Literature DB >> 26161159

A Novel Surgical Technique for Removing Buried Cannulated Screws Using a Guidewire and Countersink: A Report of Two Cases.

Yongsheng Chen1, Krishna Prasad Giri1, Christopher Jon Pearce1.   

Abstract

Removal of metal implants is a common procedure that is performed for a variety of indications. However, problems such as a buried screw head may occasionally arise and render hardware removal difficult or even impossible. The problem is further compounded when the initial screw was inserted percutaneously or via a minimally-invasive (MIS) technique. In the present paper, we introduce a novel, minimally invasive technique to remove buried cannulated screws which obviates the need for excessive extension of the skin incision, surgical exploration, soft tissue dissection or excess bone removal, which surgeons may otherwise have to undertake to uncover the buried screw head. This technique is especially useful in removing cannulated screws which have been inserted using small stab incisions and MIS techniques initially. This technique can be applied to the removal of buried cannulated screws which are placed into any bone in the body.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Buried screw; cannulated screw; implant removal

Year:  2015        PMID: 26161159      PMCID: PMC4493633          DOI: 10.2174/1874325001509010210

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Open Orthop J        ISSN: 1874-3250


  17 in total

1.  The posterolateral approach for plating tibial plateau fractures: problems in secondary hardware removal.

Authors:  Yi-Gang Huang; Shi-Min Chang
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  Percutaneous removal of buried antegrade femoral nails.

Authors:  Gregory M Georgiadis
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.512

3.  Removal of forearm plates. A review of the complications.

Authors:  V G Langkamer; C E Ackroyd
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1990-07

4.  On secondary fractures after removal of internal fixation material.

Authors:  L Convent
Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg       Date:  1977 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 0.500

5.  Complications and hardware removal after open reduction and internal fixation of humeral fractures.

Authors:  Scott Lovald; Deana Mercer; Jean Hanson; Ian Cowgill; Meghan Erdman; Paul Robinson; Beverly Diamond
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2011-05

6.  Retrieval and analysis of intramedullary rods. A follow-up study.

Authors:  S D Cook; R L Barrack; E Renz; R C Anderson; A F Harding; R J Haddad; M Milicic
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Incidence of hardware-related pain and its effect on functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fractures.

Authors:  O L Brown; D R Dirschl; W T Obremskey
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  Femoral neck fracture following hardware removal.

Authors:  James A Shaer; Barbara M Hileman; Jill E Newcomer; Marina C Hanes
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2012-01-16       Impact factor: 1.390

9.  Removal of intramedullary rods after femoral shaft fracture.

Authors:  R Miller; S E Renwick; T A DeCoster; P Shonnard; F Jabczenski
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 10.  Removal of broken hardware.

Authors:  David J Hak; Matthew McElvany
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.020

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.