Cargando…

Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus ORIF and primary subtalar arthrodesis for complex displaced intraarticular calcaneus fractures: An expected value decision analysis

OBJECTIVES: To determine the optimal patient-oriented treatment between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with or without primary subtalar arthrodesis (PSTA) for patients with displaced intraarticular calcaneus fractures (DIACFs, OTA 82-C3 and C4). DESIGN: Expected value decision analysis....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eisenstein, Emmanuel David, Kusnezov, Nicholas A., Waterman, Brian R., Orr, Justin D., Blair, James A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7953466/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33937643
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000005
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To determine the optimal patient-oriented treatment between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with or without primary subtalar arthrodesis (PSTA) for patients with displaced intraarticular calcaneus fractures (DIACFs, OTA 82-C3 and C4). DESIGN: Expected value decision analysis. SETTING: Academic military treatment facility PARTICIPANTS: One hundred randomly selected volunteers. INTERVENTION: Hypothetical clinical scenario involving ORIF versus ORIF with PSTA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Decision analysis was used to elucidate the superior treatment option based on expected patient values, composed of: the product of the average outcome probabilities established by previously published studies and the average ascribed patient utility values for each outcome probability. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to quantify the amount of change required for the inferior treatment to equal or surpass the superior option. RESULTS: Expected values for ORIF and ORIF with PSTA were 8.96 and 18.06, respectively, favoring ORIF with PSTA. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed by artificially decreasing the rate of secondary fusion following isolated ORIF thus increasing its overall expected value. Adjusting the rate of secondary fusion to 0%, the expected value of ORIF with PSTA nearly doubled that of ORIF (18.06 vs 9.45). Similarly, when adjusting the moderate and severe complication rates following ORIF with PSTA to 100%, the expected value of ORIF with PSTA still exceeded that of ORIF (15.45 vs 8.96, and 13.52 vs 8.96, respectively). CONCLUSION: Expected value decision analysis favors ORIF with PSTA as the optimal treatment for complex DIACF.