Acute versus staged fixation of bicondylar tibial plateau fractures: a dual centre international study.

BACKGROUND

Bicondylar tibial plateau fractures pose many treatment challenges due to their complex fracture patterns and associated soft tissue compromise. We aim to evaluate outcomes of acute ORIF (aORIF) versus staged ORIF (sORIF) of high energy bicondylar tibial plateau fractures.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 186 patients at two high-volume Level I trauma centers. One hundred one patients underwent aORIF and 85 underwent sORIF between 2011 and 2019. Clinical outcomes of interest included operative time, wound dehiscence, superficial and deep infection, nonunion, flap coverage, arthrodesis, and early conversion to arthroplasty.

RESULTS

Patients had a median follow up of 12 months (6-98 months). The sORIF group had a higher ISS (p = 0.02) and a higher rate of open fractures (24.7% vs 11.9%, p = 0.03). The groups were statistically similar in other demographics and co-morbidities. Operative time was significantly shorter in the aORIF group (157 vs 213 min., p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference in wound dehiscence, deep infection, flap coverage, nonunion, unplanned reoperation, or post-traumatic arthritis between groups. However, aORIF was associated with a significantly lower rate of superficial infection (p = 0.01), arthroplasty (p = 0.003) and unplanned reoperation (p = 0.005). Subgroup analysis of only the 41C3 fractures showed a lower rate of superficial infections in the aORIF group (p = 0.04). No difference in complications was found between the fracture subgroups.

CONCLUSION

We found no increased risk of complications with aORIF compared to sORIF for bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. While not all injuries may be appropriate for aORIF, our results demonstrate the safety of aORIF when patients are properly selected by experienced fracture surgeons.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.