Literature DB >> 20502220

Technical problems and complications in the removal of the less invasive stabilization system.

Takashi Suzuki1, Wade R Smith, Philip F Stahel, Steven J Morgan, Andrea J Baron, David J Hak.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the frequency of intraoperative problems and complications involved with Less Invasive Stabilization System (LISS) plate removal.
DESIGN: Retrospective study.
SETTING: Single academic level I trauma center.
METHODS: Medical records were reviewed for demographics, surgical technique, plate length, number and position of screws, time from internal fixation to plate removal, reason for removal, operating time for removal, and perioperative complications. Pre- and post-op radiographs were also reviewed to confirm plate and screw positions. The independent factors including age, sex, plate site, plate screws placed/available holes, union status, and time from internal fixation to removal were compared between patients in whom screw removal was complicated to those in whom screw removal proceeded without difficulty. Mann-Whitney and Fisher Exact tests were calculated with the level of significance at P < 0.05.
RESULTS: There were 33 patients (24 men and 9 women) that underwent LISS plate removal from 36 extremities (15 tibias and 21 femurs). The average time from internal fixation to removal was 13.2 months. The plates removed were 13-hole plates (16 cases), 9-hole plates (18 cases), and 5-hole plates (2 cases), which included a total of 349 screws. The specific reasons for plate removal were symptomatic implants after bone union (21 cases), nonunion requiring additional fixation (12 cases), early loss of fixation (2 cases), and a peri-implant fracture after bone union (1 case). The average operating time for plate removal was 71.3 minutes (range, 28-180 minutes). Five cases required more than 120 minutes. Difficulty with screw removal was encountered in 37 screws (10.6%) from 14 cases (38.9%). Two plates and 11 screw heads required cutting using a carbide or diamond tipped burr. Six cases required tearing the plate off bone by levering with a total of 10 screws still attached. Five screws were cut using a large bolt cutter. The other screws were stripped and removed with a stripped screw removal tap. Two patients developed a postoperative superficial wound infection that required treatment with oral antibiotics. One patient had a postoperative peroneal nerve palsy that recovered spontaneously. There were no statistical differences in predictors for patients with screw removal difficulty.
CONCLUSIONS: Difficulty with removal due to cold welding or screw head stripping is common in locking LISS plate screws. LISS plate removal can often require prolonged operating time and the use of specialized removal tools. Surgeons should anticipate the possibility of difficulties when removing these implants and be appropriately prepared.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20502220     DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181c29bf5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0890-5339            Impact factor:   2.512


  16 in total

1.  Case report: A technique to remove a jammed locking screw from a locking plate.

Authors:  Gunasekaran Kumar; Colin Dunlop
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  [Challenging the dogma on inferiority of stainless steel implants for fracture fixation. An end of the controversy?].

Authors:  S Weckbach; J T Losacco; J Hahnhaussen; F Gebhard; P F Stahel
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Surgical technique: Simple technique for removing a locking recon plate with damaged screw heads.

Authors:  Nirmal Raj Gopinathan; Mandeep Singh Dhillon; Rajesh Kumar
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-12-11       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Remove orthopedic fracture implant with minimal invasive surgery is good for the patient's early rehabilitation.

Authors:  Tiannan Zou; Qiaohong Li; Xiaoxiao Zhou; Zhao Yang; Ge Wang; Wei Liu; Chao Zhang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-12-15

5.  Locking Compression Plates are more difficult to remove than conventional non-locking plates.

Authors:  G D Musters; P Boele van Hensbroek; K J Ponsen; J S K Luitse; J C Goslings
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 3.693

6.  Technical complications during removal of locking screws from locking compression plates: a prospective multicenter study.

Authors:  N Schwarz; S Euler; M Schlittler; T Ulbing; P Wilhelm; G Fronhöfer; M Irnstorfer
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 3.693

7.  Microstructural Analysis of Fractured Orthopedic Implants.

Authors:  Mateusz Kopec; Adam Brodecki; Grzegorz Szczęsny; Zbigniew L Kowalewski
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-25       Impact factor: 3.623

8.  Outcome analysis of retrograde nailing and less invasive stabilization system in distal femoral fractures: A retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Christian Hierholzer; Christian von Rüden; Tobias Pötzel; Alexander Woltmann; Volker Bühren
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.251

9.  Knee arthroplasty with hardware removal: complication cascade. Is it preventable?

Authors:  Gabriel Nierenberg; Alaa Abu Elasal; Eran Keltz; Doron Norman
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2020-08-24

10.  A novel technique for pediatric femoral locked submuscular plate removal: the 'push-pull' technique.

Authors:  Martin F Hoffmann; John Gburek; Clifford B Jones
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2013-07-11       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.