Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 4, 2026

Minimally Invasive Treatment for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Using Sagittal Alignment Screws and A Trauma Reduction Device
Published on: November 8, 2024
Borderline femur fracture patients: early total care or damage control orthopaedics?
Ben Nicholas1, Laszlo Toth, Karlijn van Wessem
1Department of Traumatology, John Hunter Hospital and University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Background:
A recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) favours damage control orthopaedics (DCO) over early total care (ETC) in the management of high-energy femoral shaft fracture (FSF) patients with borderline physiology. The purpose of this study was to compare the borderline physiology FSF demographics, management and outcomes of a Level-1 trauma centre, John Hunter Hospital (JHH) with those of the RCT.
Methods:
A 41-month study of the prospective FSF database was performed. FSF patients were categorized according to the Pape system. Stable (JHH-S) and borderline (JHH-BL) patients' demographics, injury severity, methods of treatment and outcomes were compared with the corresponding groups of the RCT (RCT-S and RCT-BL).
Results:
Sixty-six patients met the inclusion criteria of which 45 (68%) were in JHH-S and 21 (32%) were in JHH-BL group. In comparison, there were 121 (73%) RCT-S and 44 (28%) RCT-BL patients in the RCT study population. The demographics and injury severity were similar in the borderline groups, while JHH-S patients were less severely injured. DCO was utilized more frequently in the RCT in both the stable group (JHH-S: 2% versus RCT-S: 41%), and the borderline group (JHH-BL: 14% versus RCT-BL: 48%). The outcomes between the JHH-S and RCT-S groups were comparable, except for intensive care unit (ICU) hours (JHH-S: 20 ± 64 versus RCT-S: 165 ± 187, P < 0.0001) and ventilator hours (JHH-S: 13 ± 46 versus RCT-S: 98 ± 120, P < 0.0001). Among borderline patients, JHH-BL had a tendency to show a lower incidence of both acute respiratory distress syndrome (0% versus 14%) and multiple organ failure (4.8% versus 19.6%). JHH-BL patients had sepsis less frequently (4.8% versus 24.5%, P < 0.05), fewer ICU hours (98 ± 129 versus 436 ± 347, P < 0.0001) and fewer ventilator hours (82 ± 119 versus 337 ± 305, P= 0.0005) compared with the RCT-BL.
Conclusions:
The incidence of S and BL patients, demographics and injury severity (among BL patients) is comparable with the RCT. Our current practice of employing predominantly ETC among S (98%) and BL (86%) patients results in shorter ICU and ventilator days, fewer septic complications and a potentially lower incidence of organ failure than in the RCT which had 57% overall utilization of ETC.
Related Concept Videos
Fractures: Bone Repair
Minor fractures with no bone displacement are treated by immobilizing the fractured bone using a cast or splint. However, in the case of fractures with displaced bones, the broken bones are repositioned before immobilization to ensure successful healing without deformation and loss of function. The realignment of fractured bone ends is performed through a process called reduction. If the procedure...
Flail Chest-II
Assessment:
1. Clinical Evaluation:
History:
Restorative Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care