Literature DB >> 17200326

Exchange nailing of ununited fractures.

Mark R Brinker1, Daniel P O'Connor.   

Abstract

Exchange nailing is most appropriate for a nonunion without substantial bone loss. There is no clear consensus regarding the use of exchange nailing in the presence of active, purulent infection. The exchange nail should be at least 1 mm larger in diameter than the nail being removed, and it has been recommended that it be up to 4 mm larger when the nail being removed was greatly undersized. Canal reaming should progress until osseous tissue is observed in the reaming flutes. Exchange nailing is an excellent choice for aseptic nonunions of noncomminuted diaphyseal femoral fractures, with union rates reported to range from 72% to 100%. On the basis of the available literature, exchange nailing cannot be recommended for distal femoral nonunions at this time. Exchange nailing is an excellent choice for aseptic nonunions of noncomminuted diaphyseal tibial fractures, with union rates reported to range from 76% to 96%. On the basis of the available literature, exchange nailing is generally not indicated for humeral nonunions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17200326     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00742

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  34 in total

1.  S-osteotomy with lengthening and then nailing compared with traditional Ilizarov method.

Authors:  Xia Lan; Lihai Zhang; Peifu Tang; Hetao Xia; Gang Li; Aiming Peng; Yilian Han; Bangtuo Yuan; Wenpeng Xu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Revision with plates of humeral nonunions secondary to failed intramedullary nailing.

Authors:  Christian Allende; Agustín Paz; Gonzalo Altube; Hernán Boccolini; Alejandro Malvarez; Bartolomé Allende
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Limb lengthening and then insertion of an intramedullary nail: a case-matched comparison.

Authors:  S Robert Rozbruch; Dawn Kleinman; Austin T Fragomen; Svetlana Ilizarov
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-09-18       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  Comparison of Intramedullary Nail Versus Conventional Ilizarov Method for Lower Limb Lengthening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Wei-Guo Xu
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 2.071

5.  Plate augmentation with retention of intramedullary nail is effective for resistant femoral shaft non-union.

Authors:  Raju Vaishya; Amit Kumar Agarwal; Nishint Gupta; Vipul Vijay
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-06-25

Review 6.  Diaphyseal long bone nonunions - types, aetiology, economics, and treatment recommendations.

Authors:  Markus Rupp; Christoph Biehl; Matthäus Budak; Ulrich Thormann; Christian Heiss; Volker Alt
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 7.  Challenge to treat hypertrophic nonunion of the femoral shaft: the Poller screw augmentation technique.

Authors:  Tae Woong Eom; Jung Jae Kim; Hyoung Keun Oh; Ji Wan Kim
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-07-06

8.  Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis in humerus nonunion after intramedullary nailing.

Authors:  Christian Allende; Fernando Vanoli; Luciano Gentile; Natalia Gutierrez
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-03-24       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Can tibial nonunion be predicted at 3 months after intramedullary nailing?

Authors:  Justin S Yang; Jesse Otero; Christopher M McAndrew; William M Ricci; Michael J Gardner
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.512

10.  Reamed interlocking intramedullary nailing for the treatment of tibial diaphyseal fractures and aseptic nonunions. Can we expect an optimum result?

Authors:  Byron E Chalidis; George E Petsatodis; Nick C Sachinis; Christos G Dimitriou; Anastasios G Christodoulou
Journal:  Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr       Date:  2009-08-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.