| Literature DB >> 34364374 |
Tzu-Hao Wang1,2,3, Hao-Chun Chuang2,3, Fa-Chuan Kuan2,4,5,3, Chih-Kai Hong2,3, Ming-Long Yeh4, Wei-Ren Su2,3, Kai-Lan Hsu6,7,8,9.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The role of open cerclage wiring in comminuted femoral shaft fracture treatment with intramedullary nails remains unclear. Here, we analyzed the effect of open cerclage wiring and the risk factors for nonunion after interlocking nailing in comminuted femoral shaft fracture treatment. We hypothesized that open cerclage wiring can be applied in patients with severe comminuted femoral shaft fractures without affecting bone healing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from consecutive patients who underwent interlocking nail fixation of a comminuted femoral shaft fracture between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2016. First, eligible patients were divided into the wire and no wire groups according to the surgical technique used, and their union rate was recorded. The patients were then divided into the union and nonunion groups, and their perioperative data were analyzed.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34364374 PMCID: PMC8348994 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-021-02633-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Fig. 1(A) Preoperative, (B) postoperative, and (C) 15-month postoperative images of a 19-year-old man with a comminuted fracture of the right femur from a motorcycle accident. Reduction and fixation were achieved via a mini-open technique, and the fracture healed 15 months after the surgery
Fig. 2 (A) Preoperative, (B) postoperative, and (C) 14-month postoperative images of a 24-year-old man with a comminuted fracture of the right femur from a traffic accident. Reduction was successfully achieved using open cerclage wiring, and the fracture healed 14 months after the surgery
Fig. 3Patient recruitment flowchart
Demographics of patients with a comminuted femoral shaft fracture treated using an interlocking nail with and without an open cerclage wire
| Characteristic | Wire ( | No wire ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 27.74 ± 14.77 | 29.30 ± 12.09 | 0.635 | |
| Male | 25 | 20 | 0.651 |
| Female | 13 | 13 | |
| 0.847 | |||
| Right | 23 | 20 | |
| Left | 15 | 13 |
Fracture pattern and union rate in patients with a comminuted femoral shaft fracture treated using an interlocking nail with and without an open cerclage wire
| Characteristic | Wire ( | No wire ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.06 | |||
| 32B | 31 | 32 | |
| 32C | 7 | 1 | |
| 1.53 ± 0.79 | 1.24 ± 0.49 | ||
| 87.66 ± 30.40 | 66.09 ± 29.03 | ||
| Preoperative | 21.64 ± 16.94 | 12.80 ± 7.50 | |
| Postoperative | 2.96 ± 1.88 | 7.51 ± 3.32 | |
| Preoperative | 20.08 ± 13.52 | 13.05 ± 7.50 | |
| Postoperative | 3.57 ± 2.91 | 7.11 ± 3.26 | |
| 22 | 24 | 0.180 | |
| 6 | 4 | 0.558 |
Patient demographics and fracture pattern and union rate in patients with a comminuted femoral shaft fracture treated using an interlocking nail with and without bone union
| Characteristic | Union ( | Nonunion ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 27.85 ± 13.69 | 29.67 ± 12.81 | 0.596 | |
| 0.352 | |||
| Male | 28 | 17 | |
| Female | 19 | 7 | |
| 11 | 6 | 0.882 | |
| 23.00 ± 4.65 | 24.73 ± 4.14 | 0.140 | |
| 8 | 4 | 0.970 | |
| 5 | 6 | 0.113 | |
| 5 | 1 | 0.354 | |
| 0.576 | |||
| 32B | 41 | 22 | |
| 32C | 6 | 2 | |
| 1.47 ± 0.74 | 1.25 ± 0.52 | 0.207 | |
| 76.05 ± 32.60 | 75.85 ± 29.46 | 0.560 | |
| Preoperative | 16.52 ± 12.20 | 19.51 ± 17.07 | 0.404 |
| Postoperative | 5.05 ± 3.11 | 5.23 ± 4.08 | 0.841 |
| Preoperative | 15.80 ± 9.47 | 18.78 ± 14.89 | 0.316 |
| Postoperative | 5.56 ± 3.15 | 4.55 ± 4.09 | 0.259 |
| 11.13 ± 1.06 | 11.48 ± 1.02 | 0.202 |