Introduction Managing critical-sized tibial defects is one of the most complex challenges orthopedic surgeons face. This is even more problematic in the presence of infection and soft-tissue loss. The purpose of this study is to describe a comprehensive three-stage surgical protocol for the reconstruction of infected tibial injuries with combined bone defects and soft-tissue loss, and report the clinical outcomes. Materials and methods A retrospective study at a specialized limb reconstruction center identified all patients with infected tibial injuries with bone and soft-tissue loss from 2010 through 2018. Thirty-one patients were included. All cases were treated using a three-stage protocol: (1) infected limb damage control; (2) soft-tissue coverage with a vascularized or local flap; (3) definitive bone reconstruction using distraction osteogenesis principles with external fixation. Primary outcomes: limb salvage rate and infection eradication. Secondary outcomes: patient functional outcomes and satisfaction. Results Patients in this series of chronically infected tibias had been operated upon 3.4 times on average before starting our limb salvage protocol. The mean soft-tissue and bone defect sizes were 124 cm2 (6–600) and 5.4 cm (1–23), respectively. A free flap was performed in 67.7% (21/31) of the cases; bone transport was the selected bone-reconstructive option in 51.7% (15/31). Local flap failure rate was 30% (3/10), with 9.5% for free flaps (2/21). Limb salvage rate was 93.5% (29/31), with infection eradicated in all salvaged limbs. ASAMI bone score: 100% good/excellent. Mean VAS score was 1.0, and ASAMI functional score was good/excellent in 86% of cases. Return-to-work rate was 83%; 86% were “very satisfied” with the treatment outcome. Conclusion A three-stage surgical approach to treat chronically infected tibial injuries with combined bone and soft-tissue defects yields high rates of infection eradication and successful limb salvage, with favorable functional outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Background: Blood loss warranting transfusion is a relatively rare complication of major-joint arthroplasty procedures like total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite this rarity, pre-transfusion testing (blood typing, screening, and cross-matching) has become routine. We sought to determine if such routine testing is necessary for patients who undergo a primary TKA or THA by (1) measuring the current rate of intraoperative transfusions in primary TKA and THA patients, (2) identifying risk factors for transfusions, and (3) calculating the costs of such blood typing and screening.Study Methods: We retrospectively examined the records of 992 patients who underwent primary TKA, THA, or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to identify patients requiring intra-operative or in-hospital postoperative transfusions. Demographic and baseline clinical and laboratory data also were collected and analyzed to identify predictors of transfusion. Cost analysis was performed.Results: The rate of intraoperative transfusion was 1.7% (17/992 patients), with rates of 2.1%, 1.6%, and 0% for TKA, THA, and UKA respectively. The inhospital transfusion rate was 10.3%, with corresponding postoperative transfusion rates of 9.1%, 12.9%, and 2%. The only baseline variable significantly linked to transfusions on multivariable analysis was preoperative hemoglobin level, with preoperative Hgb <12 g/dl predictive of transfusions in both TKA (p = .02) and THA (p = .024) patients.Discussion: Our study suggests that pre-transfusion testing for all patients undergoing primary UKA, TKA or THA is unnecessary. We recommend reserving routine pre-transfusion testing for patients with preoperative hemoglobin levels below 12 g/dl.

No abstract