Objectives Multiple systematic reviews have reported on the impact of rib fracture fixation in the presence of flail chest and multiple rib fractures, however this practice remains controversial. Our aim is to synthesise the effectiveness of surgical rib fracture fixation as evidenced by systematic reviews. Design A systematic search identified systematic reviews comparing effectiveness of rib fracture fixation with non-operative management of adults with flail chest or unifocal non-flail rib fractures. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Science Citation Index were last searched 17 March 2017. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool. The primary outcome was duration of mechanical ventilation. Results Twelve systematic reviews were included, consisting of 3 unique randomised controlled trials and 19 non-randomised studies. Length of mechanical ventilation was shorter in the fixation group compared with the non–operative group in flail chest; pooled estimates ranged from −4.52 days, 95% CI (−5.54 to –3.5) to −7.5 days, 95% CI (−9.9 to –5.5). Pneumonia, length of hospital and intensive care unit stay all showed a statistically significant improvement in favour of fixation for flail chest; however, all outcomes in favour of fixation had substantial heterogeneity. There was no statistically significant difference between groups in mortality. Two systematic reviews included one non-randomised studies of unifocal non-flail rib fracture population; due to limited evidence the benefits with surgery are uncertain. Conclusions Synthesis of the reviews has shown some potential improvement in patient outcomes with flail chest after fixation. For future review updates, meta-analysis for effectiveness may need to take into account indications and timing of surgery as a subgroup analysis to address clinical heterogeneity between primary studies. Further robust evidence is required before conclusions can be drawn of the effectiveness of surgical fixation for flail chest and in particular, unifocal non-flail rib fractures. PROSPERO registration number CRD42016053494.

Objectives To undertake a systematic review of the evidence base for the effectiveness of surgical fixation of lateral compression (LC-1) fragility fractures of the pelvis compared with non-surgical approaches. Searches MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and two international trials registers were searched up to January 2017 (MEDLINE to February 2019) for studies of internal or external fixation of fragility fractures of the pelvis. Participants Patients with lateral compression pelvic fractures, sustained as the result of a low-energy mechanism, defined as a fall from standing height or less. Interventions Surgery using either external or internal fixation devices. Conservative non-surgical treatment was the defined comparator. Outcome measures Outcomes of interest were patient mobility and function, pain, quality of life, fracture union, mortality, hospital length of stay and complications (additional operative procedures, number and type of adverse events and serious adverse events). Quality assessment and synthesis The Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Case Series was used to assess the included studies. Results were presented in a narrative synthesis. Results Of 3421 records identified, four retrospective case series met the inclusion criteria. Fixation types were not consistent between studies or within studies and most patients had more than one type of pelvic fixation. Where reported, mobility and function improved post-surgery, and a reduction in pain was recorded. Length of hospital stay ranged from 4 days to 54 days for surgical fixation of any type. Reported complications and adverse outcomes included: infections, implant loosening, pneumonia and thrombosis. Use of analgesia was not reported. Conclusions There is insufficient evidence to support guidance on the most effective treatment for patients who fail to mobilise after sustaining an LC-1 fragility fracture. Trial registration number CRD42017055872.

The surgical options for revision shoulder arthroplasty and the number of procedures performed are increasing. However, little is known about the risk factors for intraoperative complications associated with this complex surgery. The National Joint Registry (NJR) is a surgeon reported database recording information on major joint replacements including revision shoulder arthroplasty. Using multivariable binary logistic regression modelling, we analyzed 1445 revision shoulder arthroplasties reported to the NJR between April 2012 and 2015. The risk of developing a complication during revision surgery was greater than primary arthroplasty (5% versus 2.5%). An intraoperative fracture was the most common complication occurring in 50 (3.5%) cases. Nerve injuries were recorded for two (0.1%) patients and vascular injuries for one (0.1%) patient. The incidence of intraoperative fractures was higher in females than males (relative risk = 3.25; p = 0.005). Periprosthetic fracture as an indication for revision carried the highest risk for any complication (relative risk = 3.00, p = 0.06). This is the largest registry study to date investigating the incidence and risk factors for intraoperative complications during revision shoulder arthroplasty. Females have over three times the risk of intraoperative fractures compared to males. This study will help inform surgeons to accurately counsel patients.