LAUSR

Abstract Background  Limb-threatening lower extremity injuries often require secondary bone grafting after soft tissue reconstruction. We hypothesized that there would be fewer wound complications when performing secondary bone grafting via a remote surgical approach rather than direct flap elevation. Methods  A retrospective cohort study was performed at a single Level 1 trauma center comparing complications after secondary bone grafting in patients who had undergone previous soft tissue reconstruction after open tibia fractures between 2006 and 2020. Comparing bone grafting via a remote surgical incision versus direct flap elevation, we evaluated wound dehiscence requiring return to the operating room as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were deep infection and delayed amputation. Results  We identified 129 patients (mean age: 40 years, 82% male) with 159 secondary bone grafting procedures. Secondary bone grafting was performed via a remote surgical approach in 54% ( n  = 86) and direct flap elevation in 46% ( n  = 73) of cases. Wound dehiscence requiring return to the operating room occurred in one patient in the flap elevation group (1%) and none of the patients in the remote surgical approach. The odds of deep wound infection (OR, 1.77; p  = 0.31) or amputation (OR, 1.43; p  = 0.73) did not significantly differ between surgical approaches. No significant differences were found in complications between the reconstructive surgeon elevating and re-insetting the flap and the orthopaedic trauma surgeon performing the flap elevation and re-inset. Conclusion  Direct flap elevation for secondary bone grafting after soft tissue reconstruction for open tibia fractures did not result in more complications than bone grafting via a remote surgical approach. These findings should reassure surgeons to allow other clinical factors to influence the surgical approach for bone grafting.