Cargando…
If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures?
BACKGROUND: Internal fixation for rib fractures has been widely carried out worldwide, and its surgical efficacy has been recognized. However, there is still controversy about whether implant materials need to be removed. At present, the research on this topic is still lacking at home and abroad. Th...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10318814/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37403105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13019-023-02330-1 |
_version_ | 1785068121738969088 |
---|---|
author | Li, Yang Jiang, kaile Zhao, Tiancheng Guo, Xiang Liu, Kaibin Zhao, Yonghong |
author_facet | Li, Yang Jiang, kaile Zhao, Tiancheng Guo, Xiang Liu, Kaibin Zhao, Yonghong |
author_sort | Li, Yang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Internal fixation for rib fractures has been widely carried out worldwide, and its surgical efficacy has been recognized. However, there is still controversy about whether implant materials need to be removed. At present, the research on this topic is still lacking at home and abroad. Therefore, in this study, the patients undergoing removal of internal fixation for rib fractures in our department within one year were followed up, to statistically analyze implant-related complications, postoperative complications and postoperative remission rate. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 143 patients undergoing removal of internal fixation for rib fractures from 2020 to 2021 in our center. The implant-related complications, postoperative complications and postoperative remission rate of patients with internal fixation were analyzed. RESULTS: In this study, a total of 143 patients underwent removal of internal fixation, among which 73 suffered from preoperative implant-related complications (foreign-body sensation, pain, wound numbness, sense of tightness, screw slippage, chest tightness, implant rejection), and 70 had no post operative discomfort but asked for removal of internal fixation. The average interval between rib fixation and removal was 17 ± 9.00 (months), and the average number of removed materials was 5.29 ± 2.42. Postoperative complications included wound infection (n = 1) and pulmonary embolism (n = 1). of the 73 patients with preoperative implant-related complications, the mean postoperative remission rate was 82%. Among the 70 patients without preoperative discomfort, the proportion of discomforts after removal was 10%. No perioperative death occurred. CONCLUSION: For patients with internal fixation for rib fractures, removal of internal fixation can be considered in the case of implant-related complications after surgery. The corresponding symptoms can be relieved after removal. The removal presents low complication rate, and high safety and reliability. For patients without obvious symptoms, it is safe to retain the internal fixation in the body. For the asymptomatic patients who ask for removal of internal fixation, the possible risk of complications should be fully informed before removal. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10318814 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103188142023-07-05 If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? Li, Yang Jiang, kaile Zhao, Tiancheng Guo, Xiang Liu, Kaibin Zhao, Yonghong J Cardiothorac Surg Research BACKGROUND: Internal fixation for rib fractures has been widely carried out worldwide, and its surgical efficacy has been recognized. However, there is still controversy about whether implant materials need to be removed. At present, the research on this topic is still lacking at home and abroad. Therefore, in this study, the patients undergoing removal of internal fixation for rib fractures in our department within one year were followed up, to statistically analyze implant-related complications, postoperative complications and postoperative remission rate. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 143 patients undergoing removal of internal fixation for rib fractures from 2020 to 2021 in our center. The implant-related complications, postoperative complications and postoperative remission rate of patients with internal fixation were analyzed. RESULTS: In this study, a total of 143 patients underwent removal of internal fixation, among which 73 suffered from preoperative implant-related complications (foreign-body sensation, pain, wound numbness, sense of tightness, screw slippage, chest tightness, implant rejection), and 70 had no post operative discomfort but asked for removal of internal fixation. The average interval between rib fixation and removal was 17 ± 9.00 (months), and the average number of removed materials was 5.29 ± 2.42. Postoperative complications included wound infection (n = 1) and pulmonary embolism (n = 1). of the 73 patients with preoperative implant-related complications, the mean postoperative remission rate was 82%. Among the 70 patients without preoperative discomfort, the proportion of discomforts after removal was 10%. No perioperative death occurred. CONCLUSION: For patients with internal fixation for rib fractures, removal of internal fixation can be considered in the case of implant-related complications after surgery. The corresponding symptoms can be relieved after removal. The removal presents low complication rate, and high safety and reliability. For patients without obvious symptoms, it is safe to retain the internal fixation in the body. For the asymptomatic patients who ask for removal of internal fixation, the possible risk of complications should be fully informed before removal. BioMed Central 2023-07-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10318814/ /pubmed/37403105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13019-023-02330-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Li, Yang Jiang, kaile Zhao, Tiancheng Guo, Xiang Liu, Kaibin Zhao, Yonghong If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? |
title | If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? |
title_full | If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? |
title_fullStr | If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? |
title_full_unstemmed | If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? |
title_short | If we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? |
title_sort | if we should remove internal fixation devices for rib fractures? |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10318814/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37403105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13019-023-02330-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liyang ifweshouldremoveinternalfixationdevicesforribfractures AT jiangkaile ifweshouldremoveinternalfixationdevicesforribfractures AT zhaotiancheng ifweshouldremoveinternalfixationdevicesforribfractures AT guoxiang ifweshouldremoveinternalfixationdevicesforribfractures AT liukaibin ifweshouldremoveinternalfixationdevicesforribfractures AT zhaoyonghong ifweshouldremoveinternalfixationdevicesforribfractures |