Literature DB >> 28246951

Comparison of intramedullary nail, plate, and external fixation in the treatment of distal tibia nonunions.

Nabil A Ebraheim, Brad Evans, Xiaochen Liu, Mina Tanios, Marshall Gillette, Jiayong Liu1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine time to union of extra-articular distal tibia nonunions based on fracture type and fixation methods: intramedullary nail (IMN), plate osteosynthesis (PO), and external fixation (EF).
METHODS: This retrospective chart review included all patients who presented at a Level I trauma center with AO/OTA 43A & distal third 42A-C fracture nonunions between 2008 and 2014. Fixation methods were recorded and patient course was followed until nonunion had healed clinically.
RESULTS: Thirty-three distal tibia nonunions were included, and 29 reached eventual union (88%). Five AO/OTA fracture types were present. Mean times to union from nonunion diagnosis between original fracture types were compared (p = 0.203). Comminuted fracture types had longer times to union from nonunion diagnosis compared to simple fracture types (78 vs. 46 weeks, p = 0.051) and more revision fixations (1.5 vs. 0.5, p = 0.037). Mean time to union from nonunion diagnosis was shorter when no revision fixation was done compared to revisions (15 vs. 42 weeks, p = 0.102). Times to union from nonunion diagnosis without revision fixation were: IMN (12 weeks), PO (27 weeks), and EF (13 weeks) (p = 0.202). Times to union from definitive revision fixation were: IMN (17 weeks), PO (21 weeks), and EF (66 weeks) (p = 0.009), with EF taking significantly longer than both other methods. 21 patients (64%) underwent revision fixation. Revision fail rates were: IMN (0/6, 0%), PO (2/8, 25%), and EF (15/21, 71%). Time to union was longer in revisions that changed fixation method compared to revisions that used the same method (51 vs. 18 weeks, p = 0.030). Deep infections were also associated with longer union times (81 vs. 47 weeks, p = 0.040).
CONCLUSIONS: In this nonunion population, comminuted fracture types needed more time and revisions to reach union. Time to union was only clinically shorter when revision fixation was not performed, but IMN and PO were both successful fixation options with significantly shorter times to union than EF. Mean time to union increased even more when revision of fixation method was performed vs. exchange revision, as did nonunions with deep infections.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Distal tibia fracture; Fixation method; Fracture type; Nonunion; Revision fixation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28246951     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-017-3432-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  36 in total

1.  Is intramedullary nailing superior to plating in patients with extraarticular fracture of the distal tibia?

Authors:  Jorge Cabrolier; Marcelo Molina
Journal:  Medwave       Date:  2015-11-06

2.  The treatment of infected nonunion of the tibia following intramedullary nailing by the Ilizarov method.

Authors:  Panagiotis Megas; Alkis Saridis; Antonis Kouzelis; Alkiviadis Kallivokas; Spyros Mylonas; Minos Tyllianakis
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 3.  Soft tissue and biomechanical challenges encountered with the management of distal tibia nonunions.

Authors:  Ivan S Tarkin; Peter A Siska; Boris A Zelle
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.472

4.  Health outcomes of delayed union and nonunion of femoral and tibial shaft fractures.

Authors:  Wei-Han Tay; Richard de Steiger; Martin Richardson; Russell Gruen; Zsolt J Balogh
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 2.586

5.  [Advanced bone graft combined with locking compression plate for the treatment of middle and distal tibia nonunion].

Authors:  Xue Zhao; Pan-feng Wang; Yun-tong Zhang; Chun-cai Zhang; Shuo-gui Xu; Xin Zhang
Journal:  Zhongguo Gu Shang       Date:  2014-12

6.  Posttraumatic nonunion of the distal tibial metaphysis. Treatment using the Ilizarov circular external fixator.

Authors:  J H Lonner; K J Koval; V Golyakhovsky; V H Frankel
Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)       Date:  1995-05

7.  Randomized, prospective comparison of plate versus intramedullary nail fixation for distal tibia shaft fractures.

Authors:  Heather A Vallier; Beth Ann Cureton; Brendan M Patterson
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  [Evaluation of interlocking intramedullary nailing in distal tibial fractures and nonunions].

Authors:  Stamatios Paraschou; Huseyin Bekir; Helias Anastasopoulos; Athanasios Papapanos; John Alexopoulos; Anestis Karanikolas; Nick Roussis
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.511

9.  Fracture and dislocation classification compendium - 2007: Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification, database and outcomes committee.

Authors:  J L Marsh; Theddy F Slongo; Julie Agel; J Scott Broderick; William Creevey; Thomas A DeCoster; Laura Prokuski; Michael S Sirkin; Bruce Ziran; Brad Henley; Laurent Audigé
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2007 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.512

10.  Radiographic and clinical comparisons of distal tibia shaft fractures (4 to 11 cm proximal to the plafond): plating versus intramedullary nailing.

Authors:  Heather A Vallier; T Toan Le; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.512

View more
  4 in total

1.  Treatment of distal tibial fractures: prospective comparative study evaluating two surgical procedures with investigation for predictive factors of unfavourable outcome.

Authors:  Enrico Vaienti; Paolo Schiavi; Francesco Ceccarelli; Francesco Pogliacomi
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  A preclinical large-animal model for the assessment of critical-size load-bearing bone defect reconstruction.

Authors:  David S Sparks; Siamak Saifzadeh; Flavia Medeiros Savi; Constantin E Dlaska; Arne Berner; Jan Henkel; Johannes C Reichert; Martin Wullschleger; Jiongyu Ren; Amaia Cipitria; Jacqui A McGovern; Roland Steck; Michael Wagels; Maria Ann Woodruff; Michael A Schuetz; Dietmar W Hutmacher
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2020-02-14       Impact factor: 13.491

Review 3.  High-energy tibial pilon fractures: an instructional review.

Authors:  Boris A Zelle; Khang H Dang; Samuel S Ornell
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 4.  Prevalence and influencing factors of nonunion in patients with tibial fracture: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ruifeng Tian; Fang Zheng; Wei Zhao; Yuhui Zhang; Jinping Yuan; Bowen Zhang; Liangman Li
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 2.359

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.