| Literature DB >> 29766068 |
Yoshiyasu Uchiyama1, Yuka Kobayashi1, Gro Ebihara1, Kosuke Hamahashi1, Masahiko Watanabe1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal method of skeletal stabilization is still controversial. Therefore, we examined the clinical outcomes associated with late (L) versus immediate intramedullary nailing (IMN).Entities:
Keywords: fracture; infection; intramedullary nailing; tibia fractures
Year: 2016 PMID: 29766068 PMCID: PMC5891691 DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2016-000035
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open ISSN: 2397-5776
Characteristics of patients who received late and immediate intramedullary nailing for open fractures of the tibial shaft
| No. of cases | Men/Women | Age (years) | GA grade (I/II/IIIA) | AO type (A/B/C) | Follow-up period (months) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | 37 | 33/4 | 41.8 (18–79) | 10/17/10 | 12/17/8 | 15.0 (6–39) |
| I | 48 | 44/4 | 42.0 (18–71) | 12/19/17 | 14/24/10 | 18.3 (8–36) |
| Total | 85 | 77/8 | 22/36/27 | 26/41/18 |
GA, Gustilo-Anderson; I, immediate intramedullary nailing; L, late intramedullary nailing; no., number.
Comparison of postoperative infection rates between late and immediate intramedullary nailing for open fractures of the tibial shaft
| No. of cases | Type of infection | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Superficial | Deep | |||
| L | 37 | 5 (13.5%) | 3 (8.1%) | 8 (21.6%) |
| I | 48 | 1 (2.1%) | 0 | 1 (2.1%) |
| p Value | 0.042* | 0.045* | 0.004* | |
p, late versus immediate.
*Statistically significant.
I, immediate intramedullary nailing; L, late intramedullary nailing; no., number.
Comparison of deep and superficial infection rates between late and immediate intramedullary nailing for open fractures of the tibial shaft
| GA grade I | No. of infections | GA grade II | No. of infections | GA grade IIIA | Type of infection | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | Total | n | Total | n | Superficial | Deep | ||
| L | 10 | 1 | 17 | 2 | 10 | 2 (20%) | 3 (30%) | 5 (50%) |
| I | 12 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 17 | 1 (6.9%) | 0 | 1 (6.9%) |
| p Value | 0.26 | 0.12 | 0.26 | 0.017* | 0.008* | |||
p: late versus immediate.
*Statistically significant.
GA, Gustilo-Anderson; I, immediate intramedullary nailing; L, late intramedullary nailing; no., number.
Comparison of the delayed union rate, non-union rate, and time to bone union between late and immediate intramedullary nailing for open fractures of the tibial shaft
| No. of cases | Delayed union (no. of cases) | Non-union (no. of cases) | Time to bone union* (weeks) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| L | 37 | 3 (8.1%) | 2 (5.4%) | 15.0 (10–20) |
| I | 48 | 2 (4.2%) | 1 (2.1%) | 16.5 (9–19) |
| p Value | 0.444 | 0.411 | 0.524 |
p: late versus immediate.
*Excludes deep infection and cases of non-union.
I, immediate intramedullary nailing; L, late intramedullary nailing; no., number.
Important key factors for preventing deep infection in cases converted from external fixation to intramedullary nailing
| Deep infection (patient no.) | Gustilo-Anderson grade | Important key factors for preventing deep infection | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ||
| 1 | IIIA | Yes | 10 days | Yes | |||
| 2 | IIIA | Yes | |||||
| 3 | IIIA | Yes | Unreamed nail | Yes | |||
1: early flap coverage by well-vascularized tissue within 1 week after trauma, 2: short duration of external fixation, 3: early unreamed intramedullary nailing, 4: debridement of the screw hole at the pin site, 5: slightly prolonged interval between removal of the external fixator and intramedullary nailing until complete healing of the pin site, 6: complete healing of the pin site, bold font: did not meet the criteria.
no., number.