Are Locked Plates Necessary to Maintain Reduction in the Treatment of Geriatric Ankle Fractures?

CATEGORY: Ankle; Trauma INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE: Treatment of geriatric fractures are unique in their perioperative and postsurgical complications. Increased age, increased number of comorbidities, and decreased bone quality present a significant challenge when treating geriatric fractures, including ankle fractures. Recent studies have hypothesized using locking plates will lead to better outcomes compared to non-locking plates in geriatric ankle fractures. Conventional non-locking plates depend on the bone quality and screw-plate friction in order to achieve proper fixation and stability whereas locking plates do not. Locking plates are common in this patient population due to greater rigidity and biomechanical stability while not relying on bone quality to maintain fixation. This study aims to determine if locking plates are necessary to maintain reduction in geriatric ankle fractures. METHODS: After approval from the Institutional Review Board, a retrospective chart review was performed on all patients 60 years or older sustaining an ankle fracture between 2012-2018. Patients with less than 3 months follow-up at the time of injury were excluded. Each patient underwent surgical fixation at the discretion of the attending surgeon for bimalleolar or trimalleolar ankle fractures. The following patient information was collected from the charts: age, mechanism of injury, and comorbidities. Radiographic review was performed to determine open or closed fracture status, the type of fracture pattern and presence or absence of a syndesmotic injury. Patient radiographs from the most recent follow-up were analyzed for maintenance of reduction and use of a locking or non-locking plate. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi Square Test for significance and the Fisher’s Exact Test when necessary. RESULTS: Out of 218 patients, 143 received locking plates (L) and 75 received non-locking plates (NL). There were 99 bimalleolar fractures (69.2%) and 44 trimalleolar fractures (30.8%) in the L group. The NL group had a higher percentage of trimalleolar fractures, 50.7% (38), with 37 bimalleolar fractures (49.3%) (p=0.004). The two groups did not differ in terms of mechanism of injury (p=0.906), high energy (39.2% in L and 41.3% in NL, p=0.773), and open fractures (24.5% in L and 17.3% in NL, p=0.227). Upon radiographic review, 142 patients in the L group (0.7%) and 72 patients in the NL group (4.0%) maintained reduction (p=0.119). Loss of reduction in the L group was a trimalleolar fracture whereas 2 bimalleolar and 1 trimalleolar fractures in the NL group. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that there is not a greater loss of reduction when utilizing locking plates. Surgeons should keep this in mind when choosing constructs for fixation of geriatric ankle fractures.