Comparative Study of Function and Quality of Life in Patients with Fracture of the Tibial Plateau Operated with Locked or Conventional Plates^[*]

Abstract

Objective

To compare clinical, functional, and quality of life outcomes between patients with tibial plateau fractures operated with locked or conventional plates, and to compare the costs of these implants.

Methods

This was a comparative cross-sectional study of a consecutive series of patients with tibial plateau fractures treated surgically from August 2015 to June 2016. Patients < 18 years old, those unable to answer the questionnaires or to attend the outpatient reassessment, polytrauma patients, those with associated injuries on the ipsilateral limb, and patients who had not undergone treatment with bone plates were excluded. The present study compared the costs of the implants for the hospital, quality of life (with the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12]), Lysholm score, pain scale, and clinical and radiological parameters.

Results

A total of 45 patients with tibial plateau fractures were admitted, and 11 cases were excluded. Two cases were lost to follow-up; therefore, 32 remained for the analysis (94%). The mean follow-up time was of 15.1 months (standard deviation [SD] = 4.8 months). In group A (locked plates), there were 22 patients (69%), at an average hospital cost of BRL 4,125.39/patient (SD = 1,634.79/patient) for the implants. In group B (conventional plates) there were 10 patients (31%), at an average cost of BRL 438.53 (SD = 161.8/patient) (p < 0.00001). For the other parameters, no differences were observed, except for a greater articular depression in group A (2.7 mm ± 3.3 mm versus 0.5 mm ± 1.6 mm; p = 0.02; TE = 0.90).

Conclusion

The costs of locked implants for the treatment of tibial plateau fractures are significantly higher than those of conventional implants, without any clinical, quality of life, radiological, or functional advantages of the locked implants demonstrated in the present series.

Keywords

tibial fractures - bone plates - quality of life - Lysholm knee score - sick leave - cost and cost analysis - unified health system

^* Work developed at the Orthopedics and Traumatology Service, Hospital e Maternidade Therezinha de Jesus, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil

• Referências

• 1 Jacofsky DJ, Haidukerwych GJ. Tibia plateau fractures. In: Scott WN. , ed. Insall & Scott surgery of the knee. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2006: 1133-46
• 2 Elsoe R, Larsen P, Nielsen NP, Swenne J, Rasmussen S, Ostgaard SE. Population-based epidemiology of tibial plateau fractures. Orthopedics 2015; 38 (09) e780-6
• 3 Departamento de Informática do SUS [Base de dados online]. Brasília: MS - Ministério da Saúde 2017 [acesso em 2017 jun 21]. Disponível em: http://tabnet.datasus.gov.br/cgi/tabcgi.exe?sih/cnv/qiuf.def
• 4 Pelser PC. Controversies in the management of tibial plateau fractures. SA Orthop J 2010; 9 (03) 75-82
• 5 Logan C, Hess A, Kwon JY. Damage control orthopaedics: Variability of construct design for external fixation of the lower extremity and implications on cost. Injury 2015; 46 (08) 1533-8
• 6 Russell N, Tamblyn P, Jaarsma R. Tibial plateau fractures treated with plate fixation: to lock or not to lock. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2009; 19 (02) 75-82
• 7 Markhardt BK, Gross JM, Monu JUV. Schatzker classification of tibial plateau fractures: use of CT and MR imaging improves assessment. Radiographics 2009; 29 (02) 585-97
• 8 Petersson IF, Boegård T, Saxne T, Silman AJ, Svensson B. Radiographic osteoarthritis of the knee classified by the Ahlbäck and Kellgren & Lawrence systems for the tibiofemoral joint in people aged 35-54 years with chronic knee pain. Ann Rheum Dis 1997; 56 (08) 493-6
• 9 Peccin MS, Ciconelli R, Cohen M. Questionário específico para sintomas do joelho “Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale”: tradução e validação para a língua portuguesa. Acta Ortop Bras 2006; 14 (05) 268-72
• 10 Silveira MF, Almeida JC, Freire RS, Haikal DS, Martins AE. Propriedades psicométricas do instrumento de avaliação da qualidade de vida: 12-item health survey (SF-12). Cien Saude Colet 2013; 18 (07) 1923-31
• 11 Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992; 112 (01) 155-9
• 12 McNamara IR, Smith TO, Shepherd KL, Clark AB, Nielsen DM, Donell S. , et al. Surgical fixation methods for tibial plateau fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (09) CD009679
• 13 DelSole EM, Egol KA, Tejwani NC. Construct choice for the treatment of displaced, comminuted olecranon fractures: are locked plates cost effective?. Iowa Orthop J 2016; 36: 59-63
• 14 Abghari M, Marcano A, Davidovitch R, Konda SR, Egol KA. Are locked plates needed for split depression tibial plateau fractures?. J Knee Surg 2016; 29 (06) 482-6
• 15 Singleton N, Sahakian V, Muir D. Outcome after tibial plateau fracture: How important is restoration of articular congruity?. J Orthop Trauma 2017; 31 (03) 158-63
• 16 Albuquerque RP, Hara R, Prado J, Schiavo L, Giordano V, do Amaral NP. Epidemiological study on tibial plateau fractures at a level I trauma center. Acta Ortop Bras 2013; 21 (02) 109-15
• 17 Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Open reduction and internal fixation compared with circular fixator application for bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. Results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (12) 2613-23
• 18 Rohra N, Suri HS, Gangrade K. Functional and radiological outcome of Schatzker type V and VI tibial plateau fracture treatment with dual plates with minimum 3 years follow-up: a prospective study. J Clin Diagn Res 2016; 10 (05) RC05-10
• 19 Mattiassich G, Foltin E, Scheurecker G, Schneiderbauer A, Kröpfl A, Fischmeister M. Radiographic and clinical results after surgically treated tibial plateau fractures at three and twenty two years postsurgery. Int Orthop 2014; 38 (03) 587-94