping of the capital femoral epiphysis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1976;58:34–42. 9. Nguyen D, Morrissy RT. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: rationale for the technique of percutaneous in situ fixation. J Pediatr Orthop. 1990;10:341–346. 10. Segal LS, Weitzel PP, Davidson RS. Valgus slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Fact or fiction? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;322:91–98. 11. Shanker VS, Hashemi-Nejad A, Catterall A, et al. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: is the displacement always posterior? J Pediatr Orthop B. 2000;9:119–121. 12. Kordelle J, Millis M, Jolesz FA, et al. Three-dimensional analysis of the proximal femur in patients with slipped capital femoral epiphysis based on computed tomography. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001;21:179–182. 13. National Center for Health Statistics, Center for Disease Control. Growth charts. 2000. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts. Accessed March 5, 2009. 14. Loder RT, Wittenberg B, DeSilva G. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis associated with endocrine disorders. J Pediatr Orthop. 1995;15:349–356. 15. Docquier PL, Mousny M, Jouret M, et al. Orthopaedic concerns in children with growth hormone therapy. Acta Orthop Belg. 2004; 70:299–305. 16. Rose PS, Ahn NU, Levy HP, et al. The hip in Stickler syndrome. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001;21:657–663. 17. Bennett JT, McMurray SW. Stickler syndrome. J Pediatr Orthop. 1990;10:760–763. 18. Barrios C, Blasco MA, Blasco MC, et al. Posterior sloping angle of the capital femoral physis: a predictor of bilaterality in slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2005;25:445–449. 19. Mirkopulos N, Weiner DS, Askew M. The evolving slope of the proximal femoral growth plate relationship to slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1988;8:268–273. 20. Pritchett JW, Perdue KD, Dona GA. The neck shaft-plate shaft angle in slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Orthop Rev. 1989;18: 1187–1192. 21. Gómez-Benito MJ, Moreo P, Pérez MA, et al. A damage model for the growth plate: application to the prediction of slipped capital epiphysis. J Biomech. 2007;40:3305–3313. 22. Fishkin Z, Armstrong DG, Shah H, et al. Proximal femoral physis shear in slipped capital femoral epiphysis—a finite element study. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006;26:291–294. 23. Litchman HM, Duffy J. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: factors affecting shear forces on the epiphyseal plate. J Pediatr Orthop. 1984;4:745–748. 24. Gekeler J. Radiology of adolescent slipped capital femoral epiphysis: measurement of epiphyseal angles and diagnosis. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2007;19:329–44. 25. Richolt JA, Hata N, Kikinis R, et al. Quantitative evaluation of angular measurements on plain radiographs in patients with slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a 3-dimensional analysis of computed tomography-based computer models of 46 femora. J Pediatr Orthop. 2008;28:291–296. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Outpatient Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation in Adolescent Patients: Long-Term Follow-up Study Natalie M. Best MD, Rick C. Sasso MD Indiana Spine Group and Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN Abstract Study Design: Data collected prospectively were reviewed for patients aged 19 years or younger who had a discectomy procedure without arthrodesis as an outpatient. Objective: The purpose of our article is to investigate the clinical outcome of discectomy on the lumbar spine in adolescent patients. Summary of Background Data: Standard discectomy has been proven to be effective in adult patients and can be done successfully as an outpatient. Controversy remains over the best surgical solution for adolescent patients with lumbar disc herniation. Some have advocated fusion along with discectomy. Methods: Standard discectomy has been proven to be effective in adult patients and can be done successfully as an outpatient. Controversy remains over the best surgical solution for adolescent patients with lumbar disc herniation. Some have advocated fusion along with discectomy. Results: No patients were hospitalized following the procedure. Two patients (6.5%) had complications. One had a postoperative hematoma, and the other had a recurrent herniation requiring a subsequent operation. Patient reported outcomes were favorable with 84.6% stating a good or better outcome. Conclusions: Results have confirmed favorable results following lumbar decompression without arthrodesis in adolescent patients for disc herniation. Few required subsequent operations or had recurrent herniations. Introduction Standard discectomy has been routinely performed by surgeons since it was first used by Mixter and Barr in 1934.1 Microlumbar discectomy (MLD) has since become a standard procedure to decompress the nerve resulting in relief of many of the common symptoms of leg pain, numbness, and weakness. Many studies have justified the use of discectomy without arthrodesis in adult patients for the treatment of lumbar disc herniations.2-11 However, there has been controversy over the procedure for lumbar herniation in the adolescent spine due to reports of poor results prompting some to recommend simultaneous arthrodesis.12-22 The incidence of lumbar herniation in pediatric patients is relatively rare, and the exact number has been debated. In adolescent patients presenting with back pain, 3-3.7% have been reported to have a disc herniation.12,14,17,20 Out of the total population of discectomy procedures, 0.4-3% have been reported to be on adolescent patients,12,15,16,20,21 and up to 15.4% in a study out of Japan.18 Although not common, the prevalence of lumbar disc herniation in adolescent patients remains, along with the difficulty in determining the correct course of action for these patients. This study aims to validate the efficacy of outpatient discectomy without arthrodesis in adolescent patients. Materials and Methods Patient Population From February, 1992 to August, 2001, 1377 decompression procedures on the posterior lumbar spine without fusion were retrospectively studied. Thirty-one of these procedures (2.3%) were performed on teenage patients 19 years of age or younger. All were performed by one spine surgeon at one of four facilities. The two main facilities were suburban teaching hospitals. The other facilities were suburban surgery centers. The demographics of the patients were largely suburban, mid-to large metropolitan US city residents. Patients were all diagnosed with herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP), which required the decompression procedure due to unsatisfactory non-operative treatment. Patients with structural abnormalities or previous instrumentation were excluded from the study. All procedures were performed on one level. Specifically, decompression procedures included microdiscectomy. Most patients had a unilateral hemilaminotomy. General anesthesia was used on all procedures. Each procedure was counted separately. There were no exclusions due to sex or medical condition. Data Collection A retrospective review was done on all patients by examining their medical records. A comprehensive study was done recording demographic information, diagnosis, preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score (recorded by the patient on a scale of 1-10 at their pre-operative appointment 3-4 weeks prior to surgery), level of surgery, and any complications including recurrence. In addition, it was noted whether the surgery was done as an inpatient and if so, for what reason. A procedure was considered outpatient if the patient left the hospital the same day of surgery, without being hospitalized. Patients were then contacted by either telephone or mail in 70 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Outpatient Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation in Adolescent Patients: Long-Term Follow-up Study (continued) order to complete an outcome questionnaire. This questionnaire was developed by the principal investigator and evaluated patient satisfaction with the procedure. An unbiased observer not involved in the surgical procedures made the follow-ups 2.5-7.8 years following their surgical procedure. A minimum follow-up of 2.5 years was chosen in order to capture all of the complications directly resulting from the surgery as well as to rate patient satisfaction with the procedure. Follow-up was first attempted by the telephone. If the patient could not be reached, a questionnaire was sent to the patient with the same wording as what was said over the telephone. VAS scores were done on a scale of 1-10, 10 described as the worst pain imaginable. On the mailed questionnaire, this was done by circling one number from 1-10. Statistical Methods Descriptive statistics (number, mean/frequency, standard deviation/percentage, and range) were provided for age, gender, previous surgery, and pre-operative VAS score for pain. Summary statistics were listed for both the total patient population and the patients with post-operative follow-up. Frequency tables were provided for each of the categorical variables (number of hospitalizations, number of inpatient conversions, number of complications, surgical outcome, and whether the procedure would be repeated). The primary outcome measurement in this study was conversion to an inpatient procedure. A Wilcoxon matched pairs test was used to test for the mean difference between pre-operative and post-operative VAS scores. Results Study Population In the final study population, 31 consecutive procedures on patients aged 19 or younger were included. Thirteen (42%) had a minimum 2.5 year follow-up. The demographic information for these patients is presented in Table 1. Eighteen (58%) of the total 31 patient population were male. Mean age was 17.2. No cases were worker’s compensation patients, and none were taking part in litigation in relationship to their injury. All procedures were done on one level. All 31 procedures were done on an outpatient basis. The average follow-up time was 4.6 years (range 2.57.8 years, SD=1.6). The demographic data for the follow-up population are in Table 2. Follow-up questionnaires were not completed due to incorrect contact information, inability to reach, or refusal to participate. Due to the age of the patients included in this population, it was difficult to find accurate contact information two years following their surgery. Many had moved away or likely changed names due to marriage. For the patients who did complete the questionnaire, 5 of the 13 (38.5%) were male; the mean age was 17.3. The overall demographic characteristics of all patients and patients with follow-ups are similar, except for a lower percentage of male patients in the follow-up population. Table 1. Demographic Information Total Population N Mean/ Frequency Std Dev/ Percent Minimum Maximum Age 31 17.2 1.6 14 19 Gender - Male 31 18 58.1% Previous Surgery 31 0 0.0% Pre-Operative VAS (Pain) 28 8.2 1.9 1 10 Table 2. Demographic Information in Follow-up Population Follow-Up Population N Mean/ Frequency Std Dev/ Percent Minimum Maximum Age 13 17.3 1.7 14 19 Gender - Male 13 5 38.5% Previous Surgery 13 0 0.0% Pre-Operative VAS (Pain) 11 8.7 1.4 5 10 71 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Outpatient Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation in Adolescent Patients: Long-Term Follow-up Study (continued) Table 3: Complication Rates, Patient Reported Outcomes Patients Age 14-19 N Frequency Percentage Inpatient Procedures 31 0 0.0% Unplanned Inpatient Procedures 31 0 0.0% Complications 31 2 6.5% Outcome of Good-Excellent 13 11 84.6% Would Repeat Procedure 13 10 76.9% Inpatient Procedures Reasons for hospitalization were identified from the operative notes, discharge summaries, and medical charts. Out of the 31 procedures, none were hospitalized. This information is detailed in Table 3. All of the patients reported that they were able to leave the same day as the procedure. Complications Two of the 31 patients (6.5%) had a complication. One patient had a recurrent HNP, and the other had a postoperative hematoma. The one patient who had a recurrent herniation (3.2%) underwent a revision laminectomy at the same level 4.5 years later. This was the only patient with a revision in this population. The complication rate is listed in Table 3. Patient Reported Outcome Surgical outcome was reported as excellent, very good, good, fair or poor by all 13 follow-up participants. Eleven of the13 patients (84.6%) stated that their surgical outcome was good or better, and one (7.7%) reported a poor outcome. When asked whether they would repeat the procedure again as an outpatient, 10 (76.9%) stated that they would. Based on patients who had both pre-operative and postoperative pain VAS scores, a calculated mean difference between these scores was determined. The mean difference was 6.8 ( p<.001). All patient-reported outcome results are detailed in Table 3. Discussion Recent studies have shown favorable results for discectomy in adolescent patients.16,17,20 However, the debate over whether a fusion is necessary in such patients remains. A 2008 study by Dewing reported that young, active patients do well following lumbar microdiscectomy without arthrodesis.3 Many returned to unrestricted active military duty and had high satisfaction with their outcome. Recurrent her- niation rate was 3% with four out of the six requiring additional surgery. Patients included in that particular study were between the ages of 19-46 years with a mean age of 27 years. In our study, the age was restricted to patients aged 14-19. Our recurrent HNP rate was 3.2%, which was similar to the above study with older patients. The age restriction for adolescent patients has not been consistent. When looking at the literature, there was no consensus on what the restriction should be. For this study, we chose the age of 19 years or younger. Due to the inconsistency of age limitation, it is difficult to compare incidence rates, and there has been some debate about what the true incidence is. In this study, 2.3% of all patients who underwent a discectomy were aged 19 years or younger. This is comparable to other published rates of 0.4% to 3%.12,15,16,20,21 Less than 1% of the total population were 16 years of age or younger, which is also within the published range. One difference in this study compared to many of the other studies on adolescent patients is that we excluded all patients with structural abnormalities and those who had previous instrumentation. This would likely affect the results as some patients might have required instrumentation and fusion as well as hospitalization following their procedure. In this population, all patients received only a microdiscectomy. In a study by Parisini, he showed worsened results in followup.21 One reason for a difference is that his study included 40 cases of 129 (31%) with structural abnormalities, and four patients (2.3%) had a fusion done. In long-term follow-up, 10% had reintervention. His study was also conducted on patients who had their surgery between the years of 1975-1991, which was earlier than all patients in our study. Operative techniques likely improved following that time period. Numerous studies have attempted to evaluate treatment of lumbar herniation in adolescent patients. Some studies have recommended conservative therapy while others have stated surgery is necessary in many of these patients due to conservative therapy resulting in unsatisfactory results. Recent studies have shown favorable results in lumbar surgery in adolescent patients for HNP.12,13,16-18,20,22 The debate has been over the necessity of fusing such patients. Most of the studies done have included patients who had instrumentation or fusion done. This has resulted in varying results. Some have recommended the use of fusion, and have shown better follow-up results with less reinterventions.12,16 Other studies have stated that fusion is not necessary and that laminotomy 72 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Outpatient Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation in Adolescent Patients: Long-Term Follow-up Study (continued) without fusion is the best option.17,18,20,22 In order to make a uniform study population, this study only included patients who did not have fusion or instrumentation. All patients were therefore able to have the procedure as an outpatient and did not necessitate hospitalization. One criticism of performing discectomy procedures on adolescent patients is the high incidence of reoperation and recurrent herniations. In this study, only one patient needed a revision. Higher rates of reoperations have been reported, ranging from 24-28% of all adolescent patients requiring a subsequent operation.12,13,20 Our experience has been more favorable with only one patient needing a revision. Certainly, these patients are susceptible to having a subsequent herniation, but with adequate follow-up, there does not appear to be worse results following discectomy alone without arthrodesis. To compare these results with results of the total population would better characterize whether adolescent patients should be treated similarly to adult patients. A study published by the above authors showed that microlumbar discectomy could be performed successfully and safely in patients on an outpatient basis.2 That study had a complication rate of 8.6% and a recurrent herniation rate of 6.4%. The rates in this study are lower. Although this study population is much smaller, patients did as well as the older patient population. And, the adolescent patients also had their operations performed on an outpatient basis with no readmissions or hospitalizations in the total population. Patients were satisfied with their operation and would have the operation again as an outpatient. For young patients with disc herniation, outpatient microlumbar discectomy without arthrodesis is a good surgical solution with a low complication rate and high patient satisfaction. Patients will continue to need follow-up for recurrent herniation or involvement of another level, but as these results show, patients do very well following this initial operation. 73 References 1. Mixter WJ, Barr JS. Rupture of the intervertebral disc with involvement of the spinal canal. N Engl J Med. 1934; 211:210-5. 2. Best NM, Sasso RC. Success and safety in outpatient microlumbar discectomy. J Spinal Disord. 2006; 19(5):334-7. 3. Dewing CB, Provencher MT, Riffenburgh RH, et al. The outcomes of lumbar microdiscectomy in a young, active population: correlation by herniation type and level. Spine. 2008; 33(1):33-8. 4. Findlay GF, Hall BI, Musa BS, et al. A 10-year follow-up of the outcome of lumbar microdiscectomy. Spine. 1998; 21:1168-71 5. Hansraj KK, Cammisa FP, O’Leary PF, et al. Decompressive surgery for typical lumbar stenosis. Clin Orthop. 2001; 384:10-7. 6. Iguchi T, Kurihara A, Nakayama I, et al. Minimum 10-year outcome of decompressive laminectomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. 2000; 25:1754-9. 7. Postacchini F. Management of herniation of the lumbar disc. J bone Joint Surg. Br 1999; 81:56776. 8. Silvers HR, Lewis PJ, Asch HL. Decompressive lumbar laminectomy for spinal stenosis. J Neurosurg. 1993; 78(5)695-701. 9. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial. JAMA. 2006; 296:2441-50. 10. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, et al. Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) observational cohort. JAMA. 2006; 296:2451-9. 11. Williams RW. Microlumbar discectomy: a conservative surgical approach to the virgin herniated disc. Spine. 1978; 3:175-82. 12. DeOrio JK, Bianco AJ. Lumbar disc excision in children and adolescents. J bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64:991-6. 13. Durham SR, Sun PP, Sutton LN. Surgically treated lumbar disc disease in the pediatric population: an outcome study. J Neurosurg. 2000; 92(1 suppl): 1-6. 14. Ebersold MJ, Quast LM, Bianco AJ Jr. Results of lumbar discectomy in the pediatric patient. J Neurosurg. 1987; 67(5):643-7. 15. Ewald W, Eberhardt C, Scholrling S, et al. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001; 83(Suppl 2):140-1. 16. Isihara H, Matsui H, Hirano N, et al. Lumbar intervertebral disc herniation in children less than 16 years of age: Long-term follow-up study of surgically managed cases. Spine. 1997; 22:2044-9. 17. Kumar R, Kumar V, Das NK, et al. Adolescent lumbar disc disease: findings and outcome. Childs Nerv Sys. 2007; 23:1295-9. 18. Kurihara A, Kataoka O. Lumbar disc herniation in children and adolescents: a review of 70 operated cases and their minimum 5-year follow-up studies. Spine. 1980; 5:443-51. 19. Mayer HM, Brock M. Percutaenous diskectomy in the treatment of pediatric lumbar disk disease. Surg Neuro.l 1988; 29:311-4. 20. Papagelopoulos PJ, Shaughnessy WJ, Ebersold MJ, et al. Long-term outcome of lumbar discectomy in children and adolescents sixteen years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998; 80:689-98. 21. Parisini P, Di Silvestre M, Greggi T, et al. Lumbar disc excision in children and adolescents. Spine. 2001; 26(18):1997-2000. 22. Shillito J Jr. Pediatric lumbar disc surgery: 20 patients under 15 years of age. Surg Neurol. 1996; 46(1):14-8. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Clinical Outcomes of Scaphoid and Triquetral Excision With Capitolunate Arthrodesis Versus Scaphoid Excision and Four-Corner Arthrodesis R. Glenn Gaston, MD, Jeffrey A. Greenberg, MD, Robert M. Baltera, MD, Alex Mih, MD, Hill Hastings, MD © 2009, The Journal of Hand Surgery - American, Volume 34:1407-1412, 2009. Reprinted with permission, Elsevier Limited, Oxford, United Kingdom Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes of scaphoid and triquetral excision combined with capitolunate arthrodesis versus 4-corner (capitate, hamate, lunate, triquetrum) intercarpal arthrodesis. Methods: We retrospectively identified 50 patients with scapholunate advanced collapse wrist changes who had 4-corner arthrodesis. Thirty-four patients were able to return and complete all follow-up evaluations. Patient demographics were similar between the 2 groups. Follow-up evaluation included radiographs, wrist range of motion (flexionextension, radial-ulnar deviation, and pronation-supination); grip strength; visual analog scale (VAS); and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Complications of nonunion, hardware migration, conversion to wrist arthrodesis or arthroplasty, and pisotriquetral arthritis were recorded. Results: Sixteen patients had capitolunate arthrodesis, and 18 patients had a 4-corner arthrodesis. There was no statistical difference in radial-ulnar deviation, pronation–supination, grip strength, VAS, or DASH scores between groups. There was a slight increase in flexion–extension in the 4-corner group. There were 2 nonunions in the 4-corner group and none in the capitolunate group. Five patients in the capitolunate group required screw removal secondary to migration. Three patients in the 4-corner group required a subsequent pisiform excision. Conclusions: Capitolunate arthrodesis compares favorably to 4-corner arthrodesis at an average 3-year follow-up in this series with respect to range of motion, grip strength, DASH scores, and VAS. Advantages of capitolunate arthrodesis include a lessened need for bone graft harvesting while maintaining a similarly low nonunion rate, easier reduction of the lunate following triquetral excision, and avoiding subsequent symptomatic pisotriquetral arthritis. Screw migration, however, remains a concern with this technique. (J Hand Surg 2009;34A:1407–1412. © 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand.) From OrthoCarolina, Charlotte, NC; Indiana Hand Center, Indianapolis, IN. Received for publication December 1, 2007; accepted in revised form May 27, 2009. No benefits in any form have been received or will be received related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article. Corresponding author: R. Glenn Gaston, MD, OrthoCarolina,1025 Morehead Med Dr., Suite 300, Charlotte, NC 28204; e-mail: [email protected]. 0363-5023/09/34A08-0005$36.00/0 doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.05.018 Type of Study/Level of Evidence: Therapeutic III. Key Words: Arthrodesis, capitolunate, fusion, limited, wrist. Traditionally, 4-corner arthrodesis has been the recommended motion-sparing procedure for scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC) wrist based on the large surface area available for bony union and the proven track record in published series. In Watson’s original article on the management of SLAC wrist, 3 of the reported 16 patients who had limited wrist arthrodesis had a capitolunate (CL) arthrodesis with results similar to the patients who had 4-corner arthrodesis.1 In an earlier work of Watson’s on limited wrist arthrodesis, 3 of 26 patients had CL arthrodesis with favorable results, including 1 patient who “rode 4,753 miles on a bike with hand brakes.”2 Capitolunate arthrodesis was first reported in 1966 for Kienböck’s disease,3 and early applications of this technique to the SLAC wrist were met with poor outcomes secondary to a high nonunion rate.4,5 The current 4-corner arthrodesis technique advocated by Watson arose from the desire to increase the surface area for bony union when compared to CL arthrodesis. Technical refinements of CL arthrodesis (specifically changing fixation from K-wires to compression screws) have greatly decreased the incidence of nonunion. The need for a bone graft is lessened or eliminated, and excising the triquetrum eases lunate reduction and eliminates pisotriquetral arthritis as a complication.6–8 Although recent studies have demonstrated improved efficacy of CL arthrodesis, we could find no previous articles that directly compared a single institution’s experience with CL arthrodesis to the traditional 4-corner arthrodesis. The null hypothesis of our study is that no difference exists in clinical outcomes of 4-corner and capitolunate arthrodesis. Materials and Methods Fifty-seven patients with SLAC deformities who had 4-corner or CL arthrodesis over the last 10 years were identified retrospectively at our institution. Following institutional review board approval, patients were contacted by phone and mail to participate in the study. Thirty-one patients had been treated with 4-corner arthrodesis, and 26 patients had capitolunate arthrodesis. Five patients who had 4-corner arthrodesis using a circle plate were excluded to avoid potential 74 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Clinical Outcomes of Scaphoid and Triquetral Excision With Capitolunate Arthrodesis Versus Scaphoid Excision and Four-Corner Arthrodesis (continued) Table 1. Patient Demographics Characteristic 4-Corner Arthrodesis Capitolunate Arthrodesis SD P Value 48 y (18-73) 57 y (48-86) 14.1 .04 Male gender 81% 88% Workers’ compensation 13% 28% 0.4 .10 Smoking history 44% 42% 0.51 .83 High demand 65% 75% 0.46 .47 Age (mean) (range) device-related confounding complications, as recent studies have found this technique to have a higher risk of complications than other techniques.9,10 One patient had died of unrelated causes, and 1 patient was incarcerated at the time of the study. The remaining 50 patients were contacted to participate, of whom 34 were able to return to the office and complete follow-up evaluations. The mean follow-up time of all patients was 35.5 months (range, 4–110 months). The mean time of follow-up was 31.0 months for the CL patients and 39.0 months for the 4-corner patients. This difference was not statistically significant (p = .45). Of the patients who completed follow-up, 16 had CL arthrodesis and 18 had 4-corner arthrodesis. The 2 cohorts were similar with respect to patient age, gender, workers’ compensation status, smoking history, and level of activity (Table 1). Objective measurements made by blinded, senior certified hand therapists included range of motion and grip strength. Subjective patient outcome measures used were the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. The incidence of fracture union, hardware migration, conversion to wrist arthrodesis or arthroplasty, and pisotriquetral arthritis were recorded. Union was determined based on physical examination findings of absence of tenderness directly over the arthrodesis site as well as radiographic evidence of bridging trabeculae at all arthrodesis sites. loidectomy (12 patients), posterior interosseous neurectomy (7 patients), carpal tunnel release (3 patients), cubital tunnel release (1 patient), and carpometacarpal arthroplasty (1 patient). Radial styloidectomy was performed in cases in which, with radial deviation, there was contact or notable tightness between the styloid and the trapezium. Autologous bone graft was harvested from the distal radius in 7 patients and from the iliac crest in 1 patient to augment the CL likelihood of fusion. In the remaining 8 patients, bone graft was not used. The same dorsal approach was used for patients having 4-corner arthrodesis. In all cases, the scaphoid was excised. The lunate extension was corrected, and the lunate, capitate, hamate and triquetrum were temporarily pinned with 1.14mm (0.45-in) K-wires. Next, their articular cartilage and subchondral bone was removed with rongeurs and curettes. Statistical analysis was performed using 2-tailed t-tests and Fisher’s exact tests with statistical software (SAS software, version 9.1, Carey, NC). Surgical Technique The surgical technique for CL arthrodesis was performed as described by Calandruccio et al., using Accutrak antegrade compression screws (Accumed Inc., Beaverton, OR) in all cases (Fig. 1).6 In the majority of cases, the triquetrum was excised; however, in 4 cases it was retained based on the treating surgeon’s discretion. We found triquetral resection to improve the ease of correcting lunate extension. A total of 24 additional procedures were performed in conjunction with CL arthrodesis in 15 of 16 patients including radial sty- 75 FIGURE 1: Wrist posteroanterior radiograph following CL arthrodesis. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Clinical Outcomes of Scaphoid and Triquetral Excision With Capitolunate Arthrodesis Versus Scaphoid Excision and Four-Corner Arthrodesis (continued) (1 patient). Autologous bone graft was used in all cases; it was harvested from the distal radius in 12 cases and from the iliac crest in 6 cases. Postoperative management was similar among all patients, consisting of a postoperative splint for 2 weeks followed by 1 month of cast immobilization. K-wires were only used in the 4-corner patients (9 of these) and they were removed after clinical and radiographic evidence of healing was present, typically around 3 months after surgery. Active and active-assisted range of motion exercise was instituted at the 6-week postoperative mark with passive range of motion and strengthening exercise commenced at 8 to 12 weeks based on radiographic and clinical determination of healing. Results FIGURE 2: Wrist posteroanterior radiograph following 4-corner arthrodesis. Hardware used for 4-corner arthrodesis included K-wires (9 patients), compression screws (6 patients, of whom 5 patients had compression screws (Accutrak) and 1 had 1.5-mm AO screws), and compression staples (1 patient) (Fig. 2). A total of 17 concomitant procedures were performed in 12 of the 18 patients. These included radial styloidectomy (11 patients), posterior interosseous nerve resection (4 patients), carpal tunnel release (1 patient), and carpometacarpal arthroplasty The results are summarized in Table 2. Wrist range of motion was similar between the 2 groups. The flexion–extension arc averaged 58% of the contralateral side for 4-corner patients and 48% of the contralateral side for CL patients. The mean difference between the 2 techniques in terms of flexion–extension arc was 10.3% (95% CI 0.1, 20.5) and was slightly statistically significant (p.0477). Radial-ulnar deviation averaged 70% of the contralateral side for 4-corner patients and 60% of the contralateral side for CL patients. The mean difference between techniques was 9.7% (95% CI 11.7, 31.1) and not statistically significant (p = .35). Pronation–supination arc averaged 98% of the contralateral side in patients with 4-corner arthrodesis and 99% of the contralateral side in patients with isolated CL arthrodesis. This small difference in pronation–supination means of 1.5% was not statistically significant (p = .56). Similarly, there was no statistically or clinically significant difference in grip strength between the 2 groups (p = .31, 95% CI -25.5, 8.3). Patients in the 4-corner cohort averaged 78% of the contralateral side, and the CL cohort averaged 70% of the contralateral side. Neither VAS nor DASH was statistically or clinically different between groups. With respect to the need for bone graft, only 50% of CL arthrodesis patients (8 of 16) had bone graft used, versus 100% of 4-corner patients (18 of 18), with a union rate of 100% in CL patients and 89% in 4-corner patients. This Table 2. Results Outcome Measure 4-Corner Arthrodesis Capitolunate Arthrodesis P Value 95% CI Flexion-extension 73˚ 63˚ .048 0.1, 20.5 Radial-ulnar deviation 38˚ 32˚ .35 11.7, 31.1 Pronation-supination 162˚ 167˚ .56 Grip strength 27 kg 23 kg .31 -25.5, 8.3 VAS 1.1 1.4 .54 -0.84, 1.7 DASH 22 17 .39 -17.1, 6.9 76 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Clinical Outcomes of Scaphoid and Triquetral Excision With Capitolunate Arthrodesis Versus Scaphoid Excision and Four-Corner Arthrodesis (continued) reliable means of treating SLAC wrist.4,6,7,11 Our treatment has come full circle since Watson’s original description of this condition. In his original article, he reports patients having CL arthrodesis. Over the years, 4-corner arthrodesis has become the limited wrist arthrodesis of choice for most surgeons because of the higher surface area available for fusion and the high nonunion rate associated with CL arthrodesis. It is now thought that this high incidence of nonunion in earlier studies was likely due to inadequate fixation techniques.4,5 Recent studies using compression techniques have demonstrated markedly lower nonunion rates that are equal to or lower than that reported for 4-corner arthrodesis.6,7 FIGURE 3: A Wrist posteroanterior radiograph following CL arthrodesis. B Wrist posteroanterior radiograph demonstrating proximal screw migration. difference in union rate was not statistically significant (p = .49). Of patients with nonunion, 1 had fixation with K-wires and 1 with compression screws. Five patients in the CL group required removal of their screws, with 2 patients requiring concomitant wrist arthrodesis. Figures 3A and 3B show the screws to be more prominent at later follow-up, with erosion into the lunate facet of the distal radius in Figure 3B. The radiographs are slightly projectionally different; however, these screws had been placed with direct visualization of them seated beneath the subchondral bone of the lunate at the time of surgery and were noted to protrude from the subchondral bone and be prominent at the time of revision surgery. Of the 4 patients who had retention of the triquetrum, 3 required screw removal secondary to migration. Three of the patients who required screw removal secondary to migration had bone graft used at the index procedure and 2 did not. All patients who had K-wires placed for 4-corner arthrodesis had the pins removed electively (8 patients). One patient in the 4-corner group required staple removal for dorsal impingement. Two patients in each group had a subsequent revision to total wrist arthrodesis, and 1 patient in the CL group had conversion to wrist arthroplasty. Three patients in the 4-corner cohort required a subsequent pisiform excision for pisotriquetral arthritis (3 of 18) versus none in the CL group but this was not statistically significant (p = .23). The overall number of revision surgeries, not including elective K-wire removal, was 5 of 16 patients for CL and 6 of 18 for 4-corner patients. The rate of revisions was not statistically significant between groups (p = .897). When our results are compared with previous reports on CL arthrodesis, several observations can be made.4,6 Range of motion and grip strength are similar between studies (Figs. 4, 5). The flexion–extension arc has been shown to be 53%, 48%, and 48% of the contralateral extremity by Kirschenbaum, Calandruccio, and our study, respectively.4,6 Radial-ulnar deviation has been found to be 60%, 45%, and 60%, respectively, by the same studies. Grip strength has been shown to be 61%, 70%, and 70% by the same authors, FIGURE 4: Comparison of wrist range of motion following CL arthrodesis. Discussion Numerous treatment options exist for the management of SLAC wrist. Recently, CL arthrodesis, combined with scaphoid and triquetral excision, has been advocated as a 77 FIGURE 5: Comparison of grip strength following CL arthrodesis. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Clinical Outcomes of Scaphoid and Triquetral Excision With Capitolunate Arthrodesis Versus Scaphoid Excision and Four-Corner Arthrodesis (continued) VAS. Advantages of 4-corner arthrodesis include a statistically significant improved arc of flexion–extension of 10° and avoidance of screw back-out. Advantages of CL arthrodesis include a lessened need for bone graft harvesting while maintaining a similarly low nonunion rate, achieving easier reduction of the lunate following triquetral excision, and avoiding subsequent symptomatic pisotriquetral arthritis. Triquetral excision can be particularly beneficial in aiding lunate reduction in the presence of a type II lunate, where colinearity of the lunate and capitate axes can be challenging to establish owing to the presence of a hamate facet on the lunate. FIGURE 6: Comparison of nonunion rates following CL arthrodesis. References respectively. However, a marked difference is seen with respect to nonunion rate (Fig. 6). Earlier reports by Krakauer and Kirschenbaum, using staples and K-wires, had nonunion rates of 50% and 33%, respectively.4,5 Using newer compression techniques, the rate has been lowered to 18%,6 8%,7 and ultimately 0% in this study. The nonunion rate for 4-corner arthrodesis was 11% in our study, which is consistent with the 4% to 18% rate reported in the literature.12,13 Although many of our outcome measurements had similar means between the 2 groups and were not statistically significant, the confidence intervals are large, reflecting the rather small sample size. For example, with respect to grip strength, the means of the 2 groups were 78% and 72% of the contralateral limb, a seemingly small difference. The 95% confidence intervals, however, were -25.5 to -8.6, meaning that a difference of up to 25% could theoretically exist between the 2 groups, although the difference was not found in our study. We found comparable results of CL fusions and 4-corner fusions at an average 3-year follow-up in this series with respect to range of motion, grip strength, DASH scores, and 1. Watson HK, Ballet FL. The SLAC wrist: scapholunate advanced collapse pattern of degenerative arthritis. J Hand Surg 1984;9A:358–365. 2. Watson HK, Goodman ML, Johnson TR. Limited wrist arthrodesis. Part II: Intercarpal and radiocarpal combinations. J Hand Surg 1981; 6:223–233. 3. Graner O, Lopes EI, Carvalho BC, Atlas S. Arthrodesis of the carpal bones in the treatment of Kienböck’s disease, painful unfused fractures of the navicular and lunate bones with avascular necrosis and old fracture-dislocations of carpal bones. J Bone Joint Surg 1966; 48A:767–774. 4. Kirschenbaum D, Schneider LH, Kirkpatrick WH, Adams DC, Cody RP. Scaphoid excision and capitolunate arthrodesis for radioscaphoid arthritis. J Hand Surg 1993;18A:780–785. 5. Krakauer J, Bishop A, Cooney W. Surgical treatment of scapholunate advanced collapse. J Hand Surg 1994;19A:751–759. 6. Calandruccio JH, Gelberman RH, Duncan SF, Goldfarb CA, Pae R, Gramig W. Capitolunate arthrodesis with scaphoid and triquetrum excision. J Hand Surg 2000;25A:824–832. 7. Goubier JN, Teboul F. Capitolunate arthrodesis with compression screws. Tech Hand Upper Extrem Surg 2007;11:24 –28. 8. Gaston RG, Lourie GM, Floyd WE, Swick M. Pisotriquetral dysfunction following limited and total wrist arthrodesis. J Hand Surg 2007;32A:1348–1355. 9. Vance MC, Hernandez JD, Didonna ML, Stern PJ. Complications and outcome of four corner arthrodesis: circular plate fixation versus traditional techniques. J Hand Surg 2005;30A:1122– 1127. 10. Shindle MK, Burton KJ, Weiland AJ, Domb BG, Wolfe SW. Complications of circular plate fixation for four corner arthrodesis. J Hand Surg 2007;32B:50 –53. 11. Duteille F, Rehart S, Dautel G, Merle M. Capitolunate arthrodesis: the lateral approach. Tech Hand Upper Extrem Surg 2001;5:212–215. 12. Seigel JM, Ruby LK. A critical look at intercarpal arthrodesis: review of the literature. J Hand Surg 1996;21A:717–722. 13. Wyrick JD, Stern PJ, Kiefhaber TR. Motion-preserving procedures in the treatment of scapholunate advanced collapse wrist: proximal row carpectomy versus four-corner arthrodesis. J Hand Surg 1995; 20A:965–970. 78 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing a Semitendinosis Graft and Titanium Flip Button Tension Band Construct Vivek Agrawal, MD The Shoulder Center, PC, Carmel, IN Correspondence: Vivek Agrawal MD The Shoulder Center, PC 12188-A North Meridian Street Suite 310 Carmel, IN 46032-4406 [email protected] (317) 802-9686 Introduction The surgical treatment of symptomatic complete or high grade acromioclavicular (AC) joint disruptions remains controversial with more than 60 published techniques.1 Concerns regarding strength of initial fixation, cyclic failure, and inconsistent outcomes with techniques similar to the coracoacromial (CA) ligament transfer first described by Weaver and Dunn have been reported.2-5 Failure due to synthetic material abrasion at the clavicle or coracoid as well as cyclic failure of the synthetic material is a concern with techniques utilizing a synthetic material construct alone.6, 7 Excellent biomechanical strength and clinical outcomes have been recently reported with tendon graft coracoclavicular (CC) reconstruction.8-10 This paper describes an arthroscopic technique that is equally suitable to acute or chronic high grade AC joint disruptions as well as previously failed CC reconstructions. A tension band construct is created utilizing a single titanium flip button device placed at the inferior cortex of the coracoid (#7 PE ZipLoop Extended ToggleLoc; Biomet. Warsaw, IN) combined with a Semitendinosis graft. Along with offering the benefits of an arthroscopic approach, the technique also offers the additional advantage of placing no hardware at the superior aspect of the clavicle. Figure 1a: Patient with symptomatic Right Grade IV AC Separation. Figure 1b: Same patient positioned in the semi-lateral decubitus position with portal sites and clavicle incision outlined. Surgical Technique the coracoid is then performed similar to the manner first described by Wolf.11 After initially learning an arthroscopic AC reconstruction technique in August 2000, as described by Wolf,11 we have gradually modified our technique both to address potential biomechanical and clinical limitations and to formulate the most reliable technique with inherent applicability for the broadest possible patient population. The inferior and lateral aspect of the coracoid process is clearly visualized followed by a 1.5cm incision in Langer’s lines at the superior aspect of the clavicle (3cm incision if also performing a distal clavicle resection). Subcutaneous dissection is performed followed by subperiosteal elevation of soft tissues to the anterior and posterior margins of the clavicle. The periosteum anterior and inferior to the clavicle is elevated to allow instrument passage to the coracoid. The clavicular and coracoid tunnels are created utilizing an arthroscopic ACL guide and a 2.4mm drill point guide wire as previously described.11 (Figure 2) A 4.5mm cannulated drill is utilized over the initial guide wire to create a 4.5mm tunnel in the clavicle and coracoids. (Figure 3) The clavicular tunnel is placed approximately 35mm proximal to the distal clavicle, placing it between the trapezoid and conoid ligament insertions.13, 14 We perform all shoulder arthroscopy procedures in the modified lateral decubitus position utilizing 6-10 pounds of counter-traction to suspend the arm. (Figure 1) For patients that prefer an autograft, we recommend harvesting the ipsilateral Semitendinosis graft with the patient initially in the supine position.12 Glenohumeral and subacromial arthroscopy for diagnosis and treatment is initially performed as required for each unique patient circumstance. We prefer to address all other concurrent pathology prior to proceeding with the CC reconstruction. Visualization of the inferior aspect of 79 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing a Semitendinosis Graft and Titanium Flip Button Tension Band Construct (continued) The guide wire is removed leaving the cannulated drill in place. After a pulling suture is passed through the cannulated drill, superior to sub-coracoid, and retrieved via the anterior cannula, the pulling suture is tied to the ToggleLoc passing suture. The ToggleLoc device has two adjustable ZipLoops, a passing suture loop, and a “zip suture” loop. (Figure 4) With counter traction applied to the ZipLoops to ensure the ToggleLoc does not flip prematurely, the ToggleLoc device is pulled down through the clavicle and coracoid tunnels until it is clearly visualized inferior to the coracoids. (Figure 5) The ToggleLoc device is now allowed to flip and engage the inferior coracoids. (Figure 6) Figure 4: #7 PE ZipLoop Extended ToggleLoc; Biomet. Warsaw, IN. Figure 2: Sawbones model demonstrating placement of 2.4mm drill point guide wire. Figure 3: Arthroscopic view of 4.5mm cannulated drill over the initial guide wire at inferior aspect of coracoid. The “zip suture” loop and one of the ZipLoops is retrieved anterior to the clavicle leaving one ZipLoop within the clavicular tunnel and one anterior to the clavicle. (Figure 7) The Semitendinosis graft is passed through the anterior ZipLoop to create two equal limbs. The appropriate limb of the “zip suture” loop is pulled to shorten this anterior ZipLoop, pulling the Semitendinosis graft to the coracoid tunnel. The ToggleLoc can be rotated or adjusted under direct visualization, utilizing a probe via the anterior cannula, prior to fully reducing the anterior ZipLoop. The anterior ZipLoop is reduced fully, firmly approximating the midpoint of the Semitendinosis graft to the superior aspect of the coracoid and fixing the position of the ToggleLoc at the inferior coracoids. (Figure 8) One limb of the Semitendinosis graft is now passed posterior to the clavicle and medial to the clavicular tunnel to mimic the conoid ligament. With one limb of the Semitendinosis posterior to the clavicle and the other anterior, the limbs are passed through the remaining ZipLoop in the clavicle tunnel. A surgeon’s knot is utilized to tie the 80 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing a Semitendinosis Graft and Titanium Flip Button Tension Band Construct (continued) Figure 5a: ToggleLoc device is pulled down through the clavicle and coracoid tunnels. Figure 5b: ToggleLoc device engaged at inferior aspect of coracoid. The passing suture is removed from the ToggleLoc device. Next, the two limbs of “zip suture” are separated and tied, sliding the knot to the superior aspect of the coracoid utilizing standard arthroscopic techniques. The excess ends of the graft are trimmed and the incision is closed in layers (fascia, subcutaneous, skin). The portals are closed with simple sutures. The patient wears a simple sling for one month postoperatively, performing Codman and supine range of motion exercises daily. Active motion and activities are gradually increased with most patients returning to all regular activities at 12-16 weeks postoperatively. We encourage patients to wait at least 6 months to return to contact sports (football, rugby, hockey, etc.) and Olympic style lifts (Dead lift, Snatch, Clean and Jerk). 15 Discussion Figure 6: Arthroscopic view of ToggleLoc device engaged at inferior aspect of coracoid. two limbs of the graft over the clavicle while the clavicle is held in a reduced position with the arm traction released. A running locking suture (MaxBraid, Biomet) is utilized to suture the two limbs together. The “zip suture” is now pulled to shorten the clavicular ZipLoop until it is shortened as much as possible. This ZipLoop compresses the graft to the superior aspect of the clavicle, while also creating a construct to maintain tension in the graft. (Figure 9) 81 Of the multiple techniques previously described for high grade AC disruptions, arthroscopic CC reconstruction has only been described recently.11, 16-21 Although many techniques focus on transfer of the CA ligament with or without augmentation, we prefer to avoid utilizing the CA ligament because the CA ligament may play an important role in shoulder function.5 Strength of initial fixation, cyclic failure, and inconsistent outcomes with techniques similar to the coracoacromial CA ligament transfer first described by Weaver and Dunn are also of potential concern.3-6, 9, 22 Techniques utilizing only a synthetic material or rigid fixation to maintain the relationship between the clavicle and coracoid are inherently reliant on the biologic healing Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing a Semitendinosis Graft and Titanium Flip Button Tension Band Construct (continued) Figure 7: The “zip suture” loop and one of the ZipLoops is retrieved anterior to the clavicle leaving one ZipLoop within the clavicular tunnel and one anterior to the clavicle. Figure 8: The anterior ZipLoop is reduced fully, firmly approximating the midpoint of the Semitendinosis graft to the superior aspect of the coracoid and fixing the position of the ToggleLoc at the inferior coracoid. potential of the patient’s disrupted CC ligaments and may not be appropriate for chronic AC disruptions or previously failed reconstructions. The biomechanical and functional limitations of these techniques have also been studied.4, 6, 7, 23 Recent work focusing on reconstruction of the CC ligaments with biologic tissue (allograft or autograft) has shown promising biomechanical and clinical results.8, 10, 13, 20, 22, 24, 25 Our technique builds on and differs from previously reported open and arthroscopic biologic CC reconstruction techniques: • Placing the graft at the superior cortex of the coracoid more accurately reproduces the anatomic location of the native CC ligaments and avoids the possibility of anterior clavicle translation with passage of the graft around the clavicle.14, 28, 29 • An arthroscopic technique potentially offers reduced morbidity, improved cosmesis, and the ability to address concurrent shoulder pathology.11, 16 • The lack of superior hardware placement avoids the potential for hardware loosening, irritation, or prominence. • A single 4.5mm tunnel in the clavicle and coracoid instead of larger or multiple tunnels help reduce the risk of subsequent fracture.26, 27 • The continuous suture loops placed through the coracoid and clavicle provide uniform compression of the graft at the coracoid and clavicle. Rather than relieve load from the graft, they create a tension band construct to maintain graft tension and position. • The risk of neurovascular injury to structures medial to the coracoid is reduced as no dissection medial to the coracoid is required. • The placement of a single drill hole in the clavicle at 35mm medially allows the two limbs of the graft to reproduce the anatomic course and function of the Trapezoid and Conoid ligaments.14 • The #7 Adjustable Loop ToggleLoc Device has an average peak load of 1664.1N, 374.1lbs with 0mm cyclic loading slippage under testing resulting in the highly desirable likelihood of failure of the Semitendinosis graft rather than at the points of fixation similar to the open technique described by Lee et al (Biomet Sports Medicine, data on file).9 • Minimal preparation of the graft is required reducing operative time. • The technique utilizes readily available implants and instruments, familiar to many arthroscopic surgeons, making it relatively simple to learn. 82 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing a Semitendinosis Graft and Titanium Flip Button Tension Band Construct (continued) patients prospectively for longer term outcomes. In summary, we present a strong and reliable arthroscopic technique for anatomic CC reconstruction as an option for significantly symptomatic high grade acute and chronic AC disruptions as well as failed CC reconstructions. References Figure 9a: Graft passed and tied through clavicular ZipLoop. Figure 9b: Ziploops fully reduced fixing tension and position of graft. Figure 9c: Postoperative radiograph of arthroscopic CC reconstruction technique. As of January 2010, we have performed the technique in six patients. All patients had high grade AC disruptions with disabling symptoms secondary to high energy injuries (motor vehicle accident, recreational vehicle accident, bicycle accident, contact sports, or industrial accident). All six patients also had concurrent shoulder pathology treated arthroscopically at the same operation (rotator cuff tear-2, anterior instability-1, posterior instability-1, SLAP Lesion-4) highlighting the benefits and advantages of an arthroscopic approach. With an admittedly short follow-up, we have had no complications or failures to date and find the technique highly satisfactory for our patients. We continue to follow our 83 1. Rockwood CAJ, Williams, G.R. Jr., Young, D.C. Disorders of the acromioclavicular joint. In: Rockwood CAJ, Matsen, F.A. III, ed. The Shoulder. 2 ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1998:483553. 2. Weaver JK, Dunn HK. Treatment of acromioclavicular injuries, especially complete acromioclavicular separation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Sep 1972; 54(6):1187-1194. 3. Harris RI, Wallace AL, Harper GD, Goldberg JA, Sonnabend DH, Walsh WR. Structural properties of the intact and the reconstructed coracoclavicular ligament complex. Am J Sports Med. Jan-Feb 2000; 28(1):103-108. 4. Jari R, Costic RS, Rodosky MW, Debski RE. Biomechanical function of surgical procedures for acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Arthroscopy. Mar 2004; 20(3):237-245. 5. Lee TQ, Black AD, Tibone JE, McMahon PJ. Release of the coracoacromial ligament can lead to glenohumeral laxity: a biomechanical study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. Jan-Feb 2001; 10(1):6872. 6. Kippe MA, Demetropoulos CK, Baker KC, Jurist KA, Guettler JH. Failure of coracoclavicular artificial graft reconstructions from repetitive rotation. Arthroscopy. Sep 2009; 25(9):975-982. 7. Lim YW, Sood A, van Riet RP, Bain GI. Acromioclavicular Joint Reduction, Repair and Reconstruction Using Metallic Buttons-Early Results and Complications. Techniques in Shoulder & Elbow Surgery. 2007; 8(4):213-221 8. Nicholas SJ, Lee SJ, Mullaney MJ, Tyler TF, McHugh MP. Clinical outcomes of coracoclavicular ligament reconstructions using tendon grafts. Am J Sports Med. Nov 2007; 35(11):1912-1917. 9. Lee SJ, Nicholas SJ, Akizuki KH, McHugh MP, Kremenic IJ, Ben-Avi S. Reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments with tendon grafts: a comparative biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med. Sep-Oct 2003; 31(5):648-655. 10. Jones HP, Lemos MJ, Schepsis AA. Salvage of failed acromioclavicular joint reconstruction using autogenous semitendinosus tendon from the knee. Surgical technique and case report. Am J Sports Med. Mar-Apr 2001; 29(2):234-237. 11. Wolf EM, Pennington WT. Arthroscopic reconstruction for acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Arthroscopy. May 2001; 17(5):558-563. 12. Wolf EM. Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: TransFix Technique. In: Chow JCY, ed. Advanced Arthroscopy. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2001:449-450. 13. Mazzocca AD, Santangelo SA, Johnson ST, Rios CG, Dumonski ML, Arciero RA. A biomechanical evaluation of an anatomical coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. Feb 2006; 34(2):236-246. 14. Rios CG, Arciero RA, Mazzocca AD. Anatomy of the clavicle and coracoid process for reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments. Am J Sports Med. May 2007; 35(5):811-817. 15. Clayer M, Slavotinek J, Krishnan J. The results of coraco-clavicular slings for acromioclavicular dislocation. Aust N Z J Surg. Jun 1997;.67(6):343-346. 16. Laurent L, Gloria PB, Jan L. Arthroscopic Treatment of Acute and Chronic Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation. Arthroscopy. 2005; 21:8(1017):e1-e8. 17. Hosseini H, Friedmann S, Troger M, Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner JD. Arthroscopic reconstruction of chronic AC joint dislocations by transposition of the coracoacromial ligament augmented by the Tight Rope device: a technical note. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. Jan 2009; 17(1):92-97. 18. Tomlinson DP, Altchek DW, Davila J, Cordasco FA. A modified technique of arthroscopically assisted AC joint reconstruction and preliminary results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. Mar 2008; 466(3):639-645. 19. Scheibel M, Ifesanya A, Pauly S, Haas NP. Arthroscopically assisted coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction for chronic acromioclavicular joint instability. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. Nov 2008; 128(11):1327-1333. 20. Pennington WT, Hergan DJ, Bartz BA. Arthroscopic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction using biologic and suture fixation. Arthroscopy. Jul 2007; 23(7):785 e781-787. 21. Wolf EM, Fragomen, A.T. Arthroscopic reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments for acromioclavicular joint separations. Oper Tech Sports Med. 2004; 12:49-55. 22. Lee SJ, Keefer EP, McHugh MP, et al. Cyclical loading of coracoclavicular ligament reconstructions: a comparative biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med. Oct 2008; 36(10):19901997. 23. Costic RS, Labriola JE, Rodosky MW, Debski RE. Biomechanical rationale for development of anatomical reconstructions of coracoclavicular ligaments after complete acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Am J Sports Med. Dec 2004; 32(8):1929-1936. 24. Wellmann M, Kempka JP, Schanz S, et al. Coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction: biomechanical comparison of tendon graft repairs to a synthetic double bundle augmentation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. May 2009; 17(5):521-528. 25. Grutter PW, Petersen SA. Anatomical acromioclavicular ligament reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison of reconstructive techniques of the acromioclavicular joint. Am J Sports Med. Nov 2005; 33(11):1723-1728. 26. Nalla RK, Stolken JS, Kinney JH, Ritchie RO. Fracture in human cortical bone: local fracture criteria and toughening mechanisms. J Biomech. Jul 2005; 38(7):1517-1525. 27. McBroom RJ, Cheal EJ, Hayes WC. Strength reductions from metastatic cortical defects in long bones. J Orthop Res. 1988; 6(3):369-378. 28. Salzmann GM, Paul J, Sandmann GH, Imhoff AB, Schottle PB. The coracoidal insertion of the coracoclavicular ligaments: an anatomic study. Am J Sports Med. Dec 2008; 36(12):23922397. 29. Morrison DS, Lemos MJ. Acromioclavicular separation. Reconstruction using synthetic loop augmentation. Am J Sports Med. Jan-Feb 1995; 23(1):105-110. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management Daniel Wurtz M.D. and Judd Cummings M.D. Section of Orthopaedic Oncology Indiana University Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Introduction Advances in the systemic treatment of patients with metastatic carcinoma and multiple myeloma have improved survival rates in patients with these diseases. Consequently, metastatic involvement of the skeleton has become more common as patient lives are prolonged, and they essentially live with various degrees of systemic disease. While these patients are rarely cured of their disease once metastatic, they require a multidisciplinary team approach to optimize treatment. The orthopaedic surgeon is an integral member of this team. Our role in this scenario isn’t to affect a cure, but to work with other members of the team to reduce pain and improve the quality of life in these patients. This discussion will provide some guidelines to orthopaedic surgeons for diagnosis and surgical management of patients with extremity metastases. bone disease to orthopaedic surgeons for immediate care such as fracture fixation. Patients with destructive bone tumors without a diagnosis however need further work-up for a specific diagnosis and determination of extent of disease (staging) before surgical treatment is rendered. Above all, the orthopaedic surgeon should resist the temptation for early operative intervention to stabilize an involved bone until sufficient work-up has been completed to confirm a diagnosis of metastatic disease. This work-up may include a biopsy of the bone lesion before a surgery is performed that may inadvertently contaminate anatomic compartments or neurovascular structures and prevent margin-free surgical resection if needed for cure. This caution and thoroughness on the part of the orthopaedic surgeon will help prevent inappropriate surgical intervention with the unfortunate consequences of compromised patient outcomes and avoidable litigation. Current Concepts Evaluation The approach to the work-up and treatment of undiagnosed destructive bone lesions has been confusing to both patients and clinicians. Much of the published literature on this topic covers the “how to’s” of management but fails to elaborate on the logic behind the accepted treatment approach. The diagnostic possibilities for bone lesions with radiographic evidence of bone destruction include benign aggressive, primary malignant (with or without distant metastatic disease), and metastatic from carcinoma or myeloma. The implications for patient survival for each of these categories of disease are vastly dissimilar, and each should be handled differently with its own algorithm. Obviously benign- aggressive (noncancerous) tumors such as giant cell tumor of bone, aneurysmal bone cyst, and chondroblastoma to name a few may cause local bone destruction but are not life threatening. They are usually treated with intralesional curettage without need for aggressive margin-free surgery and systemic treatment is not needed. Work-up of patients with known or suspected metastatic bone disease (MBD) begins with a thorough history and physical exam. Personal or family history of carcinoma in any patient with musculoskeletal pain should alert the physician to the possibility of metastatic disease. Lung, thyroid, breast, prostate, and renal carcinomas account for roughly 80% of skeletal metastases.1 Patients typically complain of deep, aching pain experienced both at rest and with activity. If a lesion is present at or near a joint, pain can often be elicited with range of motion testing. Primary malignant bone tumors, on the other hand, are cancers. Those that are high grade have a significant risk for systemic metastasis. Prompt surgical treatment is needed to remove these malignancies with surgical margins free of tumor. This surgery is performed as part of an overall approach to cure these patients. Patients with metastatic carcinoma and multiple myeloma are unlikely to be cured of their disease. These cancers have already spread beyond their site of origin. Systemic treatment for these patients is rendered to achieve the goals of prolonging survival rather than cure. Understandably, our role as orthopaedic surgeons as members of the treatment team is to help with efforts for prolonging survival, controlling pain, and preserving function. Medical oncologists, emergency room physicians, and other clinicians frequently refer patients with known diagnoses of metastatic Laboratory studies can be a useful adjunct in patient evaluation. While rarely diagnostic of the primary carcinoma, they can help rule out other potential sources for pain or radiographic abnormality such as infection or diffuse marrow abnormalities (leukemia, myeloma). Routine blood work should include CBC with differential, chemistry panel including ionized calcium and alkaline phosphatase, and CRP / sedimentation rate (ESR). Serum protein electrophoresis and PSA levels should be checked especially in cases of metastatic disease of unknown origin. Tumor serum markers such as CEA, AFP, CA-125 are not routinely used due to their lack of specificity. Imaging studies are crucial to both diagnosis and treatment planning for patients with MBD. Plain radiographs provide an abundance of information, and when combined with laboratory and clinical exam findings should allow the orthopedists to establish an accurate differential diagnosis in the majority of cases. Metastatic lesions often appear as a lucent or radiolytic lesion with ill-defined borders. Surrounding bone sclerosis or periosteal reaction is uncommon. Soft tissue masses are seen infrequently. Some carcinomas, such as breast and prostate, can present with a mixed or blastic pattern of bone involvement. Overall, the spine is the most 84 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management (continued) frequent site of MBD followed by the pelvis and long bones, particularly the proximal femur and humerus. Acral metastases or metastatic lesions distal to the elbow or knee are rare and usually herald a poor prognosis. Lung and kidney carcinoma are the most commonly seen cancers metastasizing to these distant sites. If a patient is suspected of having MBD by initial history, physical exam and imaging studies, whole body bone scans are useful to gauge extent of disease. Previously asymptomatic lesions can be diagnosed, monitored, and treated appropriately. Computed tomography (CT) imaging is useful to evaluate lesions in the spine and pelvis where complex anatomical structures are better visualized in three dimensions. Furthermore, CT scanning can assist in surgical planning where resection and arthroplasty reconstruction is being considered such as the hip or proximal humerus. Finally, CT scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis are useful in detecting a primary cancer when the patient has a presumed metastatic lesion of unknown origin. (Figure 1 A, B) Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has limited utility for MBD. Except in cases with soft tissue extension or spinal lesions with questionable cord or nerve root involvement, MRI is not routinely indicated. Management Key Principles Management of MBD involves both operative and nonoperative measures. Ideally patients will be monitored by both A oncology and orthopedic specialists. Careful consideration of the patient’s prognosis and expected survival should be made to avoid placing a terminally ill patient at unnecessary surgical risk. This prognosis for survival depends to a large extent upon the specific tissue diagnosis of origin for metastatic carcinoma and the extent or stage of disease. Keep in mind that patients with metastatic carcinoma from breast and prostate may survive their disease for many years. A collaborative effort between the orthopaedic surgeon and the medical oncologist is necessary in most cases for a meaningful assessment of the patient overall prognosis. Unfortunately, we as orthopaedic surgeons often discuss our recommendations, but do not give adequate time to patients with terminal illnesses to understand their expectations and desires for continued treatment. Understandably, we cannot always predict the shortterm outcome of patients with MBD, but good communication between physicians and patients will help to avoid either over or under treatment. The assessment of impending pathologic fracture risk especially for weight-bearing long bones is crucial to identify those patients who would benefit from prophylactic stabilization. Scoring systems, while imperfect, have been published to aid in the prediction of fracture risk.2 In general, those patients with destruction in a lower extremity bone, especially about the hip, with a radiolytic process that are painful with weight bearing are at highest risk.3 For those patients with a pathologic fracture due to metastatic disease, any fixation construct or reconstruction should allow the patient to bear weight immediately or have B Figure 1 (A) A 58-year-old man presented with left shoulder and arm pain without a history of trauma. This AP radiograph shows a pathologic fracture of the proximal humerus with an unknown primary malignancy. (B) A subsequent work-up of this patient with an axial CT scan of the abdomen shows the likely source of metastatic disease is from a renal carcinoma of the left kidney. 85 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management (continued) functional use of the involved extremity without restriction in the immediate post-operative period. For this reason, fixation should be as rigid and durable as possible. Usually this goal is achieved best with careful planning for fixation or reconstruction that will survive much longer than the predicted longevity of the patient. Protective fixation for the entire involved bone should be considered. The number of interlocking screws in medullary nails should be maximized to prevent the occurrence of a painful nonunion. Often cement fixation should be considered to augment fixation particularly when large destructive tumor voids are present. The principles of traumatic (non-pathologic) fracture treatment with fixation do not apply to those that are pathologic. Unlike traumatic fractures, pathologic fractures due to metastatic disease usually do not heal. Fracture non-unions due to a hostile bone environment secondary to cancer, radiation, or chemotherapy are the rule rather than the exception. Any patient with metastatic disease of unknown origin or diagnosed primary carcinoma with suspected skeletal metastasis requires biopsy to establish a diagnosis of metastatic carcinoma. In many cases, a biopsy can typically be done at the time of definitive surgical management with a frozen section analysis of tissue obtained during the same anesthetic. The biopsy should be performed in a manner consistent with recommended biopsy technique to avoid unnecessary contamination in the event the diagnosis proves to be a primary malignant bone tumor. If the pathologist cannot confirm metastatic disease or if the tissue is not optimal A for frozen section analysis, then the surgeon should provide enough representative tissue for permanent section analysis and delay any further surgery until a definitive diagnosis is confirmed. This approach of confirming a suspected carcinoma or myeloma immediately prior to definitive fixation requires the availability of a competent pathologist, and ideally, the proximity of the lab facility to prepare this tissue in a timely fashion. Proceeding with caution and the use of a frozen section will help prevent the unfortunate instrumentation of a primary malignant bone tumor. (Figure 2 A, B, C) Once MBD has been confirmed, surgical treatment can be initiated. Post-operative adjuvant radiation treatment of the metastatic lesion should be considered in all patients. Radiation therapy should be administered after surgery, not before, to avoid unnecessary wound healing complications. Consultation with the radiation oncologist is suggested. Other nonsurgical modalities are available for treatment of patients with MBD. Pain control efforts supported by a pain management specialist may have a significant positive impact on quality of life. Bisphosphonates, radiopharmaceuticals, chemotherapy or hormonal therapies are often used depending on primary diagnosis and patient co-morbidities. These treatment modalities should be continually managed by the medical oncology service in consultation with the orthopaedic surgeon. B C Figure 2 Postoperative radiograph (A) taken after internal fixation of an impending pathologic fracture of the proximal femur. Preoperative staging studies were not performed. A subsequent biopsy confirmed chondrosarcoma rather than metastatic bone disease and a resection was performed. (B) Resected proximal femur with initial fixation hardware. (C) Opened specimen shows chondroid tissue consistent with chondrosarcoma. 86 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management (continued) A B C Figure 3 AP radiograph (A) of a 72-year-old with left hip pain. This study shows a lucency in the left acetabulum. (B) An axial CT scan confirms a radiolytic left acetabulum lesion consistent with metastatic disease. Further staging studies confirmed metastatic lung carcinoma. (C) A total hip arthroplasty was performed with an acetabular reconstruction using threaded pins and cement fixation. Recommended Surgical Management by Anatomic Region Intertrochanteric Region Lower Extremity Femoral Head / Neck While the spine is the most common site of MBD, lesions in the pelvis and lower extremities are often more debilitating. These areas are subjected to high physiologic stresses and response to radiation therapy is less predictable. Femoral head and neck lesions rarely heal and generally require resection and arthroplasty reconstruction.4 If the patient’s general heath permits, hemi-arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty is recommended depending on the presence or absence of acetabular disease and/or arthritic changes. A CT scan of the pelvis is particularly useful in this setting to evaluate the hip joint, as acetabular MBD can go unrecognized in a large percentage of patients.5 The decision to augment acetabular fixation with screws or cement should be dictated by overall bone quality and extent of metastatic disease. (Figure 3 A, B, C) On the femoral side, cement fixation of the stem is generally recommended. This allows for immediate full weightbearing and eliminates the need for biologic fixation that may be significantly impaired by adjuvant radiation treatment or metastatic disease. (Figure 4 A, B) Whether to use a long or conventional length stem is controversial and continues to be debated. Proponents argue that long stemmed prosthesis offer the advantage of prophylactically stabilizing the entire femur in the event of disease progression. Those opposed to this concept argue that the risk of pulmonary complications from a large cement load outweigh the theoretic benefit of a long stem in the absence of documented non-contiguous metastatic lesions. Regardless of the stem chosen, serious consideration should be given to cementing techniques that avoid pressurization so as to avoid potentially life threatening pulmonary complications. 87 Both impending and realized fractures in this location can be treated with a variety of techniques including open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), use of an intramedullary device, or arthroplasty. The appropriate choice of technique depends on overall patient health and life expectancy, size of the lesion, amount of fracture displacement, condition of the hip joint, and experience of the treating surgeon. Use of a dynamic hip screw and side plate (ORIF) requires medial cortical integrity to be a viable option. Debate continues regarding the issue of tumor debulking and cement A B Figure 4 AP radiograph (A) of a patient with right hip pain showing an impending pathologic fracture of the femoral neck. (B) Reconstruction of the same patient using a cemented long stem hemiarthroplasty. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management (continued) Subtrochanteric Region Compressive forces in this region can approximate four to six times body weight. Both ORIF techniques such as dynamic hip screws or fixed angle devices and intramedullary nails can be used for both impending and realized fractures. Intramedullary nails have better success rates with the advantages cited previously. Arthroplasty is reserved for cases of extensive bone loss or as salvage procedures for failed previous surgery. Proximal femur replacing components are commonly used and require either greater trochanteric osteotomy or direct abductor repair. Femoral Diaphysis A B Figure 5 AP (A) and lateral (B) radiographs of a patient with impending pathologic fracture of the intertrochanteric region of the proximal left femur. (C) Cephalomedullary nail fixation is preferred in this location over sliding hip screw and plate devices. augmentation. Removing gross tumor at the fracture site has the advantage of decreasing tumor burden but often necessitates a larger exposure and increased blood loss. The residual tumor cavity should be packed with bone cement in conjunction with fracture reduction and fixation. Unfortunately, even with cement augmentation, this technique has a moderate incidence of failure. Intramedullary nail fixation is the treatment of choice for both impending and realized fractures. Consideration should be given for placement of reconstruction or cephalomedullary screws even in the absence of documented disease at the proximal femur or femoral neck, especially for patients with longer life expectancies. The largest diameter nail possible should be used and the nail statically locked. Whether to debulk or curette the metastatic lesion and augment the bone with cement depends on the size of the lesion. This issue may be somewhat controversial but lesions that occupy greater than one diaphyseal diameter in the proximal to distal plane or that prevent cortical contact of at least two cortices may benefit from cement stabilization.6 Intramedullary devices typically enjoy better success rates than ORIF techniques in this anatomic location. Advantages include a shorter lever arm and the ability to stabilize the entire femur. Reconstruction or cephalomedullary screws should be used. Depending on fracture pattern and surgeon experience, intramedullary devices can often be inserted with less blood loss and operative time compared with ORIF techniques. (Figure 5 A, B) If treating an impending fracture with this technique, the surgeon should be confident of the diagnosis before proceeding. If MBD has not been documented previously, intra-operative frozen sections should be obtained to confirm metastatic carcinoma. If the diagnosis is uncertain, additional tissue should be obtained and sent for permanent analysis and further definitive surgery postponed. Primary bone sarcomas, while much less common, can masquerade as MBD and should be treated by an orthopedic oncologist as shown above. Arthroplasty can be used as a primary mode of treatment, especially in cases of extensive bone loss or as a salvage procedure for failed ORIF or prophylactic stabilization. Consideration for use of a calcar replacement stem should be given. Every effort should be made to preserve the greater trochanter and native abductor mechanism. If this cannot be done, a proximal femoral replacement (PFR) prosthesis is indicated. (Figure 6 A, B) Post-operative rehab and therapy must be tailored appropriately to allow for soft tissue healing. A B Figure 6 AP radiograph (A) of the right hip in this patient with renal cell carcinoma metastasis showing continued tumor progression around the fixation device and impending implant failure. (B) Resection of the proximal femur and reconstruction with a cemented proximal femoral replacement. 88 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management (continued) resection with ankle fusion if there is significant bone and cartilage destruction. Foot MBD in the foot is uncommon and portends a poor prognosis. Lung and genitourinary carcinomas account for the majority of acral metastatic disease. Reconstructive efforts are difficult especially if there is extensive bony destruction. Partial amputation or ray resection often provides a better outcome and less morbidity in these patients whose expected survival is generally less than one year. Upper Extremity A B Figure 7 Preoperative AP radiograph (A) in a patient with knee pain secondary to an impending pathologic fracture from multiple myeloma involvement in the distal femur near the femoral component of his knee replacement. Postoperative AP radiograph (B) after fixation was achieved with a looking plate and screw construct using intramedullary cement. Supracondylar Region Lesions in this area are often difficult to treat secondary to comminution and/or poor bone stock. Fortunately, this is a relatively uncommon area for MBD involvement. There are limited studies that discuss optimum treatment strategies. Generally, lesions are treated with tumor curettage and debulking followed by cement augmentation and ORIF. (Figure 7 A, B) Locked plate constructs can be helpful when host bone is of poor quality and offer the advantage of unicortical screw placement if a preexisting femoral stem or IMN is in place. If the lesion involves the epiphysis or joint, conventional knee arthroplasty or distal femur replacement (DFR) and hinged knee arthroplasty is chosen depending on the size of the lesion. The use of a long stemmed tibial component in this setting depends on surgeon preference and disease status of the tibia. In general, patients with metastatic disease of the upper extremity may be treated more conservatively than those with lower extremity involvement because the problems of patient immobility are less for this group. For example, patients with impending fracture of the humerus and forearm may be treated with low profile functional braces or splints and external beam radiation in the hope of improved pain control and progress of bone consolidation. However, those patients with a pathologic fracture rarely heal their fracture without internal fixation. If these patients have a reasonable longevity, then internal fixation is usually indicated for pain control and improved function. Humerus The humerus has three regions that may be involved with metastatic disease. Each is unique and requires consideration for different treatment. The proximal humerus is a common site for metastatic disease. For those without high risk for fracture, consideration should be given for radiation and protection in a sling, and gentle motion with restricted weight-bearing. Those at high risk for impending fracture should be treated with adequate fixation that allows for early motion to avoid problems of shoulder joint stiffness. Often the region of the head and surgical neck requires plate and screw fixation approached though a deltopectoral incision. This fixation is generally more rigid than that achieved with intramedullary nails with transfixation screws. (Figure 8 A, B) Unfortunately, this proximal plate and screw constructs do not protect the remainder of the humerus. Preoperative workup should therefore include radiographs of the entire bone. Tibia Fewer than 5% of metastatic lesions involve the distal extremities or feet. Treatment principles based on anatomic location are similar to the femur. Proximal, periarticular lesions are managed best with resection and arthroplasty. Metaphyseal lesions, both proximal and distal, can be treated with curettage, cement, and ORIF techniques. Diaphyseal lesions are treated with IMN with or without curettage and bone cement. Distal tibia lesions that involve the joint may require 89 A B Figure 8 AP radiograph (A) of the proximal humerus showing a nondisplaced pathologic fracture in a patient with metastatic carcinoma. Postoperative AP radiograph (B) showing rigid fixation of the proximal humerus fracture with a locking plate and screw construct using cement. Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Metastatic Disease of the Extremities: Tips for Management (continued) occurs when surgeons fail to lock intramedullary humeral nails both proximally and distally. Unfortunately an impending pathologic fracture may progress to a non-healing and painful fracture due to lack of torsional fixation. Metastatic disease involving the distal humerus or supracondylar region should be treated with plate and screw fixation with early, gentle elbow motion. Forearm MBD involving the forearm is much less common than that found in the humerus. Those patients with fracture or impending fracture should be treated with plate and screw fixation. Conclusion Figure 9 AP radiograph (A) of the proximal left humerus of a 60year-old female with metastatic breast carcinoma and a pathologic humerus fracture. Postoperative radiograph (B) showing fixation of the humerus with a locking intramedullary nail. Note that this nail construct has proximal and distal fixation screws to insure static fixation and avoid torsional failure. The finding of multifocal disease in the humerus warrants the use of an intramedullary nail with transfixation screws.7 Occasionally patients may present with destruction of the humeral head and require a cemented hemiarthroplasty. Those with severe destruction of the proximal humerus occasionally require resection and reconstruction with a proximal humerus replacement. Patients with disease of the humeral diaphysis are best treated with locked medullary nails that span the entire length of the humerus. (Figure 9 A, B) A common pitfall Patients with metastatic bone disease frequently require orthopaedic intervention to insure improved quality of life and pain control. While some patients may not need surgical fixation of pathologic fractures or impending fractures, many will require durable bone fixation or replacement. Thoughtful evaluation of these patients in concert with collaboration with other members of the oncology team will help the surgeon optimize treatment for these patients. References 1. Bauer HCF: Controversies in the surgical management of skeletal metastases. J Bone Joint Surg. 2005; 87B:608-17. 2. Mirels H. Metastatic disease in long bones. A proposed scoring system for diagnosing impending pathologic fractures. Clin Orthop. 1989; 249:256-64. 3. Hipp JA, Springfield DS, Hayes WC. Predicting pathologic fracture risk in the management of metastatic bone defects. Clin Orthop. 1995; 312:120-35. 4. Camnasio F, Scotti C, Peretti GM, et al. Prosthetic Joint Replacement for Long Bone Metastases: Analysis of 154 Cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2008; 128(8):787-93. 5. Wunder JS, Ferguson PC, Griffin AM, Pressman A, Bell RS: Acetabular Metastases: Planning for Reconstruction and Review of Results. Clin Orthop. 2003; 415:187-97. 6. Harrington KD. Orthopaedic management of extremity and pelvic lesions. Clin Orthop. 1995; 312:136-47. 7. Redmond BJ, Biermann JS, Blasier RB. Interlocking intramedullary nailing of pathological fractures of the shaft of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996; 78:891-96. 90 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Advances in Orthopaedic Oncology for 2010 Bruce T. Rougraff, M.D. Corresponding Author: Bruce T. Rougraff, M.D. 8450 Northwest blvd Indianapolis, IN 46278 [email protected] (317)802-2451 Introduction Early improvements in orthopedic oncology started from recognizing and carefully diagnosing tumors in a similar and reproducible way. Once standard diagnoses and grade evaluations of these unusual tumors were established, clinical outcomes could be addressed. Chemotherapy for bone sarcomas was initially utilized in the 1960’s in combination with radical amputation. In the 1970s, improvement in survival was found with the use of chemotherapy for Ewing’s sarcoma and osteosarcoma.. In the 1980s and 90s the evolution of limb sparing operations for both bone and sarcomas with adjuvant treatment became commonplace, instead of amputations. Similarly, imaging studies became much improved and refined with the use of three-dimensional imaging technology. Thus, the multidisciplinary approach to orthopedic oncologic problems became mainstream approach to patients with sarcoma due to these improvements in radiology, pathology and surgery. From a surgical standpoint, most resection and reconstruction techniques were developed by orthopaedic surgeons who continue to treat the majority of sarcomas to this day. In 2010, the greatest challenge for physicians treating sarcoma patients is the early recognition and improved treatment of metastatic disease. A great deal of research and hope is placed in the future of directed therapy to attack sarcomas from the widely expanding field of oncogenetics and exploiting gene translocations associated with many orthopedic oncologic tumors. Surgical reconstruction techniques are likewise improving, and radiographic staging studies improve as the role of modern radiographic studies continues to evolve. This review will discuss the most common bone and soft tissue sarcomas, good and poor prognostic findings, relative cure rates, and the near future improvements anticipated in the treatment of these challenging patients. Osteosarcoma Osteosarcoma is the most common primary malignancy of bone in children and represents 20% of all primary bone sarcomas. The incidence of osteosarcoma is four or five cases per million individuals per year which translates to about 1000 to 1500 newly diagnosed cases in the United States each year. Osteosarcoma is a primary cancer of bone which is defined as 91 Figure1 A-B Radiograph and biopsy example of a 26-year-old male with a distal femoral osteosarcoma. He was treated with pre-surgical chemotherapy, followed by resection and metal endoprosthesis reconstruction. a malignant proliferation of cells that synthesize and deposit bone matrix.1,2 A conventional osteosarcoma represents 75% of all osteosarcoma cases and is manifested by an aggressive lytic and sometimes a blastic bone lesion in the metaphysis of long bones. (Figure 1A-B) It is most commonly seen the distal femur and proximal tibia and less likely occurs in the, proximal humerus, pelvis or other bone sites. There are several subtypes of osteosarcoma, including Paget’s sarcoma which has a very poor prognosis and develops in an area of previous pagetoid bone. Parosteal and periosteal osteosarcomas are lower grade variants that occur on the surface of bones, that typically do not need chemotherapy and can be treated with wide surgical resection and reconstruction.3 Conventional osteosarcomas are more commonly seen in males than females, typically occur in the second decade of life, and present as a painful soft tissue and bone mass. Occasionally the patient will present with a pathologic fracture through the lesion, which carries a very poor prognosis. There are typically no systemic symptoms associated with osteosarcomas. Fevers, weight loss and general malaise are not symptoms typically seen in patients diagnosed with osteosarcoma. A painful firm, deep mass of the extremity or pelvis are the most common presenting symptom. Laboratory studies are nonspecific, although alkaline phosphatase may be elevated. Typically, the diagnosis is made from the plain radiograph of the involved extremity or bone site. Further imaging with whole body bone scan, computed tomography (CAT scan), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) further defines the local and systemic extent of the disease. A carefully placed biopsy must be carried out to finalize the diagnosis. The placement of the biopsy is critical so that the biopsy site can be resected at the same time as the tumor resection. Contamination of neurovascular structures or postoperative fractures can result in an amputation for the patient. It is strongly recommended that the biopsy be performed by someone who is well-versed in the treatment of osteosarcomas. The biopsy of osteosarcoma will typically show a malignant cells forming osteoid on Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) staining. No specific genetic error is associated with osteosarcoma, although multiple genetic alterations can Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Advances in Orthopaedic Oncology for 2010 (continued) be seen at times with these patients. There are no known environmental agents associated with the development of osteosarcoma. After establishing the diagnosis with biopsy, the initial treatment for osteosarcoma is pre-surgical chemotherapy. Surgical resection and reconstruction or amputation is typically performed after two to three months of the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis, which is usually found in the lung, have much poorer survival rates. These patients are treated with chemotherapy, surgical resection of the primary tumor, and attempts at metastatectomy, if feasible. Chemotherapy for osteosarcoma typically involves doxorubicin, high-dose methotrexate, cisplatin and ifosfamide. Surgical resection is required for cure. Various surgical reconstruction options have improved over the last 20 years including allograft reconstruction, prosthetic-allograft reconstruction, large metal endoprosthetic reconstruction, rotationplasty, and vascular bone graft reconstruction. Good prognostic factors for conventional osteosarcoma include a negative chest CAT scan at the time of diagnosis, a primary tumor < 8 cm, resectable disease, chemotherapyinduced tumor necrosis of > 90%, and distal sites of disease. Poor prognostic factors for conventional osteosarcoma include skip marrow metastases, a positive chest CAT scan, a primary tumor > 8 cm, and presentation with a pathologic fracture. The overall five-year survival rate of patients with non-metastatic conventional osteosarcoma treated with chemotherapy and surgery is 65%.4 If the chest CAT scan is positive for metastases at the time of diagnosis, only 20 to 25% of these patients will live five years. Osteosarcoma patients have a longer length of survival with aggressive metastatectomy and aggressive chemotherapy. The future treatment for conventional osteosarcoma includes finding more effective treatment for metastatic disease, improved skeletal reconstruction, and techniques that find better limb lengthening and equalization. Other future developments will be looking for better identification of high-risk patients and in improved delivery of chemotherapy in these high risk patients. Ewing’s Sarcoma Ewing’s sarcoma accounts for 1% of all childhood tumors. It is the second most common primary bone sarcoma of childhood and adolescence.5-10 Most patients are between five and 30 years of age at the time of diagnosis. The incidence of Ewing’s sarcoma in the United States is two cases per million per year. It is unusual in African-Americans and also less likely in Asian-Americans than Caucasians. Unlike osteosarcoma, the treatment of Ewing sarcoma with surgery alone has a nearly fatal outcome. Ewing’s sarcoma, unlike osteosarcoma, is radiosensitive. Like osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma is chemotherapy-sensitive and typically presents with a painful bone mass. Laboratory evaluation for Ewing’s sarcoma should include lactate dehydrogenase, which can be elevated and is associated with a poor prognosis. A complete blood count may reveal leukocytosis or anemia, which is also associated with a poor prognosis. Elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate is found in about half of patients with Ewing’s sarcoma, and can confuse the initial diagnosis as perhaps being a bone infection. Ewing’s sarcoma of bone is most likely identified in long bones, pelvis, vertebra, ribs, clavicle, and scapula. Unfortunately, approximately one-fourth of patients with Ewing’s sarcoma present with metastatic disease. The most common location of metastatic disease is lung, followed by other bones, lymph nodes, and the liver. Like patients with osteosarcoma, imaging should be were obtained before the biopsy of a suspected Ewing’s sarcoma. A carefully planned surgical biopsy and bone culture is necessary for diagnosis. The tumor is characterized by sheets of monotonous, small, round the blue cells. These cells are extremely homogenous in appearance and typically have well-defined borders with indistinct cytoplasm. CD 99 is a commonly used immunohistochemistry stain which is positive in almost all Ewing’s sarcomas. Cytogenetic testing typically reveals a translocation between T11 and T22. 90% of patients with Ewing’s sarcoma have a translocation and the fusion gene called EWS which combines with a FLI1 gene. In the future, directed therapy may be used against these genetic alterations. Chemotherapy for Ewing’s sarcoma has recently been accelerated, in that treatment which was given every three weeks is now given every two weeks with an improvement in overall survival.7 Chemotherapy agents that have been shown to be effective with Ewing’s sarcoma include cyclophosphide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and actinomycin D. Local control for Ewing’s sarcoma includes the use of surgery and radiation treatment. Surgical resection can be used without radiation treatment in expendable bones and sites of disease where wide surgical resection is feasible. It is advised to completely resect the entire initial portion of bone involved with the Ewing’s sarcoma if radiation is not given. It is probable that surgical resection with radiation results in better local controll than radiation alone, although no randomized studies have been performed to define that difference. Due to late secondary malignancies, radiation-induced malignancies, and significant lifelong morbidity from childhood radiation, most centers try to avoid radiation in immature patients with Ewing’s sarcoma.5 Poor prognostic features for Ewing’s sarcoma include age > 14 years, elevated LDH at the time of presentation, weight loss and fever at the time of presentation, a fusion gene other than the EWS-FLI 1, pelvis location, and a positive chest for metastatic disease. Good prognostic features for Ewing’s sarcoma include age < 15 years, a primary tumor of < 8 cm or tumor volume < 200 cc, female gender, distal location, a negative chest CAT scan, and 100% necrosis after chemotherapy. The outcome for Ewing’s sarcoma is associated with a 60% cure rate for non-metastatic patients and a 25 to 30 per cent five-year survival in patients with metastatic disease. 92 Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Advances in Orthopaedic Oncology for 2010 (continued) The Children’s Cancer Study Group recently published their results of an accelerated chemotherapy program and found a 70% five-year survival for non-metastatic Ewing’s sarcoma patients.11 The future of Ewing’s sarcoma includes targeted chemotherapy for improved treatment for metastatic disease. Further delineation of the best local control option with radiation surgical resection is needed. Chondrosarcoma Chondrosarcoma is a primary bone malignancy that affects mostly adults. Chondrosarcoma is characterized by cartilage-forming malignant cells which do not form osteoid. They are subclassified by histologic and clinical behavior.12 Secondary chondrosarcoma occur in areas of previous ostechondroma and previous enchondroma. Conventional chondrosarcoma occur in areas of otherwise normal bone. Other subtypes of chondrosarcoma include clear cell chondrosarcoma, mesenchymal chondrosarcoma, dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma, and periosteal chondrosarcoma. Chondrosarcomas can be low-grade, intermediate grade, or high grade. Chondrosarcoma respond poorly to chemotherapy and radiation. Surgical resection is therefore paramount for local control and cure of a chondrosarcoma. (See Figure 2 A-C) Good prognostic findings for chondrosarcoma include low-grade histology, distal anatomic site such as the fingers or toes, clear cell variant, periosteal variant, scapular location, and a normal chest CAT scan at the time of diagnosis. Bad prognostic signs for chondrosarcoma include mesenchymal or dedifferentiated subtype, pelvis location, and metastatic disease on chest CAT scan at the time of diagnosis. The treatment for chondrosarcoma is a wide surgical resection. Wide surgical resection is associated with a local recurrence rate, typically under 10%. If there are positive margins with the resection, local recurrence rate can be between 33 and 60%. Because chemotherapy and radiation are not effective, they do not appear to change local control data. Grade I chondrosarcoma is typically associated with a 95% cure rate. Grade II chondrosarcoma have a 75% cure rate, and grade III chondrosarcoma only a 50% cure rate.13 Soft Tissue Sarcoma Soft tissue sarcomas have many histologic subtypes and can be seen as low-grade, intermediate grade, or high-grade lesions.13-16 The most common type of soft tissue sarcoma is a pleomorphic sarcoma, formerly called malignant fibrous histiocytoma. The second most common kind of soft tissue sarcoma is a liposarcoma, followed by malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, synovial sarcoma, epithelioid sarcoma, and angiosarcoma. Good prognostic features in soft tissue sarcoma included low-grade histology, a tumor < 5 cm, a normal chest CAT scan at the time of diagnosis, and a surgically resectable site. Poor prognostic features for soft tissue sarcoma include tumors > 5 cm, metastatic disease, high grade histology, synovial sarcoma histology, and round cell liposarcoma histology. 93 Figure 2 A-C Radiograph, MRI, and pathology of a 45-year-old man with a acetabular de-differentiated chondrosarcoma. Tumor was resected and reconstructed with a massive pelvic allograft. He did not receive chemotherapy and is alive six years from diagnosis. At this time, there is no convincing evidence that chemotherapy improves the five-year cure rate of soft tissue sarcomas. It has been shown to increase the length of survival but does not improve the overall cure rate.17 Radiation treatment has been associated with improved local control rate Indiana Orthopaedic Journal Volume 4 – 2010 Advances in Orthopaedic Oncology for 2010 (continued) in selected cases to enhance limb salvage surgery. Surgical resection remains the mainstay treatment for soft tissue sarcomas of all grades and histology. With adjuvant radiation treatment surgical resection and limb sparing operations for high grade, large, deep soft tissue sarcomas is indicated in 90-95% of all patients. Metastatectomy has been associated with a longer life span after a diagnosis of metastatic disease. However, patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma have only a 10% five-year survival.17 Future developments in the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas will include improved directed chemotherapy based on genetic abnormalties found within some tumor types. Improvements in imaging and detection of metastatic disease, as well as improvements in definitions of surgical margins and indications for radiation treatment, will be improved in the near future. References 1. Bacci G, Briccoli A, Longhi A, et al. Treatment and outcomes of recurrent osteosarcoma: Experience at Rizzoli in 235 patients initially treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Acta Oncol. 2005; 44:748-55. 2. Mankin HJ, Hornicek FJ, Rosenberg AE, et al. Survival data for 648 patients with osteosarcoma treated at one institution. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 429:286-91. 3. Campanacci M, Picci P, Gherlinzoni F, et al. Parosteal Osteosarcoma. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1984; 66:313-21. 4. Goorin AM, Anderson JW: Experience with multiagent chemotherapy for osteosarcoma: Improved outcome. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991; 270:22-8. 5. Fuchs B, Valenzuela RG, Petersen IA, et al. Ewing’s sarcoma and the development of secondary malignancies. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; 415:82-9. 6. Grier HE, Krailo MD, Tarbell NJ et al. Addition of ifosfamide and etoposide to standard chemotherapy for Ewing’s sarcoma and primitive neuroectodermal tumor or bone. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348:694-701. 7. Marina NM, Pappo AS, Parham DM, et al. Chemotherapy dose-intensification for pediatric patients with Ewing’s family of tumors and desmoplastic round cell tumor: A feasibility study at St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital. J Clin Oncol. 1999; 17:180-190. 8. O’Connor MI, Pritchard DJ. Ewing’s sarcoma: Prognostic factors, disease control, and the reemerging role of surgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991; 262:78-87. 9. Pritchard DJ, Dahlin DC, Dauphine RT, et al. Ewing’s sarcoma: A clinicopathological and statistical analysis of patients surviving 5 years or longer. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975; 57:1016. 10. Wunder JS, Paulian G, Huvos AG, et al. The histological response to chemotherapy as a predictor of the oncological outcome of operative treatment of Ewing sarcoma. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:1020-33. 11. Italiano A, Penel N, Robin YM, et al. Neo/adjuvant chemotherapy does not improve outcome in resected primary synovial sarcoma: a study of the French Sarcoma Group. Ann Oncol. 2009; 20(3):425-30. 12. Bertoni F, Bacchini P, Hogendoorn PCW: Chondrosarcoma, In Fletcher CD, Unni KK Mertens F (eds): World Health Organisation Classification of Tumours: Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone. Lyon, France, IARC Press, 2002, pp. 247-251. 13. Dickey ID, Rose PS, Fuchs B, et al: Dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma: The role of chemotherapy with updated outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86:2412-8. 14. Czerniak B: Pathologic and molecular aspects of soft tissue sarcomas. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2003; 12:263-303. 15. Massi D, Beltrami G, Capanna R, Franchi A. Histopathological re-classification of extremity pleomorphic soft tissue sarcoma has clinical relevance. Eur J Surg Onco.l 2004; 30:1131-6. 16. Randall RL, Schabel KL, Hitchcock Y, et al. Diagnosis and management of synovial sarcoma. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2005; 6:429-59. 17. Pisters PW, Leung DH, Woodruff J, et al. Analysis of prognostic factors in 1,041 patients with localized soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities. J Clin Oncol. 1996; 14(5):1679-89. Author Information The Indiana Orthopaedic Journal is an annual publication of the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery. The Journal has a limited paper circulation and may be accessed electronically via the IU Department of Orthopaedic Surgery website (http://www.orthopaedics.iu.edu/). We invite original research papers, case studies, and opinion pieces from our core faculty, volunteer faculty, residents, and alumni. We will also accept for reprint a recent, previously published paper with written permission to reprint from the publisher. When preparing your original manuscript for submission, please follow this general format. An abstract is optional, but, if included, it should be 250 words or less. For research papers, there should be an Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections. References should be listed in order of appearance in the paper. Tables should be in a separate Word file and not imbedded in the text of the paper. Figures may be submitted in jpg format or within a PowerPoint file. All figures will appear in black-and-white in the Journal. Each figure should have a legend, and all references, tables, and figures should be cited in the text. Incomplete manuscripts will be returned to the submitting author. Please submit no more than two manuscripts, case studies, or opinion papers per first author per year. Manuscripts will be solicited via an email call for papers sent out in early January. All manuscripts must be submitted electronically. Submission deadlines are generally on or about the end of March with anticipated publication in early September of each year. Due to limited space, a manuscript may be held for publication in a subsequent issue or rejected. 94 Patient Fit is now an option The new Zimmer Natural Nail System ® ™ features anatomic implants and intuitive instrumentation designed to help you restore your patients naturally. Cephalomedullary Nails t Anatomic anterior bows (1.3 to 1.5m) t 4° proximal lateralization angle t Instrumentation for use with patients large or small t Straightforward technique t Fixed angle screw options To learn more about the Zimmer Natural Nail System, contact your Zimmer representative or visit www.zimmer.com © 2010 Zimmer, Inc.