Lisa G M Friedman1, Terri A Zachos2, Daniela Sanchez3, Akhil Tawari4, Harish Kempegowda5, Scott Ryan6, Anna Michalowski6, Daniel S Horwitz7. 1. Geisinger Medical Center, 100 N. Academy Ave., Danville, PA, 17822, USA. LGMFriedman@gmail.com. 2. , Erie, PA, USA. 3. School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universidad del Rosario, Bogota, Colombia. 4. Thunga Hospitals, SRCC Children's Hospital, Mumbai, India. 5. Horizon Health, Lewisville, TX, USA. 6. Tufts University Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Open fractures in the elderly are distinct compared to younger populations. The purpose of this study is to follow a series of open fractures of the lower extremity in the geriatric population to better prognosticate outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients over the age of 65 years old who were treated for an open, lower extremity fracture across two level I trauma medical systems. Patients were included if they had documented wound healing problems in the postoperative period, or 6 months of follow-up, or if they had a definitive radiographic outcome. Sixty-four patients were included of an average age of 76.23, of whom 73.4% were female. RESULTS: The fracture types were midshaft femur in 3, distal femur in 9, patella in 2, proximal tibia in 3, proximal fibula in 1, midshaft tibia in 14, distil tibia in 8, ankle in 23, and talar neck/calcaneus in 1. Forty-two fractures were the result of low energy mechanism and 22 fractures were from high energy mechanism. Fourteen fractures were type 1, 32 were type 2, 11 were type 3A, 6 were type 3B, and 1 was type 3C. At final follow-up, 13 wounds were well healed, 39 wounds were healed following a delay of more than 6 weeks to achieve healing, 3 were infected, 3 had been treated with amputation, 2 had chronic ulceration, 2 with active draining, and 2 had draining sinuses. DISCUSSION: Open lower extremity fractures are serious injuries with high rates of morbidity. Such risks are even higher in the geriatric population, particularly with regard to wound healing. This study provides important prognostic information in counseling geriatric patient with an open lower extremity fracture, as well as informs treatment in terms of wound surveillance and care in the postoperative period.
INTRODUCTION: Open fractures in the elderly are distinct compared to younger populations. The purpose of this study is to follow a series of open fractures of the lower extremity in the geriatric population to better prognosticate outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients over the age of 65 years old who were treated for an open, lower extremity fracture across two level I trauma medical systems. Patients were included if they had documented wound healing problems in the postoperative period, or 6 months of follow-up, or if they had a definitive radiographic outcome. Sixty-four patients were included of an average age of 76.23, of whom 73.4% were female. RESULTS: The fracture types were midshaft femur in 3, distal femur in 9, patella in 2, proximal tibia in 3, proximal fibula in 1, midshaft tibia in 14, distil tibia in 8, ankle in 23, and talar neck/calcaneus in 1. Forty-two fractures were the result of low energy mechanism and 22 fractures were from high energy mechanism. Fourteen fractures were type 1, 32 were type 2, 11 were type 3A, 6 were type 3B, and 1 was type 3C. At final follow-up, 13 wounds were well healed, 39 wounds were healed following a delay of more than 6 weeks to achieve healing, 3 were infected, 3 had been treated with amputation, 2 had chronic ulceration, 2 with active draining, and 2 had draining sinuses. DISCUSSION: Open lower extremity fractures are serious injuries with high rates of morbidity. Such risks are even higher in the geriatric population, particularly with regard to wound healing. This study provides important prognostic information in counseling geriatric patient with an open lower extremity fracture, as well as informs treatment in terms of wound surveillance and care in the postoperative period.
Authors: Charles M Court-Brown; Kate E Bugler; Nicholas D Clement; Andrew D Duckworth; Margaret M McQueen Journal: Injury Date: 2011-12-27 Impact factor: 2.586
Authors: J Stuart Melvin; Derek G Dombroski; Jesse T Torbert; Stephen J Kovach; John L Esterhai; Samir Mehta Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: Yaping Chang; Mohit Bhandari; Kan Lun Zhu; Reza Donald Mirza; Melody Ren; Sean Alexander Kennedy; Ahmed Negm; Neera Bhatnagar; Faysal N Naji; Lazar Milovanovic; Yutong Fei; Arnav Agarwal; Rakhshan Kamran; Sung Min Cho; Stefan Schandelmaier; Li Wang; Lin Jin; Shiyun Hu; Yanping Zhao; Luciane Cruz Lopes; Mei Wang; Brad Petrisor; Bill Ristevski; Reed A C Siemieniuk; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: JBJS Rev Date: 2019-02
Authors: William P Toole; Mark Elliott; David Hankins; Corey Rosenbaum; Anthony Harris; Christopher Perkins Journal: J Foot Ankle Surg Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 1.286
Authors: J Stuart Melvin; Derek G Dombroski; Jesse T Torbert; Stephen J Kovach; John L Esterhai; Samir Mehta Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.020