Objective: To describe the injury mechanisms and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in acute hamstring injuries of male soccer players using a systematic video analysis. Design: Descriptive case series study of consecutive acute hamstring injuries from September 2017 to January 2022. Setting: Two specialized sports medicine hospitals. Participants: Professional male soccer players aged between 18 and 40 years, referred for injury assessment within 7 days after an acute hamstring injury, with an available video footage of the injury and positive finding on MRI. Independent Variables: Hamstring injury mechanisms (specific scoring based on standardized models) in relation to hamstring muscle injury MRI findings. Main Outcome Measures: Hamstring injury mechanism (playing situation, player/opponent behavior, movement, and biomechanical body positions) and MRI injury location. Results: Fourteen videos of acute hamstring injuries in 13 professional male soccer players were analyzed. Three different injury mechanisms were seen: mixed-type (both sprint-related and stretch-related, 43%), stretch-type (36%), and sprint-type (21%). Most common actions during injury moments were change of direction (29%), kicking (29%), and running (21%). Most injuries occurred at high or very high horizontal speed (71%) and affected isolated proximal biceps femoris (BF) (36%). Most frequent body positions at defined injury moments were neutral trunk (43%), hip flexion 45-90 degrees (57%), and knee flexion <45 degrees (93%). Magnetic resonance imaging findings showed that 79% were isolated single-tendon injuries. Conclusions: According to a video analysis, most hamstring injuries in soccer occur during high-speed movements. Physicians should suspect proximal and isolated single-tendon—most often BF—hamstring injury, if represented injury mechanisms are seen during game play. In addition to sprinting and stretching, also mixed-type injury mechanisms occur.

Introduction: Trochanteric femoral fractures are among the most common operatively treated fractures. Intramedullary fixation has become the treatment of choice in many centers around the world. Nevertheless, the knowledge of rare complications of these fractures is limited. In this study, the incidence and treatment strategies for peri-implant fractures (PIF) were assessed. Materials and methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was done on 987 consecutive operatively treated trochanteric fractures. PFNA cephalomedullary nail was used as a fixation method. All patients were followed up from patient records for peri-implant fractures. Plain radiographs as well as different salvage methods were analyzed and compared. Results: The total rate of peri-implant fractures was 1.4% (n = 14). The rate of PIF for patients treated with short (200 mm) nails, intermediate-length (240 mm) nails, and long nails was 2.7% (n = 2), 1.5% (n = 11), and 0.7% (n = 1), respectively (ns, p > 0.05 for difference). Treatment of choice for PIF was either ORIF with locking plate (57%, n = 8) or exchange nailing (43%, n = 6). None of the PIF patients needed additional surgeries for non-union, malunion, or delayed union. Conclusions: A PIF is a rare complication of intramedullary fixation of trochanteric fractures. It can be treated with either locking plates or exchange nailing with sufficient results. There are no grounds for favoring long nails to avoid PIFs.

Objectives: Hamstring injuries are common and can now be accurately diagnosed. In addition, novel surgical indications have been introduced. However, evidence-based guidelines on the hamstring injuries in management of top-level athletes are missing. Methods: The management methods and outcomes of treatment are classically based on relatively small case series. We discuss a novel concept based on the fact that each tendon of the hamstrings muscle should be managed in an individual fashion. Furthermore, suitable indications for hamstring surgery in athletes are introduced. Results: The present study introduces modern treatment principles for hamstring injury management. Typical clinical and imagining findings as well as surgical treatment are presented based on a critical review of the available literature and personal experience. Conclusions: Hamstring injuries should not be considered to be all equal given the complexity of this anatomical region: The three separate tendons are different, and this impacts greatly on the decision-making process and outcomes in athletes.

Background: The incidence of completely displaced overriding distal metaphyseal radial fractures in children is unknown, and the optimal treatment is controversial. Methods: All completely displaced distal metaphyseal radial fractures in patients <16 years old treated in our tertiary-level institution from 2014 to 2019 were identified with use of the Kids’ Fracture Tool Helsinki. Etiology, fracture characteristics, management, and quality of treatment were assessed. A telephone interview with the guardian of the patient was performed for 100 (89%) of 112 patients at 1.5 to 7.2 years (median, 4.6 years) after the injury. Pain during the last month and forearm function were recorded. Treatment satisfaction was assessed with use of a 7-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 113 completely displaced overriding distal metaphyseal radial fractures in 112 patients (81 of whom were residents of Helsinki) were treated during the 6-year-long study period. The mean annual incidence was 1.42 per 10,000 population. Most (73%) of these fractures occurred in children <11 years old, and most fractures were dorsally displaced and located nearly as far proximally from the distal radial physis as the maximum width of the distal metaphysis. Closed manipulation was attempted in two-thirds of cases in the emergency department, with a failure rate of 46%. Strong opioids were administered in 70 of 112 patients. None of the 26 patients whose fractures were immobilized in an overriding position had secondary interventions, pain, or functional disability. The mean satisfaction with treatment on the Likert scale was 6.2. Conclusions: The annual incidence of overriding distal metaphyseal radial fractures patients <16 years old was shown to vary between 0.72 and 2.01 per 10,000 population. Opioids, local and general anesthesia, hospital admission, and secondary interventions can be avoided in prepubescent patients by casting these fractures in an overriding position while the patient is in the emergency department. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Introduction Distal radius is the most common site of fracture in children, comprising 23%–31% of all paediatric fractures. Approximately one-fifth of these fractures are displaced. Completely displaced distal metaphyseal radius fractures in children have traditionally been treated with closed reduction. Recent evidence suggests that correcting the shortening in over-riding distal metaphyseal radius fractures is not necessary in prepubertal children. To date, no published randomised controlled trial (RCT) has compared treatment of these fractures in children by casting the fracture in bayonet position to reduction and pin fixation. Methods and analysis We will conduct an RCT to compare the outcomes of casting the fracture in bayonet position in children under 11 years of age to reduction and percutaneous pin fixation. 60 patients will be randomly assigned to casting or surgery groups. We have two primary outcomes. The first is ratio (injured side/non-injured side) in the total active forearm rotation and the second is ratio (injured side/non-injured side) in total active range of motion of the wrist in the flexion–extension plane at 6 months. The secondary outcomes will include axial radiographic alignment, passive extension of the wrists, grip strength and length of forearms and hands, patient-reported outcome QuickDASH and pain questionnaire PedsQL. Patients not willing to participate in the RCT will be asked to participate in a prospective cohort. Patients not eligible for randomisation will be asked to participate in a non-eligible cohort. These cohorts are included to enhance the external validity of the results of the RCT. Our null hypothesis is that the results of the primary outcome measures in the casting group are non-inferior to surgery group. Ethics and dissemination The institutional review board of the Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District has approved the protocol. We will disseminate the findings through peer-reviewed publications. Trial registration number NCT04323410. Protocol V.1.1, 29 September 2020.

Update: This article was updated on April 5, 2024, because of a previous error. On page 2, in the bottom right of Figure 1, the text that had previously read “202 (43%) patients with Isolated Radial Fractures” now reads “202 (43%) patients with Both-Bone Fractures.” An erratum has been published: JBJS Open Access. 2024;9(2):e22.00115ER. Background: The incidence of and risk factors for adverse events after internal fixation of diaphyseal forearm fractures have not been well defined in the current literature. The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of adverse events after diaphyseal forearm fracture surgery in adults and explore potential risk factors for adverse events. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter, cohort study in which we evaluated all diaphyseal forearm fractures between 2009 and 2019 in patients presenting to 4 trauma hospitals in southern Finland. Patients <16 years of age and fracture-dislocations were excluded. There were 470 patients included in this study. Patient records were evaluated to identify and analyze adverse events. Results: There were 202 patients with both-bone fractures, 164 patients with isolated ulnar fractures, and 104 patients with isolated radial fractures. In total, 146 patients (31%) experienced an adverse event; 83 (18%) had major adverse events (persistent or requiring surgical intervention). The patients underwent procedures performed by 185 different surgeons. The median number of operations for a single surgeon was 2 (range, 1 to 12). The most common major adverse events were plate and screw-related issues (6%), nonunion (5%), persistent nerve injuries (4%), and refractures (4%). Higher body mass index, Gustilo-Anderson type-II open fractures, both-bone fractures, isolated radial fractures, and operations performed by junior residents were found to be risk factors for adverse events in the multivariable analysis. Conclusions: Adverse events after diaphyseal forearm fracture surgery are common. We recommend concentrating these operations in a limited team of surgeons and restricting inexperienced surgeons from operating on these fractures without supervision. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.