Literature DB >> 32549965

Comparison of Clinico-radiological Outcomes of Monolateral Fixator in Infected Non-union of Tibia Based on Bone Gap Quantification.

Jitendra Wadhwani1, Rajesh Rohilla2, Ramchander Siwach1, Roop Singh1, Ashish Devgan1, Sumedha Vashishth3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Monolateral rail fixators are more comfortable to the patients and have a lesser learning curve compared to ring fixators. Guidelines are still lacking for rational use of monolateral fixator for bone transport. This retrospective study aimed to analyze and compare the clinico-radiological outcomes of monolateral fixator in infected non union of tibia based on bone gap quantification.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 35 patients of post traumatic infected osteocutaneous defects of tibia operated from May 2013 to May 2016. Group I having bone gap of 6 cm or less (n = 20) and group II with > 6 cm bone gap (n = 15). The mean age was 29.56 (range 18-62) years in group I and 29.67 (range 20-65) years in group II. The mean bone gap was 4.62 (2-6 cm) in group I and 7.6 cm (6.5-10 cm) in group II (P < 0.00001, Mann-Whitney test). The results were assessed by Association for the Study and Application of the Method of Ilizarov (ASAMI) criteria.
RESULTS: Union was achieved primarily in 90% (n = 18) cases in group I and 73.34% (n = 11) cases in group II. The bone result was excellent, good, fair/poor in 14, 5, 1 in group I; and in 4, 6, 5 in group II, respectively (P = 0.020, Chi-square test). The functional results were excellent, good, fair/poor in 15, 4, 1 in group I; and 5, 8, 2 in group II, respectively (P = 0.0479, Chi-square test).
CONCLUSION: We recommend use of monolateral fixator in patients with infected diaphyseal non union of tibia with bone gap ≤ 6 cm. Use of monolateral fixator in patients with bone gap > 6 cm is associated with higher incidence of residual problems and complications. © Indian Orthopaedics Association 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASAMI; Bone gap; Distraction osteogenesis; Infected nonunion; Monolateral fixator; Tibia

Year:  2020        PMID: 32549965      PMCID: PMC7270390          DOI: 10.1007/s43465-020-00053-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Orthop        ISSN: 0019-5413            Impact factor:   1.251


  25 in total

1.  Compound tibial fractures with bone loss treated by the Ilizarov technique.

Authors:  F Dagher; S Roukoz
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1991-03

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

3.  Infected nonunion of the long bones.

Authors:  Anil K Jain; Skand Sinha
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Management of complex tibial and femoral nonunion using the Ilizarov technique, and its cost implications.

Authors:  S Patil; R Montgomery
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2006-07

Review 5.  Problems, obstacles, and complications of limb lengthening by the Ilizarov technique.

Authors:  D Paley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  A review of problems, obstacles and sequelae encountered during femoral lengthening : uniplanar versus circular external fixator.

Authors:  Levent Eralp; Mehmet Kocaoglu; Fikri Erkal Bilen; Halil Ibrahim Balci; Berkin Toker; Kamran Ahmad
Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 0.500

7.  Management of massive posttraumatic bone defects in the lower limb with the Ilizarov technique.

Authors:  Manish Chaddha; Divesh Gulati; Arun Pal Singh; Ajay Pal Singh; Lalit Maini
Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 0.500

Review 8.  The treatment of infected tibial nonunion by bone transport using the Ilizarov external fixator and a systematic review of infected tibial nonunion treated by Ilizarov methods.

Authors:  P Yin; Q Zhang; Z Mao; T Li; L Zhang; P Tang
Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 0.500

9.  Ilizarov methodology for infected non union of the Tibia: Classic circular transfixion wire assembly vs. hybrid assembly.

Authors:  Ranjit Kr Baruah
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.251

10.  Treatment of infected non-unions with segmental defects with a rail fixation system.

Authors:  Srikanth Mudiganty; Arup Kumar Daolagupu; Arun Kumar Sipani; Satyendra Kumar Das; Arijit Dhar; Parag Jyoti Gogoi
Journal:  Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr       Date:  2017-02-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.