PurposeKnee dislocations (KDs) are rare in orthopaedic trauma but can have devastating effects. Failing to diagnose a concomitant vascular injury can lead to amputation. Different methods are used for the diagnosis of a vascular injury and the best approach is under debate.This study aims to examine the risk factor(s) of vascular injury in patients with KDs, examine variables that differ between obese patients and non-obese patients with KDs, and analyse the modalities used to identify vascular injuries in the KD population. MethodsThe electronic patient medical record system at a major trauma centre was retrospectively reviewed to identify knee dislocations from 2015 to 2022. These were stratified based on age, gender, BMI, mechanism of injury, vascular injury, non-vascular complications, and laterality. Co-variates were inputted into a univariable regression analysis, followed by a multivariable regression analysis to identify risk factors of vascular injury in patients with knee dislocations. Co-variates were also compared between obese and non-obese patients using two-tailed t-tests for continuous variables and chi-squared test for categorical variables. ResultsForty patients were identified with a KD, with twenty-eight males and twelve females. The average age was 42.9 years, seventeen patients had a BMI of thirty or over, and eleven patients (27.5%) had a vascular injury. Open injuries (OR: 2.21; 95% CI: 1.19–11.30; p = 0.038) and obesity (OR: 2.66; 95% CI: 1.45–18.69; p = 0.027) are risk factors for vascular injury in patients with knee dislocation. Compared to non-obese patients, obese patients had a higher rate of open injury (p = 0.028), vascular injury (p = 0.017), low-energy injuries (p = 0.014), non-vascular complications (p = 0.017), and amputation (p = 0.036). ConclusionOpen injuries and obesity are risk factors for vascular injury in patients with KD. Compared to non-obese patients, obese patients have low-energy injuries and an increased rate of non-vascular complications, meaning that clinicians could err on the side of caution when investigating vascular injury.Level of evidence: IV.