Literature DB >> 25528622

Bone tissue repair in patients with open diaphyseal tibial fracture treated with biplanar external fixation or reamed locked intramedullary nailing.

Fábio Lucas Rodrigues1, Luiz Carlos de Abreu2, Vitor Engrácia Valenti2, Andre Lage Valente3, Rafael da Costa Pereira Cestari3, Pedro Henrique Isoldi Pohl3, Luciano Miller Reis Rodrigues3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Open tibial fractures are usually caused by high-energy trauma. There is no consensus about the best treatment for these fractures. Biomechanical studies show that fixing on two planes approaches the rigidity of the bone, whereas the use of interlocking intramedullary nailing is widely used and reported to produce better therapeutic results in fracture healing.
OBJECTIVE: To compare bone tissue repair in patients with open diaphyseal tibial fracture treated with biplanar external fixation or reamed locked intramedullary nailing.
METHOD: Prospective randomised study with 68 patients undergoing two types of surgical treatment: biplanar external fixation or reamed locked intramedullary nailing. Consolidation, complications (infection, malunion and non-union) and quality of life using the SF-36 Health Survey were assessed 12 months after surgery.
RESULTS: Consolidation occurred in 84.6% of patients who underwent reamed intramedullary nailing, and in 90.3% of patients who were treated with biplanar external fixation. In the intramedullary nailing group, there were two cases of non-union, three cases of malunion and two cases of infection. In the patients treated with biplanar fixation, there were three cases of non-union, five cases of malunion and no cases of infection. There were no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups for these results. Patient quality of life was statistically equal for both methods.
CONCLUSION: Treatment with biplanar external fixation was associated with statistically similar results compared with intramedullary locking.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  External fixators; Fractures; Intramedullary fixation of fractures; Quality of life; Tibial fractures

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25528622     DOI: 10.1016/S0020-1383(14)70018-X

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Injury        ISSN: 0020-1383            Impact factor:   2.586


  5 in total

1.  The outcome comparison of the suprapatellar approach and infrapatellar approach for tibia intramedullary nailing.

Authors:  Qi Sun; XiaoYang Nie; JinPeng Gong; JieZhou Wu; RenLong Li; Wei Ge; Ming Cai
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-05-07       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Risk factors for infectious complications after open fractures; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kirsten Kortram; Hans Bezstarosti; Willem-Jan Metsemakers; Michael J Raschke; Esther M M Van Lieshout; Michael H J Verhofstad
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-07-25       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Sequential management of tibial fractures using a temporary unicortical external fixator.

Authors:  Anne-Pauline Russo; Alexandre Caubere; Ammar Ghabi; Antoine Grosset; Philippe Mangin; Sylvain Rigal; Laurent Mathieu
Journal:  SICOT J       Date:  2018-09-07

4.  External fixator combined with three different fixation methods of fibula for treatment of extra-articular open fractures of distal tibia and fibula: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Dong-Dong Sun; Dan Lv; Kun Zhou; Jian Chen; Li-Lan Gao; Ming-Lin Sun
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 5.  An engineering review of external fixators.

Authors:  P L N Fernando; Aravinda Abeygunawardane; Pci Wijesinghe; Parakrama Dharmaratne; Pujitha Silva
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 2.242

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.