P P Schmittenbecher1. 1. Department of Pediatric Surgery, Municipal Hospital, Moltkestraße 90, 76133, Karlsruhe, Germany. peter.schmittenbecher@klinikum-karlsruhe.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Implant removal in children is still a standard procedure. Implants may disturb function, and some theoretical long-term risks like growth disturbance, foreign body reaction, chronic infection and corrosion are used as arguments for removal. Implant migration or interference with any other orthopaedic treatment over the later course of life is also a matter of debate. On the other hand, the difficulty in removing single implants as well as possible perioperative complications has induced discussion about the retention of implants in childhood. METHODS: The current procedures are exposed and the available literature on implant removal in children reviewed. RESULTS: Actually, a clear recommendation does not exist. The current line of action still includes routine removal, as it is preferred by some authors, whereas others argue for a selective procedure. K-wires as well as intramedullary nails are usually removed because the ends may interfere with the surrounding tissue. Screws and plates can be retained if there are no local problems. The removal of external fixators is non-controversial. CONCLUSIONS: Benefits have to outweigh the risks and complications in the individual case and the procedure should not require a more extensive procedure than insertion. It has to be an individual decision in view of the lack of evidence to support routine removal as well as to refute it.
PURPOSE: Implant removal in children is still a standard procedure. Implants may disturb function, and some theoretical long-term risks like growth disturbance, foreign body reaction, chronic infection and corrosion are used as arguments for removal. Implant migration or interference with any other orthopaedic treatment over the later course of life is also a matter of debate. On the other hand, the difficulty in removing single implants as well as possible perioperative complications has induced discussion about the retention of implants in childhood. METHODS: The current procedures are exposed and the available literature on implant removal in children reviewed. RESULTS: Actually, a clear recommendation does not exist. The current line of action still includes routine removal, as it is preferred by some authors, whereas others argue for a selective procedure. K-wires as well as intramedullary nails are usually removed because the ends may interfere with the surrounding tissue. Screws and plates can be retained if there are no local problems. The removal of external fixators is non-controversial. CONCLUSIONS: Benefits have to outweigh the risks and complications in the individual case and the procedure should not require a more extensive procedure than insertion. It has to be an individual decision in view of the lack of evidence to support routine removal as well as to refute it.
Authors: Saam Morshed; Marcie Humphrey; Luis A Corrales; Meredith Millett; Scott A Hoffinger Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2007-01-20 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Alexandre Boulos; Steven F DeFroda; Justin E Kleiner; Nathan Thomas; Joseph A Gil; Aristides I Cruz Journal: J Clin Orthop Trauma Date: 2017-07-01
Authors: Jeroen C van Egmond; Caroline A Selles; Berry I Cleffken; Gert R Roukema; Kees H van der Vlies; Niels W L Schep Journal: J Wrist Surg Date: 2019-05-09