This study demonstrates that muscle necrosis is more commonly found in acute compartment syndrome in the absence of a fracture than in those with a fracture. Referral of swollen limbs without fracture for an orthopaedic opinion should not be delayed.

No abstract

IntroductionAnkle fractures are common in the elderly population. Surgical fixation is technically challenging and often results in complications due to high rates of osteoporosis and vascular disease. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) often requires prolonged periods of non-weight bearing increasing the risks of complications. Tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing has been suggested as an alternative to ORIF which allows immediate weight bearing, and is suggested to result in fewer complications. This study aims to compare the two surgical techniques in the elderly population with ankle fractures.Methods and analysisThe study will be a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial comparing ORIF to TTC nailing in 110 patients with ankle fractures aged 50 or above with a Charlson Comorbidity Index of greater than or equal to four. Participants and assessors will not be blinded to intervention. The primary outcome measure will be overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes include length of hospital stay, mobility at discharge, discharge destination, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot score, the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score, mortality rate, rate of secondary surgical interventions and number of blood transfusions required postoperatively. Our null hypothesis is that there is no clinically significant difference in the primary outcome measure between the two treatment groups.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by Metro South Hospital and Health Services Human Research Ethics Committee (EC00167) (reference number HREC/17/QPAH/351).DiscussionCompletion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of TTC nailing versus ORIF in treatment of the elderly ankle fracture. If TTC nailing is found to result in superior outcomes, this trial has the capacity to change current clinical practice.Trial registration numberACTRN12617001588381;Pre-results andU1111-1203-1704.

Removal of hardware alone is a reasonable option to offer as a relatively minor procedure following a failed arthrodesis of the first MTPJ. This must be accepted on the proviso that in this study four out of 11 (36%) patients proceeded to a revision first MTPJ fusion or first MTPJ replacement. We also found that the rate of non-union in primary first MTPJ fusion was significantly higher in males and those patients who had undergone previous surgery.