Electromagnetic distal targeting system does not reduce the overall operative time of the intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fractures.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the use of the electromagnetic distal targeting system in treating humeral shaft fracture.Methods
Patients were divided in: Group 1) patients that received a distal locking screw placement following the free-hand technique; Group 2) patients in which the distal locking screw was performed using the SURESHOT device.Results
No differences were noted comparing Group 1 (freehand) [71,9 range 40-135 min] to Group 2 (SURESHOT)[70, range 25-125 min].Conclusion
The use of the EM distal targeting system doesn't reduce the overall operative time of the humeral shaft fracture fixation using IMN.
SUBMITTER: Camarda L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6115538 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Electromagnetic distal targeting system does not reduce the overall operative time of the intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fractures.
Camarda Lawrence L Zini Stefania S Butera Marcello M Giambartino Sabastin S Mattaliano Ugo U Raso Francesco F Sciortino Roberto R D'Arienzo Michele M
Journal of orthopaedics 20180824 3
<h4>Introduction</h4>We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the use of the electromagnetic distal targeting system in treating humeral shaft fracture.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients were divided in: Group 1) patients that received a distal locking screw placement following the free-hand technique; Group 2) patients in which the distal locking screw was performed using the SURESHOT device.<h4>Results</h4>No differences were noted comparing Group 1 (freehand) [71,9 range 40-135 min] to Group 2 (SURESHOT)[7 ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThere 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsOne 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).ConclusionsThe 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.
| S-EPMC2663330 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOpen tibial shaft fractures comprise almost 45% of all open fractures and are frequently the result of high-energy trauma. Due to contamination, limited soft tissue coverage of the tibial shaft and poor tibial blood supply, open tibial shaft fractures are associated with high rates of complication including malunion, non-union and infection. Intramedullary nailing (IMN) is a mainstay of treatment. This study aims to determine the frequency of the various complications in this cohort.MethodsA systematic review of papers published on Embase, PubMed and Cochrane databases pertaining to the use of IMN to fix open tibial shaft fractures were included. The available evidence was collated in regard to the incidence of union, malunion, non-union and infection seen in this cohort.ResultsA total of 2767 citations were reviewed, and 17 studies comprising 1850 patients were included in the analysis. There was a delayed union rate of 22.4%, malunion rate of 8.3%, non-union rate of 9.7% and infection rate of 8.1% (95% CI: 5.7%-10.8%) in this patient cohort. Subgroup analysis showed a 3-fold increase in non-union and a 2-fold increase in deep infection among Gustilo III injuries compared to Gustilo I and II.ConclusionsIMN for open tibial shaft fractures results in high rates of union and low rates of infection, comparable to figures seen in closed injuries and superior to those seen with alternative methods of fixation. There is a substantially increased risk of complication associated with Gustilo III injuries, reinforcing the significance of the soft tissue injury in these patients.
| S-EPMC9969004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the advantages of robot navigation system-assisted intramedullary nail treatment for humeral shaft fractures and compare it's efficacy with that of traditional surgical intramedullary nail treatment.Materials and methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of patients with humeral shaft fractures who received intramedullary nail treatment at our centre from March 2020 to September 2022. The analysis was divided into a robot group and a traditional surgical group on the basis of whether the surgery involved a robot navigation system. We compared the baseline data (age, sex, cause of injury, fracture AO classification, and time of injury-induced surgery), intraoperative conditions (surgery time, length of main nail insertion incision, postoperative fluoroscopy frequency, intraoperative bleeding), fracture healing time, and shoulder joint function at 1 year postsurgery (ASES score and Constant-Murley score) between the two groups of patients.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference in the baseline data or average fracture healing time between the two groups of patients. However, the robotic group had significantly shorter surgical times, longer main nail incisions, fewer intraoperative fluoroscopies, and less intraoperative blood loss than did the traditional surgery group (P < 0.001).ConclusionRobot navigation system-assisted intramedullary nail fixation for humeral shaft fractures is a reasonable and effective surgical plan. It can help surgeons determine the insertion point and proximal opening direction faster and more easily, shorten the surgical time, reduce bleeding, avoid more intraoperative fluoroscopy, and enable patients to achieve better shoulder functional outcomes.
| S-EPMC11446091 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Femoral shaft fractures result from high-energy trauma. Despite intramedullary nailing (IMN) representing the gold standard option of treatment, external fixation (EF) can be used temporarily for damage control or definitively. The purpose of this study is to compare two different options, anterograde IMN and monoaxial EF, for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures. METHODS:Between January 2005 and December 2014, patients with femoral shaft fractures operated on in two centers were retrospectively evaluated and divided into two groups: the IMN group (n = 74), and the EF group (n = 73). For each group, sex; laterality; age; and AO classification type mean follow-up, mean union time, and complications were reported. RESULTS:Both groups were found to have no statistical differences (p > 0.05) in sex, laterality, age, and AO classification types. In the IMN group the average surgery duration was 79.7 minutes (range 45-130). The average time for bone union was 26.9 weeks. Major complications occurred in 4 (5.4%) patients. In the EF group the average follow-up duration was 59.8 months (range 28-160). The average time for bone union was 24.0 weeks. Major complications occurred in 16 (21.9%) patients. CONCLUSIONS:IMN is the gold standard for definitive treatment of femoral shaft fractures. In patients with severe associated injuries, EF should be a good alternative.
| S-EPMC6723720 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis is a retrospective cohort study designed to compare short-term postoperative complication rates between closed humeral shaft fractures treated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus intramedullary nailing (IMN), as well as secondary independent risk factors for adverse outcomes.Materials and methodsThe American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried using CPT codes to identify patients that underwent an open reduction and plate fixation or intramedullary nailing procedure for a closed humeral shaft fracture from 2010 to 2021. Cohorts were matched using propensity scores to account for demographic differences and rates of complications were compared between the two groups.ResultsFrom the database, a total of 4,222 patients were identified who met inclusion criteria, with 3,326 and 896 undergoing ORIF and IMN respectively. After propensity score matching, 866 of the nearest-neighbor matches were included in each cohort for a total of 1,732 patients in the final analysis. The rate of any adverse event (AAE) was significantly higher in the ORIF cohort (16.3%) than the IMN cohort (12.1%, p = 0.01). The ORIF group had higher rates of postoperative transfusion (p = 0.002), return to OR (p = 0.005), and surgical site infection (SSI, p = 0.03). After multivariate analysis, ASA class 4, increasing age, increasing operative time, and history of bleeding disorder were found to increase the risk of AAE in both ORIF and IMN patients.ConclusionsWhile prior studies have claimed higher complication rates in IMN patients, this study found a significantly higher short-term risk of AAE in ORIF patients when compared in matched cohorts. However, individual 30-day complication rates do not differ significantly between procedures, and both have been shown to be safe and effective tools in the management of humeral shaft fractures.
| S-EPMC11417072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of open- versus closed-reduction and intramedullary nailing (IMN) of adult femur shaft fractures.MethodsFour databases were searched from inception until July 2022 for original studies that compared the outcomes of IMN following open-reduction versus closed-reduction technique. The primary outcome was the union rate; the secondary outcomes were time to union, nonunion, malalignment, revision, and infection. This review was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines.ResultsA total of 12 studies with 1299 (1346 IMN cases) patients were included, with a mean age of 32.3 ± 3.25. The average follow-up was 2.3 ± 1.45 years. There was a statistically significant difference in union rate (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97; p-value, 0.0352), nonunion (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.23-3.44; p-value, 0.0056), and infection rate (OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.16-3.25; p-value, 0.0114) between the open-reduction and closed-reduction groups in favour of the latter. However, malalignment was significantly higher in the closed-reduction group (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.16-0.64; p-value, 0.0012), whereas time to union and revision rates were similar (p = NS).ConclusionThis study showed that closed-reduction and IMN had more favourable union rate, nonunion, and infection rates than the open-reduction group, yet malalignment was significantly less in the open-reduction group. Moreover, time to union and revision rates were comparable. However, these results must be interpreted in context due to confounding effects and the lack of high-quality studies.
| S-EPMC10673735 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is no consensus regarding the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fracture. The present meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN) and plating for humeral shaft fracture.MethodsPubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Clinical Trails, Ovid, ISI Web of Science, and Chinese databases including WanFang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched through March 10, 2019. The Review Manager software was adapted to perform statistical analysis and relative risk (RR) were used for the binary variables, and weighted mean difference and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used to measure the continuous variables. Each variable included its 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsA total of 15 trials with 839 patients were included in the analysis. There was significant difference between IMN group and plate group in blood loss (SMD = 3.49, 95% CI: 1.19, 5.79, P = .003) and postoperative infections (RR = 3.04, 95% CI: 1.49, 6.24, P = .002). Additionally, significant difference was observed between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) group and IMN group in nonunion rate (RR = 3.20, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.84, P = .02). Statistical significance was also observed between the open reduction plate fixation group and IMN group in restriction of shoulder and elbow joints results (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.96, P < .05). No significant difference was observed for the operation time, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, nerve injury, delayed union, reoperation in either group.ConclusionIMN may be superior to plate in reducing blood loss and postoperative infections for the treatment of humeral shaft fracture. However, MIPO was superior to IMN group in nonunion and equal to IMN in other parameters. Further research is required and future studies should include analysis of assessments at different stages and follow-up after removal of the implants.
| S-EPMC6867742 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe treatment of distal third humeral shaft fracture is difficult. Studies have shown that anterior minimally invasive plate has lower probability of complication and higher healing rate. However there is no applicable anatomical plate at present. This study is to investigate the clinical effect of intramedullary nail combined with anterior minimally invasive plate in the treatment of distal humeral shaft fractures.MethodsThe data of 83 patients with lower humerus shaft fracture treated from September 2015 to January 2020 were analyzed. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into two groups: 40 patients were treated with intramedullary nailing combined with minimally invasive anterior plate fixation (group A), and 43 patients were treated with double plate fixation through posterior approach (group B). General preoperative data, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, total incision length, fracture healing time, shoulder and elbow visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Constant-Murley shoulder function score, Mayo elbow function score, and complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. Two independent sample t-tests was used for follow-up, age, BMI, operation time, intraoperative bleeding, total incision length, fracture healing time, Constant-Murley score and Mayo score, and rank sum test was used for VAS score of shoulder and elbow.ResultsThere was no significant difference in preoperative general data between the two groups (p > 0.05), indicating comparability. There were no significant differences in operation time, total incision length, fracture healing time, Constant-Murley shoulder function score at the last follow-up, Mayo elbow function score, and shoulder and elbow VAS pain score between 2 groups (p > 0.05). The amount of intraoperative blood loss in observation group was 76.98 ± 16.46, which was significantly less than that in control group, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.01). There were no radial nerve injury, musculocutaneous nerve injury, incision infection and fracture nonunion in the observation group. In the control group, four cases of iatrogenic radial nerve injury, three cases of incision infection and three cases of fracture nonunion were found. The complication rate was 23.3% (10/43). There was statistical difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (p < 0.01).ConclusionA humeral intramedullary nail combined with an anterior minimally invasive plate in the treatment of distal humeral shaft fracture has the advantages of less soft tissue damage, less blood transfusion, high fracture healing rate and low risk of iatrogenic radial nerve injury, which is an effective method for clinical treatment of this type of fracture.
| S-EPMC10693993 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) intramedullary nailing has been suggested as an alternative to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for the primary treatment of unstable fragility ankle fractures with a poor soft tissue envelope. This study aims to investigate the clinical efficacy of TTC intramedullary nail fixation for the primary treatment of unstable ankle fractures in frail elderly patients with poor soft tissue condition, by assessing the number of postoperative complications and the patient-reported functional outcomes.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed including patients with an unstable ankle fracture treated between 2015 and 2019 with TTC stabilization using a retrograde intramedullary hindfoot nail that was inserted without joint preparation and allowing immediate weight-bearing postoperatively. The primary outcome was the total number of postoperative complications.ResultsA total of 10 patients were included out of 365 operatively treated ankle fractures. The mean age was 85.2 years (range 66-92) with a mean follow-up of 11.2 months (range 6-16). Fracture types included AO/OTA 44-B2 (n = 1), 44-B3 (n = 6), 44-C1 (n = 2) and 44-C3 (n = 1). Postoperative complications were observed in 4 patients (40%), including 3 nonunions, 2 implant related complications and 1 wound infection. No wound healing disorder or below-the-knee amputation was observed. Four patients (40%) deceased between post-operative 6 to 16 months due to medical conditions unrelated to surgery. The mean Foot and Ankle Outcome Score was 52.6 (range 44.2-73.8).ConclusionHindfoot nailingis a viable treatment option in selected high-risk patients with an advanced age, unstable ankle fractures with significant bone loss, poor soft tissue condition and/or severely impaired pre-injury mobility. In a frail geriatric population, hindfoot nailing may be a safe alternative fixation method with a low risk of wound complication or major amputation. However, unprepared joint may lead to symptomatic nonunion after TTC intramedullary nailing.
| S-EPMC8216405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis review was conducted to compare the efficacy of suprapatellar (SP) and infrapatellar (IP) approaches for treating distal tibial fractures with intramedullary nailing.MethodThis systematic review included studies comparing the outcomes of patients receiving nailing for distal tibial fractures using the SP and IP approaches. We searched the Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase databases for relevant studies till 18th Sep. 2022. We used the Newcastle Ottawa Scale to assess study quality and a random-effects meta-analysis to synthesize the outcomes. We used the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data and the odds ratio (OR) with the 95% CI for dichotomous data.ResultsFour studies with 586 patients (302 in the SP group and 284 in the IP group) were included in this systematic review. The SP group may have had little or no difference in pain and slightly better knee function (MD 3.90 points, 95% CI 0.83 to 5.36) and better ankle function (MD: 8.25 points, 95% CI 3.35 to 13.15) than the IP group 12 months after surgery. Furthermore, compared to the IP group, the SP group had a lower risk of malalignment (OR: 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.75; number needed to treat (NNT): 6), a lower risk for open reduction (OR: 0.58, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.97; NNT: 16) and a shorter surgical time (MD: - 15.14 min, 95% CI - 21.28 to - 9.00).ConclusionsWith more advantages, the suprapatellar approach may be the preferred nailing technique over the infrapatellar approach when treating distal tibial fractures.Level of evidenceLevel III, systematic review of non-randomized studies.
| S-EPMC10090252 | biostudies-literature