Literature DB >> 30039307

Comparison of three different approaches for anterior knee pain after tibia intramedullary nailing.

Cagri Ozcan1, Ismail Turkmen2, Sami Sokucu3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare anterior knee pain and functional outcomes in patients who underwent intramedullary tibial nailing using transpatellar, medial parapatellar or suprapatellar nail entry methods.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent tibial fracture repair in our clinic between January 2010 and March 2017. After applying the exclusion criteria, 58 patients were included in the study. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on the nailing approach: medial parapatellar, transpatellar or suprapatellar. Age, body mass index, follow-up duration, Kujala Score, Lysholm Knee Score, anterior knee pain, length of hospitalization and surgical duration were assessed.
RESULTS: Of the 58 patients studied, 21 underwent a transpatellar (TP) approach, 16 a medial parapatellar (MP) approach, and 21 a suprapatellar (SP) approach. The mean Kujala Score of patients who had the TP approach was 80 ± 7.15 (72-93) and the average Lysholm Knee Score was 80.23 ± 8.74 (70-95). There was no statistically significant difference between Kujala Scores (p = 0.38) or Lysholm Knee Scores (p 0.06) among the groups; similarly, no statistically significant difference was found among the three groups in terms of anterior knee pain, length of hospitalization or surgical duration (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The suprapatellar tibia nailing method is as safe and reliable as transpatellar and medial parapatellar methods in terms of effect on postoperative anterior knee pain and functional outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3 case-control study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior knee pain; Functional outcomes; Suprapatellar nailing method; Tibia fracture

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30039307     DOI: 10.1007/s00068-018-0988-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg        ISSN: 1863-9933            Impact factor:   3.693


  26 in total

Review 1.  Intramedullary nailing of tibial fractures: review of surgical techniques and description of a percutaneous lateral suprapatellar approach.

Authors:  Max Morandi; Trevor Banka; Guilherme P Gaiarsa; S Trent Guthrie; Jad Khalil; Joseph Hoegler; Bennie G P Lindeque
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.390

Review 2.  Suprapatellar versus infrapatellar approach for tibia intramedullary nailing: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cong Wang; Erman Chen; Chenyi Ye; Zhijun Pan
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 6.071

3.  Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale.

Authors:  J Lysholm; J Gillquist
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1982 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.202

4.  Knee pain after tibial nailing.

Authors:  J F Keating; R Orfaly; P J O'Brien
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 2.512

5.  Radiologic outcome and patient-reported function after intramedullary nailing: a comparison of the retropatellar and infrapatellar approach.

Authors:  Mark Jones; Michael Parry; Michael Whitehouse; Steven Mitchell
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.512

6.  A novel technique for percutaneous removal of a suprapatellar intramedullary nail.

Authors:  Jeffrey Leary; Matthew Werger; Carlos Sagebien
Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)       Date:  2013-03

7.  [The relationship between anterior knee pain occurring after tibial intramedullary nailing and the localization of the nail in the proximal tibia].

Authors:  Onat Uzümcügil; Ahmet Doğan; Merter Yalçinkaya; Yavuz S Kabukçuoğlu
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2009 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.511

8.  Treatment of tibial fractures by reaming and intramedullary nailing.

Authors:  L B Bone; K D Johnson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Infrapatellar vs. suprapatellar approach to obtain an optimal insertion angle for intramedullary nailing of tibial fractures.

Authors:  Joerg Franke; Annika Homeier; Lars Metz; Thilo Wedel; Volker Alt; Sven Spät; Bernd Hohendorff; Reinhard Schnettler
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 3.693

Review 10.  Safe surgical technique: intramedullary nail fixation of tibial shaft fractures.

Authors:  Boris A Zelle; Guilherme Boni
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2015-12-12
View more
  5 in total

1.  Clinical Faceoff: Suprapatellar Tibial Nailing for Tibia Fractures.

Authors:  Lisa K Cannada; Hassan R Mir; Stephen A Kottmeier
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  MIPO vs. intra-medullary nailing for extra-articular distal tibia fractures and the efficacy of intra-operative alignment control: a retrospective cohort of 135 patients.

Authors:  Nils Jan Bleeker; Nicole M van Veelen; Bryan J M van de Wall; Inger N Sierevelt; Björn-Christian Link; Reto Babst; Matthias Knobe; Frank J P Beeres
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 2.374

3.  A Review of Proximal Tibia Entry Points for Intramedullary Nailing and Validation of The Lateral Parapatellar Approach as Extra-articular.

Authors:  Akshar H Patel; J Heath Wilder; Olivia C Lee; Austin J Ross; Krishna C Vemulapalli; Paul B Gladden; Murphy P Martin; William F Sherman
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2022-01-30

4.  Infrapatellar versus suprapatellar approach for intramedullary nailing of the tibia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nikhil Ponugoti; Branavan Rudran; Amr Selim; Sam Nahas; Henry Magill
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 2.359

5.  Difference in Pain, Complication Rates, and Clinical Outcomes After Suprapatellar Versus Infrapatellar Nailing for Tibia Fractures? A Systematic Review of 1447 Patients.

Authors:  Nils Jan Bleeker; Inge H F Reininga; Bryan J M van de Wall; Laurent A M Hendrickx; Frank J P Beeres; Kaj Ten Duis; Job N Doornberg; Ruurd L Jaarsma; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs; Frank F A IJpma
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 2.512

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.