Dataset Information

Pediatric Type II Tibial Spine Fractures: Addressing the Treatment Controversy With a Mixed-Effects Model.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Tibial spine fractures, although relatively rare, account for a substantial proportion of pediatric knee injuries with effusions and can have significant complications. Meyers and McKeever type II fractures are displaced anteriorly with an intact posterior hinge. Whether this subtype of pediatric tibial spine fracture should be treated operatively or nonoperatively remains controversial. Surgical delay is associated with an increased risk of arthrofibrosis; thus, prompt treatment decision making is imperative.

Purpose

To assess for variability among pediatric orthopaedic surgeons when treating pediatric type II tibial spine fractures.

Study design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

A discrete choice experiment was conducted to determine the patient and injury attributes that influence the management choice. A convenience sample of 20 pediatric orthopaedic surgeons reviewed 40 case vignettes, including physis-blinded radiographs displaying displaced fractures and a description of the patient's sex, age, mechanism of injury, and predominant sport. Surgeons were asked whether they would treat the fracture operatively or nonoperatively. A mixed-effects model was then used to determine the patient attributes most likely to influence the surgeon's decision, as well as surgeon training background, years in practice, and risk-taking behavior.

Results

The majority of respondents selected operative treatment for 85% of the presented cases. The degree of fracture displacement was the only attribute significantly associated with treatment choice (P < .001). Surgeons were 28% more likely to treat the fracture operatively with each additional millimeter of displacement of fracture fragment. Over 64% of surgeons chose to treat operatively when the fracture fragment was displaced by ≥3.5 mm. Significant variation in surgeon's propensity for operative treatment of this fracture was observed (P = .01). Surgeon training, years in practice, and risk-taking scores were not associated with the respondent's preference for surgical treatment.

Conclusion

There was substantial variation among pediatric orthopaedic surgeons when treating type II tibial spine fractures. The decision to operate was based on the degree of fracture displacement. Identifying current treatment preferences among surgeons given different patient factors can highlight current variation in practice patterns and direct efforts toward promoting the most optimal treatment strategies for controversial type II tibial spine fractures.

SUBMITTER: Adams AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6713965 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate short- to mid-term outcomes after arthroscopic operative fixation of tibial spine fractures in pediatric patients, to determine the incidence of further ipsilateral and contralateral knee injuries, and to describe associated meniscal pathology and intraoperative findings at the time of tibial spine repair.MethodsAll patients under age 18 with a tibial spine fracture treated arthroscopically at 1 institution by 2 surgeons from 2008 through 2019 were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes. Patients at least 1 year from their date of surgery were contacted to complete a questionnaire, which included the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form. Questions pertained to knee function, pain, and further injury or surgery on either knee. Patient charts, preoperative imaging, and operative reports were reviewed to determine demographic information, tibial spine fracture type, concomitant injuries, and intraoperative details.ResultsSixty-six of 97 eligible patients (68%) completed questionnaires. Average age at initial surgery was 10.7 years (range, 4-17). Mean follow-up was 5.8 years (range, 1.0-11.9). Average IKDC score at follow-up was 91.4 (range, 62.1-100). Patients reported their knee as 92% of "normal" (range, 40-100). Thirty-five (53%) currently participate in sport; 6 (9%) remain limited because of instability and residual pain. Regarding pain on a visual analog scale, 94%, 95%, and 83% of patients reported less than a 3 at rest, with daily activity, and with sport, respectively. Seven patients (11%) had subsequent ACL rupture. Six patients (9%) underwent ACL reconstruction 3.1 years (range, 0.9-7) after initial repair. Fourteen patients (21%) required at least 1 additional procedure. Regarding the contralateral knee, there were no ACL or tibial spine injuries. Sixty-one (92%) patients were both satisfied and would definitely undergo the procedure again.ConclusionsAlthough many pediatric patients demonstrate excellent results after tibial spine repair at mean 5.8 years follow-up, 10.6% sustained an ipsilateral ACL rupture, and 21% required an additional procedure. No patient had a contralateral tibial spine or ACL injury. This is helpful when counseling patients regarding injury risk when returning to activity after tibial spine repair.Level of evidenceLevel IV, therapeutic case series.

Project description:PurposeTo examine the condition and triggers of stress fractures of the lateral tibial plateau (LTP) similar to type III lateral hinge fractures (LHFs) after open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO).MethodsOWHTO was performed in 118 knees. They were examined for LHFs by computed tomography (CT). Patients were divided into the stress fracture group (Group SF) if they showed fracture lines on CT performed after starting weight-bearing walking and the normal group (Group N) for others.ResultsThe mean age was significantly older in Group SF (P = 0.022). Preoperatively, Group SF showed a significantly higher tibio-femoral angle (TFA, P = 0.014). No significant differences were observed in TFA and weight-bearing line ratio after surgery. Correction angle was significantly higher in the SF group. And all of the SF were more than 13 degrees. There was no significant difference in LHF incidence between groups, whereas stress fracture incidence differed significantly for each type of LHF (chi-squared test, P = 0.0001): 14.6% of type I cases, 100% of type II cases, 0% of type III cases, and 6.1% of those without LHF.DiscussionThe load on the LTP is assumed to act as a shearing force in type II fractures, which may contribute greatly to stress fractures. In type III, stress fractures may not occur because of the load dispersed at the fracture part. The stress fracture site is similar to type III LHF, and this kind of fracture is thought to be a delayed type III because it occurs after patients start weight-bearing walking. Moreover, they are observed in type I cases with a stable hinge and in 6% of cases without LHF. This study showed that high varus knees corrected with a large correction angle may develop stress fractures. OWHTO requires attention to stress fractures of the LTP, which can be regarded as delayed type III, in those developing LHFs postoperatively or having a high varus knee preoperatively.ConclusionThese results indicated the possibility of stress fracture in LTP during weight-bearing exercise after OWHTO, which was regarded as a delayed type III fracture. The results showed that Correction angle was more than 13 degrees, and lateral hinge fracture type II of the Takeuchi classification was an inducement of this stress fracture.Level of evidenceLevel IV.