Cargando…

Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail

INTRODUCTION: High-energy grade III open fractures of tibia are associated with significant complications and generate debate over the ideal fixation method. This study compares the clinical outcomes for circular frame fixation (CFF) vs intramedullary nail fixation (IMF) in grade III open tibial fra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Natalwala, Ibrahim, Chuo, Cher Bing, Shariatmadari, Isla, Barlow, Gavin, Moulder, Elizabeth, Bates, Joanna, Sharma, Hemant
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8778722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35111255
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1536
_version_ 1784637392500555776
author Natalwala, Ibrahim
Chuo, Cher Bing
Shariatmadari, Isla
Barlow, Gavin
Moulder, Elizabeth
Bates, Joanna
Sharma, Hemant
author_facet Natalwala, Ibrahim
Chuo, Cher Bing
Shariatmadari, Isla
Barlow, Gavin
Moulder, Elizabeth
Bates, Joanna
Sharma, Hemant
author_sort Natalwala, Ibrahim
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: High-energy grade III open fractures of tibia are associated with significant complications and generate debate over the ideal fixation method. This study compares the clinical outcomes for circular frame fixation (CFF) vs intramedullary nail fixation (IMF) in grade III open tibial fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single-centre retrospective study of patients admitted from January 2008 to December 2016. All patients with grade III open diaphyseal tibial fractures (AO 42 A, B, C), treated with either CFF or IMF, were included. The primary outcome was deep bone infection (DBI). Secondary outcomes were delayed or non-union, secondary intervention, and amputation. RESULTS: A total of 48 limbs in 47 patients had CFF, and 25 limbs in 23 patients had IMF. Median time to definitive fixation was significantly longer for CFF at 9 days (IQR 3–13) compared to IMF at 1 day (IQR 0–3.5) (p <0.001). The DBI rate was significantly lower (2 vs 16%) in the CFF group (p = 0.04). There were 14 limbs (29%) with delayed or non-union in the CFF group vs 5 limbs (20%) in the IMF group. In the CFF group, significantly more limbs required bone grafting for delayed or non-union (p = 0.03). However, there was a greater proportion of limbs in the CFF group with segmental fractures or bone loss (46 vs 4%) and these high-energy fracture patterns were associated with secondary bone grafting (p = 0.005), and with delayed or non-union (p = 0.03). A subgroup analysis of patients without segmental fractures or bone loss treated with either CFF or IMF showed no significant difference in secondary bone grafting (p >0.99) and delayed or non-union rates (p = 0.72). Overall, one patient in each group went on to have an amputation. CONCLUSION: Our study found that CFF had a lower rate of DBI compared to IMF. Injuries with high-energy fracture patterns (segmental fractures or bone loss) were more likely to have delayed or non-union and require secondary bone grafting. These factors should be considered when selecting the appropriate method of definitive fixation. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Natalwala I, Chuo CB, Shariatmadari I, et al. Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2021;16(3):161–167.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8778722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87787222022-02-01 Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail Natalwala, Ibrahim Chuo, Cher Bing Shariatmadari, Isla Barlow, Gavin Moulder, Elizabeth Bates, Joanna Sharma, Hemant Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr Original Research INTRODUCTION: High-energy grade III open fractures of tibia are associated with significant complications and generate debate over the ideal fixation method. This study compares the clinical outcomes for circular frame fixation (CFF) vs intramedullary nail fixation (IMF) in grade III open tibial fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single-centre retrospective study of patients admitted from January 2008 to December 2016. All patients with grade III open diaphyseal tibial fractures (AO 42 A, B, C), treated with either CFF or IMF, were included. The primary outcome was deep bone infection (DBI). Secondary outcomes were delayed or non-union, secondary intervention, and amputation. RESULTS: A total of 48 limbs in 47 patients had CFF, and 25 limbs in 23 patients had IMF. Median time to definitive fixation was significantly longer for CFF at 9 days (IQR 3–13) compared to IMF at 1 day (IQR 0–3.5) (p <0.001). The DBI rate was significantly lower (2 vs 16%) in the CFF group (p = 0.04). There were 14 limbs (29%) with delayed or non-union in the CFF group vs 5 limbs (20%) in the IMF group. In the CFF group, significantly more limbs required bone grafting for delayed or non-union (p = 0.03). However, there was a greater proportion of limbs in the CFF group with segmental fractures or bone loss (46 vs 4%) and these high-energy fracture patterns were associated with secondary bone grafting (p = 0.005), and with delayed or non-union (p = 0.03). A subgroup analysis of patients without segmental fractures or bone loss treated with either CFF or IMF showed no significant difference in secondary bone grafting (p >0.99) and delayed or non-union rates (p = 0.72). Overall, one patient in each group went on to have an amputation. CONCLUSION: Our study found that CFF had a lower rate of DBI compared to IMF. Injuries with high-energy fracture patterns (segmental fractures or bone loss) were more likely to have delayed or non-union and require secondary bone grafting. These factors should be considered when selecting the appropriate method of definitive fixation. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Natalwala I, Chuo CB, Shariatmadari I, et al. Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2021;16(3):161–167. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8778722/ /pubmed/35111255 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1536 Text en Copyright © 2021; The Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/© The Author(s). 2021 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-share alike license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) which permits unrestricted distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as original. 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.
spellingShingle Original Research
Natalwala, Ibrahim
Chuo, Cher Bing
Shariatmadari, Isla
Barlow, Gavin
Moulder, Elizabeth
Bates, Joanna
Sharma, Hemant
Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail
title Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail
title_full Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail
title_fullStr Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail
title_short Outcomes and Incidence of Deep Bone Infection in Grade III Diaphyseal Open Tibial Fractures: Circular Fixator vs Intramedullary Nail
title_sort outcomes and incidence of deep bone infection in grade iii diaphyseal open tibial fractures: circular fixator vs intramedullary nail
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8778722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35111255
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1536
work_keys_str_mv AT natalwalaibrahim outcomesandincidenceofdeepboneinfectioningradeiiidiaphysealopentibialfracturescircularfixatorvsintramedullarynail
AT chuocherbing outcomesandincidenceofdeepboneinfectioningradeiiidiaphysealopentibialfracturescircularfixatorvsintramedullarynail
AT shariatmadariisla outcomesandincidenceofdeepboneinfectioningradeiiidiaphysealopentibialfracturescircularfixatorvsintramedullarynail
AT barlowgavin outcomesandincidenceofdeepboneinfectioningradeiiidiaphysealopentibialfracturescircularfixatorvsintramedullarynail
AT moulderelizabeth outcomesandincidenceofdeepboneinfectioningradeiiidiaphysealopentibialfracturescircularfixatorvsintramedullarynail
AT batesjoanna outcomesandincidenceofdeepboneinfectioningradeiiidiaphysealopentibialfracturescircularfixatorvsintramedullarynail
AT sharmahemant outcomesandincidenceofdeepboneinfectioningradeiiidiaphysealopentibialfracturescircularfixatorvsintramedullarynail