Abstract
Introduction. Extracortical Clamp Device (ECD) is a tool that, unlike conventional wires and pins, does not perforate long bone cortex. Therefore, its use simplifies methods of combined and consequtive use of internal and external fixation, osteosynthesis in periprosthetic fractures and deformities. Purpose of the study - to compare the rate of complications and their structure depending on extracortical clamp device application and conventional transosseous elements in combined external fixation of femur. Materials and methods. We analyzed the complications arising in treatment of 66 patients with frames where ECD were used (group «ECD»). The results were compared with the results of treatment 29 patients, when utilizing combination of external and internal fixation, external fixation device included conventional transosseous elements only (group «W-P»). Results. In the group «ECD» inflammation of the soft tissues around fixing elements was identified in 14.8% of cases. In these patients complication arisen at 45.5% of the all used fixing elements; of them - 18.2% around ECD. In the group «W-P» pin-tract infection occurred in 29.2% cases. ECD breaking was in one case (3.7%) breaking of wires or pins in «W-P» group was diagnosed in 3 cases (13.6%). In the treatment of periprosthetic fractures and deformities with ECD soft tissues around fixing elements was in 16.7% of cases. In the treatment of similar fractures and deformities without prosthesis pin-tract infection were diagnosed in 21.5% cases. All of these complications did not affect the outcome. Other complications (neuropathy, contracture of the knee) were not depending on the application of ECD.
Highlights
Extracortical Clamp Device (ECD) is a tool that, unlike conventional wires and pins, does not perforate long bone cortex
In the group «ECD» inflammation of the soft tissues around fixing elements was identified in 14.8% of cases
In these patients complication arisen at 45.5% of the all used fixing elements; of them – 18.2% around ECD
Summary
Осложнения, связанные с применением экстракортикальных фиксаторов при комбинированном и последовательном использовании чрескостного остеосинтеза и внутренней фиксации бедренной кости. Результаты были сравнены с результатами применения у 29 пациентов комбинированной внешней и внутренней фиксации при использовании традиционных чрескостных элементов (группа «ЧЭ»). Ключевые слова: экстракортикальный фиксатор, осложнения чрескостного остеосинтеза, дефекты и деформации бедренной кости, удлинение и замещение дефекта поверх гвоздя. Объединение преимуществ чрескостного и интрамедуллярного блокируемого остеосинтеза позволяет уменьшить риск осложнений, повысить комфортность для пациента при лечении переломов, коррекции деформаций различной сложности, замещении сегментарных дефектов длинных костей [2, 7, 11, 15]. «Ассистирующая» внешняя фиксация блокируемого интрамедуллярного остеосинтеза при лечении переломов и коррекции деформаций длинных костей – АсВФ (External Fixation Assisted Nailing – EFAN). Цель исследования – сравнить частоту возникновения и структуру осложнений в зависимости от применения экстракторикальных фиксаторов и стандартных чрескостных элементов при чрескостном и комбинированном остеосинтезе бедренной кости
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
