Trifocal versus Pentafocal bone transport in segmental tibial defects: a matched comparative analysis for posttraumatic osteomyelitis treatment

被引:1
|
作者
Hamiti, Yimurang [1 ]
Abudureyimu, Patiman [2 ]
Lyu, Gang [3 ]
Yusufu, Aihemaitijiang [1 ]
Yushan, Maimaiaili [3 ]
机构
[1] Xinjiang Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Dept Microrepair & Reconstruct Surg, Urumqi, Xinjiang, Peoples R China
[2] Xinjiang Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 1, Imaging Ctr, Urumqi, Xinjiang, Peoples R China
[3] Xinjiang Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp 4, Tradit Chinese Med Hosp Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous, Dept Orthoped Surg, Urumqi, Xinjiang, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Bone transport; Distraction osteogenesis; Ilizarov technique; Tibial defect; Osteomyelitis; INFECTED NONUNION; EXTERNAL FIXATOR; ILIZAROV; MANAGEMENT; RECONSTRUCTION; EXPERIENCE; MUSCLE;
D O I
10.1186/s12891-024-07507-w
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and clinical results of trifocal bone transport (TBT) and pentafocal bone transport (PBT) in treating distal tibial defects > 6 cm resulting from posttraumatic osteomyelitis, highlighting the potential advantages and challenges of each method. Methods A retrospective assessment was conducted on an overall population of 46 eligible patients with distal tibial defects > 6 cm who received treatment between January 2015 and January 2019. Propensity score analysis was used to pair 10 patients who received TBT with 10 patients who received PBT. The outcomes assessed included demographic information, external fixation time (EFT), external fixation index (EFI), bone and functional outcomes assessed using the Association for the Study and Application of the Method of Ilizarov (ASAMI) scoring system, and postoperative complications evaluated using the Paley classification. Results The demographic and baseline data of the two groups were comparable. Following radical debridement, the average tibial defect was 7.02 +/- 0.68 cm. The mean EFT was significantly shorter in the PBT group (130.9 +/- 16.0 days) compared to the TBT group (297.3 +/- 14.3 days). Similarly, the EFI was lower in the PBT group (20.67 +/- 2.75 days/cm) than in the TBT group (35.86 +/- 3.69 days/cm). Both groups exhibited satisfactory postoperative bone and functional results. Pin site infection was the most common complication and the rates were significantly different between the groups, with the PBT group demonstrating a higher incidence. Conclusion Both TBT and PBT effectively treat posttraumatic tibial defects greater than 6 cm, with PBT offering more efficient bone regeneration. However, PBT is associated with a higher rate of pin site infections, highlighting the importance of careful management in these complex procedures and emphasizing the need for expert surgical execution and tailored treatment approaches in orthopedic reconstructive surgery.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Matched comparative study of trifocal bone transport versus induced membrane followed by trifocal bone transport in the treatment of segmental tibial defects caused by posttraumatic osteomyelitis
    Hamiti, Yimurang
    Yushan, Maimaiaili
    Yalikun, Ainizier
    Lu, Cheng
    Yusufu, Aihemaitijiang
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2022, 23 (01)
  • [2] Matched comparative study of trifocal bone transport versus induced membrane followed by trifocal bone transport in the treatment of segmental tibial defects caused by posttraumatic osteomyelitis
    Yimurang Hamiti
    Maimaiaili Yushan
    Ainizier Yalikun
    Cheng Lu
    Aihemaitijiang Yusufu
    BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 23
  • [3] Trifocal versus bifocal bone transport in treatment of long segmental tibial bone defects A RETROSPECTIVE COMPARATIVE STUDY
    Catagni, M. A.
    Azzam, W.
    Guerreschi, F.
    Lovisetti, L.
    Poli, P.
    Khan, M. S.
    Di Giacomo, L. M.
    BONE & JOINT JOURNAL, 2019, 101B (02) : 162 - 169
  • [4] Bifocal or Trifocal (Double-Level) Bone Transport Using Unilateral Rail System in the Treatment of Large Tibial Defects Caused by Infection: A Retrospective Study
    Yushan, Maimaiaili
    Ren, Peng
    Abula, Abulaiti
    Alike, Yamuhanmode
    Abulaiti, Alimujiang
    Ma, Chuang
    Yusufu, Aihemaitijiang
    ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2020, 12 (01) : 184 - 193
  • [5] Ilizarov bone transport and treatment of critical-sized tibial bone defects: a narrative review
    Aktuglu, Kemal
    Erol, Kubilay
    Vahabi, Arman
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2019, 20 (01)
  • [6] Matched Comparison of Bone Transport Using External Fixator Over a Nail Versus External Fixator Over a Plate for Segmental Tibial Bone Defects
    Park, Kyeong-Hyeon
    Oh, Chang-Wug
    Kim, Joon-Woo
    Oh, Jong-Keon
    Yoon, Yong-Cheol
    Seo, Il
    Ha, Sung-Soo
    Chung, Seung-Ho
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2021, 35 (11) : E397 - E404
  • [7] Treatment of segmental tibial defects by bone transport with circular external fixation and a locking plate
    Lu, Yao
    Ma, Teng
    Ren, Cheng
    Li, Zhong
    Sun, Liang
    Xue, Hanzhong
    Li, Ming
    Zhang, Kun
    Zhang, Congming
    Wang, Qian
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2020, 48 (04)
  • [8] Pedicled Double-Barrel Fibular Transplantation Versus Bone Transport in the Treatment of Upper Tibial Osteomyelitis with Bone Defects: A Retrospective Study
    Huang, Qiang
    Lu, Yao
    Ma, Teng
    Wang, Qian
    Wang, ChaoFeng
    Li, Zhong
    Zhang, Kun
    Ren, Cheng
    ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2022, 14 (11) : 2888 - 2896
  • [9] Bone transport versus acute shortening for the management of infected tibial bone defects: a meta-analysis
    Wen, Hongjie
    Zhu, Shouyan
    Li, Canzhang
    Xu, Yongqing
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2020, 21 (01)
  • [10] Docking site complications analysis of Ilizarov bone transport technique in the treatment of tibial bone defects
    Feng, Dongwei
    Zhang, Yaxin
    Wu, Weize
    Jia, Heping
    Ma, Chuang
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2023, 18 (01)