External fixator versus Ilizarov external fixator for pediatric tibial shaft fractures: A retrospective comparative study

被引:0
|
作者
Hui, Taotao [1 ]
Wang, Jun [1 ]
Yu, Yinghao [1 ]
Dong, Haojuan [1 ]
Lin, Weifeng [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Soochow Univ, Wuxi 9 Peoples Hosp, Dept Pediat Orthoped, Wuxi 214000, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[2] 999 Liangxi Rd, Wuxi, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
来源
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED | 2024年 / 55卷 / 04期
关键词
External fixator; Tibial shaft fracture; Ilizarov external fixator; Comparative study; OPERATIVE TREATMENT; MANAGEMENT; CHILDREN; TRAUMA;
D O I
10.1016/j.injury.2024.111376
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Introduction: External fixators (EF) are widely employed for pediatric tibial shaft fractures, being a prevalent choice in clinical practice. However, they are associated with numerous complications, such as loss of reduction, delayed union, and nonunion. An alternative approach involves the use of Ilizarov external fixators (IEF), which have been documented in the treatment of tibial shaft fractures in various studies. This study endeavors to retrospectively compare the clinical outcomes of EF and IEF in the treatment of pediatric tibial shaft fractures. Methods: The study retrospectively examined patients aged 5 -14 years who underwent treatment for tibial shaft fractures at our institute between January 2017 and January 2023. These individuals were subsequently classified into EF and IEF groups. Exclusions comprised patients presenting with pathological fracture, neuromuscular disorder, metabolic disease, prior tibial fracture or instrumentation, and polytrauma. Additionally, individuals with a follow-up duration of more than 12 months or incomplete medical records were excluded. Results: A total of 45 patients were divided into two groups: the EF group, comprising 24 patients (18 males, 6 females), and the IEF group, consisting of 21 patients (17 males, 4 females). The two groups exhibited no statistically significant differences in terms of sex, age, body weight, time from injury to surgery, AO classification, or concomitant injuries. There were two cases of nonunion in the EF group. Radiological union occurred more rapidly in the IEF group (7.8 +/- 0.4 weeks) than in the EF group (9.3 +/- 1.1 weeks) ( P < 0.05). The mean hospitalization duration differed significantly between the EF group (6.7 +/- 3.4 days) and the IEF group (7.5 +/- 1.1 days) ( P > 0.05). The mean duration of the operative procedure significantly differed between the IEF group (147.8 +/- 24.5 min) and the EF group (77.2 +/- 43.9 min) ( P < 0.001). A significant difference ( P < 0.001) in weight -bearing time was observed between the IEF group (2.6 +/- 0.7 weeks) and the EF group (9.9 +/- 1.4 weeks). According to the Johner -Wruhs criteria, no significant differences were found between the two groups. A significant difference ( P < 0.001) in hospitalization costs was observed between the IEF group (7848.0 +/- 262.4 $) and the EF group (5403.0 +/- 233.3 $). Conclusion: EF is cheaper, quicker and simpler and we need more randomized controlled studies and that this is a pilot study only. Both types of surgery are good choices for children. Nevertheless, the IEF group demonstrates advantages such as early weight -bearing capability and faster fracture healing.
引用
收藏
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Ilizarov external fixator for open fractures of the tibial shaft
    G. Hosny
    M. Fadel
    International Orthopaedics, 2003, 27 : 303 - 306
  • [2] Ilizarov external fixator for open fractures of the tibial shaft
    Hosny, G.
    Fadel, M.
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2003, 27 (05) : 303 - 306
  • [3] The treatment of adult segmented tibial shaft fractures with ilizarov circular external fixator
    Tuekenmez, Mehmet
    Tezeren, Guenduez
    TURKIYE KLINIKLERI TIP BILIMLERI DERGISI, 2007, 27 (03): : 379 - 385
  • [4] Treatment of type IIIA open fractures of tibial shaft with Ilizarov external fixator versus unreamed tibial nailing
    Inan, Muharrem
    Halici, Mehmet
    Ayan, Irfan
    Tuncel, Mehmet
    Karaoglu, Sinan
    ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2007, 127 (08) : 617 - 623
  • [5] Treatment of type IIIA open fractures of tibial shaft with Ilizarov external fixator versus unreamed tibial nailing
    Muharrem Inan
    Mehmet Halici
    Irfan Ayan
    Mehmet Tuncel
    Sinan Karaoglu
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2007, 127 : 617 - 623
  • [6] Use of Ilizarov external fixator for proximal tibial metaphyseal fractures
    delaCaffiniere, JY
    Zeitoun, JM
    Segonds, JM
    Lacaze, F
    REVUE DE CHIRURGIE ORTHOPEDIQUE ET REPARATRICE DE L APPAREIL MOTEUR, 1997, 83 (02): : 123 - 132
  • [7] The treatment of femoral shaft fractures in adults with hybrid Ilizarov external fixator
    Belhan, Oktay
    Ekinci, Ahmet
    Karakurt, Lokman
    Yilmaz, Erhan
    Serin, Erhan
    EKLEM HASTALIKLARI VE CERRAHISI-JOINT DISEASES AND RELATED SURGERY, 2008, 19 (02): : 50 - 54
  • [8] Evaluation of Complex Tibial Pilon Fractures Treated with Ilizarov External Fixator
    Pirwani, Mehtah Ahmed
    Kumar, Jagdesh
    Katto, Muhammad Soughat
    Rasheed, Nusrat
    Sahito, Badaruddin
    Khani, Ghulam Mustafa Kiam
    JOURNAL OF THE LIAQUAT UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES, 2018, 17 (02): : 80 - 85
  • [9] Hexaxial external fixator versus intramedullary nail in treating segmental tibial fractures: a retrospective study
    Zhiming Zhao
    Hengsheng Shu
    Peng Jia
    Xu Chen
    Feng Guo
    Yabin Liu
    Bowen Shi
    Guoqi Ji
    Chengkuo Cai
    Yidong Shen
    BMC Surgery, 24
  • [10] Hexaxial external fixator versus intramedullary nail in treating segmental tibial fractures: a retrospective study
    Zhao, Zhiming
    Shu, Hengsheng
    Jia, Peng
    Chen, Xu
    Guo, Feng
    Liu, Yabin
    Shi, Bowen
    Ji, Guoqi
    Cai, Chengkuo
    Shen, Yidong
    BMC SURGERY, 2024, 24 (01)