1 / 25

Severe Calcaneal Fractures

Severe Calcaneal Fractures. Trauma Rounds The Ottawa Hospital Presented by Drs A Liew and M Prud ’ homme-Foster September 11 th , 2012. Overview: Calcaneal fractures. Most common of tarsal bones: 2% of all Articular surface involved in 70% Type IV: 4-28%

claudia-rivera
Download Presentation

Severe Calcaneal Fractures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Severe Calcaneal Fractures Trauma Rounds The Ottawa Hospital Presented by Drs A Liew and M Prud’homme-Foster September 11th, 2012

  2. Overview: Calcaneal fractures • Most common of tarsal bones: 2% of all • Articular surface involved in 70% • Type IV: 4-28% • Conversion to fusion as high as 73% in type IV

  3. Outcomes and Expectations • Magnuson (1923) :“saw practically no fractures of the os calcis which did not result in from 30 to 70 percent disability of the foot” • Sanders (2009): “Anatomic reduction of the calcaneus therefore attempts to recreate congruent subtalar and calcaneocuboid joints, to achieve a reduced lateral wall and peroneal tendons, and to restore calcaneal height, hindfoot alignment, and talar declination. Patients should expect to wear regular shoes, to exhibit a normal gait, and to remain pain-free for an extended period of time”

  4. The ‘Ottawa Experience’ • SurveyMonkey(R) 2012, MPF et al. • 3 question survey in plane English: anonymous answers • 16 of 22 staff respondents (73%) over a 2-day period

  5. The ‘Ottawa Experience’ Question 1: Considering the last ten years, how many calcaneal fractures Sanders type 3/4 have you been responsible for managing?

  6. The ‘Ottawa Experience’ Question 2: With regards to management, which of the following have you used?

  7. The ‘Ottawa Experience’ Question 3: Would you consider primary subtalar fusion with reconstruction for a severe calcaneus fracture?

  8. The ‘Ottawa Experience’ Question 3: Would you consider primary subtalar fusion with reconstruction for a severe calcaneus fracture? • Comments Correlated to Volume • But I would refer patient for treatment (1-5) • Not personally, as I would refer, but I might consider it if referral not an option (1-5) • But rarely - rather reconstruct for height and fuse late (6-10) • Never primary arthrodesis they need to have pain as a late outcome (10+) • Maybe, but I haven't seen one yet. And, give it a shot, nothing to lose with ORIF. Sometimes you win big and the patients does well (10+) • Older patient with good skin and low comorbidity risk and wide heel (+10)

  9. Which ones to fuse? • JOT 2003: Review of prospective, randomized trial database, 471 fractures • 44 patients required fusion and were compared to others • SF-36,VAS, OAS, Sanders and Crosby • Primary prognostic determinant: Bohler angle on presentation • <0° ten times more likely to require subtalar fusion than >15° • Sanders type IV 5.5 times more likely than type II • WCB three times more likely than non-WCB

  10. Fusing later… • JBJS 2009: 75 DIACF consecutive series for subtalar fusion for post traumatic OA • Looked at fusion after nonop v. ORIF • Very few Sanders type IV • However was able to show that better outcomes for fusion in ORIF group and easier to achieve height and alignment

  11. Be Careful of Ageism • JBJS 2010: Retrospective 158 fractures, two groups, cut-off 50yoa • 8.98yrs follow-up • Differences: ASA, mechanism of injury, Worker’s comp • Outcome: Older group scored better on all clinical assessments • JBJS 2002: Prospective 471 fractures, stratified groups • 2-8 yrs follow-up • The best patients to treat nonoperative are those who are fifty or older, males and Workers’ comp

  12. New Advances? • Injury 2010: 37 consecutive Sanders type IV treated with primary fuison • AOFAS mean of 75.43 and corresponded to reconstructing Bohler angle • Mean increase of Bohler: 5.26° (normal: 25-40°) • Suggest ‘high clinical effectiveness’: However…

  13. Primary fusion?

  14. Primary Fusion • Foot and Ankle Surgery 2012 • Aim: assess the functional outcome of the primary arthrodesis in the management of comminuted displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures

  15. Primary Fusion • Lit. search from 1990-2010, eight publications , 128 calcaneus • Follow-up 28 months (12-59) • Time between injury-arthrodesis: 6-22 days

  16. Primary Fusion • Union: 124 of 128 • AOFAS: 77.4 (72.8-88) out of 94 max • 75% good-excellent • Return to work: 75-100% • Wound healing or infection: 21 of 108 (19.4%) • 7 amputations

  17. Primary Fusion • Coleman Methodology: 56 (small and flawed)

  18. Primary Fusion • Only two studies comparing fusion vs fusion after ORIF: slight advantage to primary • One study looking at minimally invasive (Vira) • Current rate of primary fusion: 0.4-15% (5%) • Conclusion:“the process of choosing the best treatment modality for a severely comminuted calcaneal fracture, the primary arthrodesis should receive full consideration”

  19. Evidence on the way…

  20. A blast from the past

  21. Summary • Sanders type IV extremely difficult to manage • 9% good and 91% fair/poor • Much more likely to require fusion • Both nonop and ORIF lead to poor results but fusion better after reconstruction • Better outcomes more often with early fusion • Choose patients based on Bohler angle and risk factors

  22. Background • Outcomes • ORIF • Non op • Fusion • Primary vs delayed • p.808: Thermann et al.28 assessed 17 patients with secondary arthrodesis, and obtained a mean of 69 points on the AOFAS scale, while in cases of primary arthrodesis, they found a mean of 88 points. These extraordinary results have not been established elsewhere. -- Highlighted 2012-09-09 • After ORIF or after non-op • 1. Radnay CS, Clare MP, Sanders RW. Subtalar Fusion After Displaced Intra-Articular Calcaneal Fractures: Does Initial Operative Treatment Matter?Surgical Technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery; 2010 Feb. 28;92(Supplement_1_Part_1):32–43. • Vs ORIF • Minimally invasive

  23. What are the results of non-op? • What are the results of ORIF? • Pain and function • Complications • What percentage go on to be fused? • Is fusion late as good as primary fusion? • Which ones will require fusion? • 1. Csizy M, Buckley R, Tough S, Leighton R, Smith J, McCormack R, et al. Displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures: variables predicting late subtalar fusion. J Orthop Trauma. 2003 Feb.;17(2):106–12. • Showed us that the degree of initial injury (Bohler angle < 0°) was the primary prognostic determinant on long term outcomes • Nonop was 5 times more likely to require fusion • Does fusion type matter? • 1. Csizy M, Buckley R, Tough S, Leighton R, Smith J, McCormack R, et al. Displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures: variables predicting late subtalar fusion. J Orthop Trauma. 2003 Feb.;17(2):106–12.

More Related