Infection in orthopaedic trauma patients is a common problem associated with significant financial and psychosocial costs, and increased morbidity. This review outlines technologies to diagnose and prevent orthopaedic infection, examines implant-related infection and its management, and discusses the treatment of post-traumatic osteomyelitis. The gold standard for diagnosing infection has a number of disadvantages, and thus new technologies to diagnose infection are being explored, including multilocus polymerase chain reaction with electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry and optical imaging. Numerous strategies have been employed to prevent orthopaedic infection, including use of antibiotic-impregnated implant coatings and cement; however, further research is required to optimize these technologies. Biofilm formation on orthopaedic implants is attributed to the glycocalyx-mediated surface mode of bacterial growth and is usually treated through a secondary surgery involving irrigation, debridement and the appropriate use of antibiotics, or complete removal of the infected implant. Research into the treatment of post-traumatic osteomyelitis has focused on developing an optimal local antibiotic delivery vehicle, such as antibiotic-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement beads or bioabsorbable bone substitute (BBS) delivery systems. As these new technologies to diagnose, prevent and treat orthopaedic infection advance, the incidence of infection will decrease and patient care will be optimized.

Application of the correct fixation construct is critical for fracture healing and long-term stability; however, it is a complex issue with numerous significant factors. This review describes a number of common fracture types, and evaluates their currently available fracture fixation constructs. In the setting of complex elbow instability, stable fixation or radial head replacement with an appropriately sized implant in conjunction with ligamentous repair is required to restore stability. For unstable sacral fractures, “standard” iliosacral screw fixation is not sufficient for fractures with vertical or multiplanar instabilities. Periprosthetic femur fractures, in particular Vancouver B1 fractures, have increased stability when using 90/90 fixation versus a single locking plate. Far Cortical Locking combines the concept of dynamization with locked plating in order to achieve superior healing of a distal femur fracture. Finally, there is no ideal construct for syndesmotic fracture stabilization; however, these fractures should be fixed using a device that allows for sufficient motion in the syndesmosis. In general, orthopaedic surgeons should select a fracture fixation construct that restores stability and promotes healing at the fracture site, while reducing the potential for fixation failure.

Assessment of fracture union is a critical concept in clinical orthopaedics; however, there is no established "gold standard" for fracture healing. This review provides an overview of the problems related to the assessment of fracture healing, examines currently available tools to determine union, discusses the role of functional outcomes in the assessment of fracture healing, and finally evaluates healing outcome measures as they pertain to fracture trials. Because there is no universally accepted method to determine fracture healing, orthopaedic surgeons must rely on a range of tools that can include: radiographic assessment, mechanical assessment, serologic markers, and clinical evaluation (including functional outcomes). When used in conjunction, these tools can help to improve the sensitivity and specificity of determining fracture union. This is furthermore relevant when conducting fracture healing trials, for which there is little consensus between surgeons or the Food and Drug Administration as to optimal study endpoints. Such studies should therefore include a composite outcome measure consisting of radiographic and functional assessments to increase the quality and consistency of fracture healing trials.

No abstract