29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Safe surgical technique: intramedullary nail fixation of tibial shaft fractures

      review-article
      ,
      Patient Safety in Surgery
      BioMed Central
      Tibia, Fracture, Intramedullary, Nail, Knee pain

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Statically locked, reamed intramedullary nailing remains the standard treatment for displaced tibial shaft fractures. Establishing an appropriate starting point is a crucial part of the surgical procedure. Recently, suprapatellar nailing in the semi-extended position has been suggested as a safe and effective surgical technique. Numerous reduction techiques are available to achieve an anatomic fracture alignment and the treating surgeon should be familiar with these maneuvers. Open reduction techniques should be considered if anatomic fracture alignment cannot be achieved by closed means. Favorable union rates above 90 % can be achieved by both reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing. Despite favorable union rates, patients continue to have functional long-term impairments. In particular, anterior knee pain remains a common complaint following intramedullary tibial nailing. Malrotation remains a commonly reported complication after tibial nailing. The effect of postoperative tibial malalignment on the clinical and radiographic outcome requires further investigation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references75

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Randomized trial of reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures.

          There remains a compelling biological rationale for both reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of tibial shaft fractures. Previous small trials have left the evidence for either approach inconclusive. We compared reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing with regard to the rates of reoperations and complications in patients with tibial shaft fractures. We conducted a multicenter, blinded randomized trial of 1319 adults in whom a tibial shaft fracture was treated with either reamed or unreamed intramedullary nailing. Perioperative care was standardized, and reoperations for nonunion before six months were disallowed. The primary composite outcome measured at twelve months postoperatively included bone-grafting, implant exchange, and dynamization in patients with a fracture gap of <1 cm. Infection and fasciotomy were considered as part of the composite outcome, irrespective of the postoperative gap. One thousand two hundred and twenty-six participants (93%) completed one year of follow-up. Of these, 622 patients were randomized to reamed nailing and 604 patients were randomized to unreamed nailing. Among all patients, fifty-seven (4.6%) required implant exchange or bone-grafting because of nonunion. Among all patients, 105 in the reamed nailing group and 114 in the unreamed nailing group experienced a primary outcome event (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.71 to 1.15). In patients with closed fractures, forty-five (11%) of 416 in the reamed nailing group and sixty-eight (17%) of 410 in the unreamed nailing group experienced a primary event (relative risk, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.47 to 0.96; p = 0.03). This difference was largely due to differences in dynamization. In patients with open fractures, sixty of 206 in the reamed nailing group and forty-six of 194 in the unreamed nailing group experienced a primary event (relative risk, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.78; p = 0.16). The present study demonstrates a possible benefit for reamed intramedullary nailing in patients with closed fractures. We found no difference between approaches in patients with open fractures. Delaying reoperation for nonunion for at least six months may substantially decrease the need for reoperation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Compartment monitoring in tibial fractures. The pressure threshold for decompression.

            We made a prospective study of 116 patients with tibial diaphyseal fractures who had continuous monitoring of anterior compartment pressure for 24 hours. Three patients had acute compartment syndrome (2.6%). In the first 12 hours of monitoring, 53 patients had absolute pressures over 30 mmHg and 30 had pressures over 40 mmHg, with four higher than 50 mmHg. Only one patient had a differential pressure (diastolic minus compartment pressure) of less than 30 mmHg; he had a fasciotomy. In the second 12-hour period 28 patients had absolute pressures over 30 mmHg and seven over 40 mmHg. Only two had differential pressures of less than 30 mmHg; they had fasciotomies. None of our 116 patients had any sequelae of the compartment syndrome at their latest review at least six months after injury. A threshold for decompression of 30 mmHg would have indicated that 50 patients (43%) would have required fasciotomy, and at a 40 mmHg threshold 27 (23%) would have been considered for an unnecessary fasciotomy. In our series, the use of a differential pressure of 30 mmHg as a threshold for fasciotomy led to no missed cases of acute compartment syndrome. We recommended that decompression should be performed if the differential pressure level drops to under 30 mmHg.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Locking intramedullary nailing with and without reaming for open fractures of the tibial shaft. A prospective, randomized study.

              Ninety-one patients who had ninety-four open fractures of the tibial shaft were randomized into two treatment groups. Fifty fractures (nine type-I, eighteen type-II, sixteen type-IIIA, and seven type-IIIB fractures, according to the classification of Gustilo et al.) were treated with nailing after reaming, and forty-four fractures (five type-I, sixteen type-II, nineteen type-IIIA, and four type-IIIB fractures) were treated with nailing without reaming. The average diameter of the nail was 11.5 millimeters (range, nine to fourteen millimeters) in the group treated with reaming and 9.2 millimeters (range, eight to ten millimeters) in the group treated without reaming. Follow-up information was adequate for forty-five patients (forty-seven fractures) who had been managed with reaming and forty patients (forty-one fractures) who had been managed without reaming. No clinically important differences were found between the two groups with regard to the technical aspects of the procedure or the rate of early postoperative complications. The average time to union was thirty weeks (range, thirteen to seventy-two weeks) in the group treated with reaming and twenty-nine weeks (range, thirteen to fifty weeks) in the group treated without reaming. Four (9 per cent) of the fractures treated with reaming and five (12 per cent) of the fractures treated without reaming did not unite (p = 0.73). There were two infections in the group treated with reaming and one in the group treated without reaming. Significantly more screws broke in the group treated without reaming (twelve; 29 per cent) than in the group treated with reaming (four; 9 per cent) (p = 0.014). There was no difference between the two groups with regard to the frequency of broken nails (two nails that had been inserted after reaming broke, compared with one that had been inserted without reaming). The functional outcome, in terms of pain in the knee, range of motion, return to work, and recreational activity, did not differ significantly between the groups. We concluded that the clinical and radiographic results of nailing after reaming are similar to those of nailing without reaming for fixation of open fractures of the tibial shaft, although more screws broke when reaming had not been done.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                zelle@uthscsa.edu
                Journal
                Patient Saf Surg
                Patient Saf Surg
                Patient Safety in Surgery
                BioMed Central (London )
                1754-9493
                12 December 2015
                12 December 2015
                2015
                : 9
                : 40
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Division of Orthopaedic Traumatology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr, MC-7774, San Antonio, TX 78229 USA
                [ ]Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Federal University of São Paulo, Rua Borges Lagoa, 783-50 Andar, São Paulo, 04038032 Brazil
                Article
                86
                10.1186/s13037-015-0086-1
                4676866
                26692899
                5e777080-7da6-4648-b208-802c6f0134d8
                © Zelle and Boni. 2015

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and 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. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 3 November 2015
                : 22 November 2015
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Surgery
                tibia,fracture,intramedullary,nail,knee pain
                Surgery
                tibia, fracture, intramedullary, nail, knee pain

                Comments

                Comment on this article