Treatment of tibial bone defects caused by infection: a retrospective comparative study of bone transport using a combined technique of unilateral external fixation over an intramedullary nail versus circular external fixation over an intramedullary nail

胫骨感染性骨缺损的治疗:单侧外固定联合髓内钉与环形外固定联合髓内钉骨搬移术的回顾性比较研究

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study was to assess and compare the clinical efficacy of bone transport with either circular or unilateral external fixators over an intramedullary nail in the treatment of tibial bone defects caused by infection. METHODS: Between May 2010 and January 2019, clinical and radiographic data were collected and analyzed for patients with bone defects caused by infection. Thirteen patients underwent bone transport using a unilateral external fixator over an intramedullary nail (Group A), while 12 patients were treated with a circular external fixator over an intramedullary nail (Group B). The bone and functional outcomes of both groups were assessed and compared using the Association for the Study and Application of the Method of the Ilizarov criteria, and postoperative complications were evaluated according to the Paley classification. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were successfully treated with bone transport using external fixators over an intramedullary nail, with a mean follow-up time of 31.63 ± 5.88 months. There were no significant statistical differences in age, gender, previous surgery per patient, duration of infection, defect size, and follow-up time between Group A and Group B (P > 0.05). However, statistically significant differences were observed in operation time (187.13 ± 21.88 min vs. 255.76 ± 36.42 min, P = 0.002), intraoperative blood loss (39.26 ± 7.33 mL vs. 53.74 ± 10.69 mL, P < 0.001), external fixation time (2.02 ± 0.31 month vs. 2.57 ± 0.38 month, P = 0.045), external fixation index (0.27 ± 0.08 month/cm vs. 0.44 ± 0.09 month/cm, P = 0.042), and bone union time (8.37 ± 2.30 month vs. 9.07 ± 3.12, P = 0.032) between Group A and Group B. The excellent and good rate of bone and functional results were higher in Group A compared to Group B (76.9% vs. 75% and 84.6% vs. 58.3%). Statistically significant differences were observed in functional results (excellent/good/fair/poor, 5/6/2/0 vs. 2/5/4/1, P = 0.013) and complication per patient (0.38 vs. 1.16, P = 0.012) between Group A and Group B. CONCLUSIONS: Bone transport using a combined technique of external fixators over an intramedullary nail proved to be an effective method in treating tibial bone defects caused by infection. In comparison to circular external fixators, bone transport utilizing a unilateral external fixator over an intramedullary nail resulted in less external fixation time, fewer complications, and better functional outcomes.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。