Cargando…

Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of EXOGEN in achieving union and common pitfalls in its use within the Manchester Foundation Trust (MFT) and Salford Royal Foundation Trust (SRFT). Method: Patients receiving EXOGEN therapy between 01/01/2017 and 31/12/2019 at hospitals within MFT and SRFT were i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hughes, Luke D., Khudr, Jamal, Gee, Edward, Pillai, Anand
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: EDP Sciences 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9012134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35426791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2022012
_version_ 1784687737360613376
author Hughes, Luke D.
Khudr, Jamal
Gee, Edward
Pillai, Anand
author_facet Hughes, Luke D.
Khudr, Jamal
Gee, Edward
Pillai, Anand
author_sort Hughes, Luke D.
collection PubMed
description Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of EXOGEN in achieving union and common pitfalls in its use within the Manchester Foundation Trust (MFT) and Salford Royal Foundation Trust (SRFT). Method: Patients receiving EXOGEN therapy between 01/01/2017 and 31/12/2019 at hospitals within MFT and SRFT were identified using EXOGEN logbooks and hospital IT systems. An equal number of patients were included from both sites. Data were retrospectively collected from clinical documents detailing clinical presentation comorbidities, and radiographic images, determining the radiological union post EXOGEN therapy. In addition, local practices were observed and compared to EXOGEN’s standardized guidance for clinicians. Results: Fifty-eight patients were included in the primary review, with 9 subsequently excluded based on insufficient clinical data. 47% of patients achieved radiological union following completion of EXOGEN therapy. Outcomes of the 23 patients with persistent non-union were as follows – 18 were referred for revision surgery, 5 were prescribed further EXOGEN therapy, 2 refused or were unfit for further intervention, and 1 did not have a plan documented. No significant baseline differences were present in both outcome groups. However, at MFT and SRFT, rates of union with EXOGEN are below that previously published in the literature. Conclusion: EXOGEN has proven successful in facilitating union in established cases of non-union without the risk and cost associated with revision surgery. Centre outcome differences may be explained by failure to educate clinicians and patients on the correct use of the EXOGEN device, failure to standardize follow-up or monitor compliance, and must be addressed to improve current services.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9012134
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher EDP Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90121342022-05-03 Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound Hughes, Luke D. Khudr, Jamal Gee, Edward Pillai, Anand SICOT J Original Article Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of EXOGEN in achieving union and common pitfalls in its use within the Manchester Foundation Trust (MFT) and Salford Royal Foundation Trust (SRFT). Method: Patients receiving EXOGEN therapy between 01/01/2017 and 31/12/2019 at hospitals within MFT and SRFT were identified using EXOGEN logbooks and hospital IT systems. An equal number of patients were included from both sites. Data were retrospectively collected from clinical documents detailing clinical presentation comorbidities, and radiographic images, determining the radiological union post EXOGEN therapy. In addition, local practices were observed and compared to EXOGEN’s standardized guidance for clinicians. Results: Fifty-eight patients were included in the primary review, with 9 subsequently excluded based on insufficient clinical data. 47% of patients achieved radiological union following completion of EXOGEN therapy. Outcomes of the 23 patients with persistent non-union were as follows – 18 were referred for revision surgery, 5 were prescribed further EXOGEN therapy, 2 refused or were unfit for further intervention, and 1 did not have a plan documented. No significant baseline differences were present in both outcome groups. However, at MFT and SRFT, rates of union with EXOGEN are below that previously published in the literature. Conclusion: EXOGEN has proven successful in facilitating union in established cases of non-union without the risk and cost associated with revision surgery. Centre outcome differences may be explained by failure to educate clinicians and patients on the correct use of the EXOGEN device, failure to standardize follow-up or monitor compliance, and must be addressed to improve current services. EDP Sciences 2022-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9012134/ /pubmed/35426791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2022012 Text en © The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Hughes, Luke D.
Khudr, Jamal
Gee, Edward
Pillai, Anand
Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound
title Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound
title_full Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound
title_fullStr Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound
title_full_unstemmed Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound
title_short Pitfalls preventing bone union with EXOGEN Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound
title_sort pitfalls preventing bone union with exogen low-intensity pulsed ultrasound
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9012134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35426791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2022012
work_keys_str_mv AT hughesluked pitfallspreventingboneunionwithexogenlowintensitypulsedultrasound
AT khudrjamal pitfallspreventingboneunionwithexogenlowintensitypulsedultrasound
AT geeedward pitfallspreventingboneunionwithexogenlowintensitypulsedultrasound
AT pillaianand pitfallspreventingboneunionwithexogenlowintensitypulsedultrasound