Cargando…

Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series

Studies have reported a high percentage of ankle fracture dislocations with secondary loss of reduction during primary treatment with a splint or cast. This study aimed to assess the rate of secondary loss of reduction in unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations treated primarily with a cast or exte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mandelka, Eric, Wikanardi, Bernhard A., Beisemann, Nils, Gruetzner, Paul A., Franke, Jochen, Vetter, Sven Y., Privalov, Maxim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9917604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36769397
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12030748
_version_ 1784886407402094592
author Mandelka, Eric
Wikanardi, Bernhard A.
Beisemann, Nils
Gruetzner, Paul A.
Franke, Jochen
Vetter, Sven Y.
Privalov, Maxim
author_facet Mandelka, Eric
Wikanardi, Bernhard A.
Beisemann, Nils
Gruetzner, Paul A.
Franke, Jochen
Vetter, Sven Y.
Privalov, Maxim
author_sort Mandelka, Eric
collection PubMed
description Studies have reported a high percentage of ankle fracture dislocations with secondary loss of reduction during primary treatment with a splint or cast. This study aimed to assess the rate of secondary loss of reduction in unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations treated primarily with a cast or external fixator, identify the potential influence of fracture morphology, and investigate the potential implications. Unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations with and without posterior malleolar fracture between 2011 and 2020 were included. Patients were categorized into two groups, depending on the method of temporary treatment. Fracture morphology, time to definitive surgery, and soft-tissue complications were compared. Of 102 patients, loss of reduction tended to occur more often in the cast group (17.3%) than in the external fixator group (6.0%). The presence of a posterior malleolar fracture did not have a significant influence on loss of reduction in cast immobilization; however, the fragment proved to be significantly bigger in cases with loss of reduction. No statistically significant differences in soft tissue complications or time to definitive surgery were found. Surgeons should consider the application of interval external fixation in the primary treatment of unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations with additional posterior malleolar fractures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9917604
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99176042023-02-11 Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series Mandelka, Eric Wikanardi, Bernhard A. Beisemann, Nils Gruetzner, Paul A. Franke, Jochen Vetter, Sven Y. Privalov, Maxim J Clin Med Article Studies have reported a high percentage of ankle fracture dislocations with secondary loss of reduction during primary treatment with a splint or cast. This study aimed to assess the rate of secondary loss of reduction in unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations treated primarily with a cast or external fixator, identify the potential influence of fracture morphology, and investigate the potential implications. Unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations with and without posterior malleolar fracture between 2011 and 2020 were included. Patients were categorized into two groups, depending on the method of temporary treatment. Fracture morphology, time to definitive surgery, and soft-tissue complications were compared. Of 102 patients, loss of reduction tended to occur more often in the cast group (17.3%) than in the external fixator group (6.0%). The presence of a posterior malleolar fracture did not have a significant influence on loss of reduction in cast immobilization; however, the fragment proved to be significantly bigger in cases with loss of reduction. No statistically significant differences in soft tissue complications or time to definitive surgery were found. Surgeons should consider the application of interval external fixation in the primary treatment of unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations with additional posterior malleolar fractures. MDPI 2023-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9917604/ /pubmed/36769397 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12030748 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Mandelka, Eric
Wikanardi, Bernhard A.
Beisemann, Nils
Gruetzner, Paul A.
Franke, Jochen
Vetter, Sven Y.
Privalov, Maxim
Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series
title Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series
title_full Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series
title_fullStr Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series
title_short Comparing Temporary Immobilization Using Cast and External Fixator in Unimalleolar Ankle Fracture Dislocations: A Retrospective Case Series
title_sort comparing temporary immobilization using cast and external fixator in unimalleolar ankle fracture dislocations: a retrospective case series
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9917604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36769397
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12030748
work_keys_str_mv AT mandelkaeric comparingtemporaryimmobilizationusingcastandexternalfixatorinunimalleolaranklefracturedislocationsaretrospectivecaseseries
AT wikanardibernharda comparingtemporaryimmobilizationusingcastandexternalfixatorinunimalleolaranklefracturedislocationsaretrospectivecaseseries
AT beisemannnils comparingtemporaryimmobilizationusingcastandexternalfixatorinunimalleolaranklefracturedislocationsaretrospectivecaseseries
AT gruetznerpaula comparingtemporaryimmobilizationusingcastandexternalfixatorinunimalleolaranklefracturedislocationsaretrospectivecaseseries
AT frankejochen comparingtemporaryimmobilizationusingcastandexternalfixatorinunimalleolaranklefracturedislocationsaretrospectivecaseseries
AT vettersveny comparingtemporaryimmobilizationusingcastandexternalfixatorinunimalleolaranklefracturedislocationsaretrospectivecaseseries
AT privalovmaxim comparingtemporaryimmobilizationusingcastandexternalfixatorinunimalleolaranklefracturedislocationsaretrospectivecaseseries