Abstract

BackgroundSurgeons agree on the benefits of operative treatment of tibial fractures – the most common of long bone fractures – with an intramedullary rod or nail. Rates of re-operation remain high – between 23% and 60% in prior trials – and the two alternative nailing approaches, reamed or non-reamed, each have a compelling biological rationale and strong proponents, resulting in ongoing controversy regarding which is better.Methods/DesignThe objective of this trial was to assess the impact of reamed versus non-reamed intramedullary nailing on rates of re-operation in patients with open and closed fractures of the tibial shaft. The study to prospectively evaluate reamed intramedullary nails in tibial fractures (S.P.R.I.N.T) was a multi-center, randomized trial including 29 clinical sites in Canada, the United States and the Netherlands which enrolled 1200 skeletally mature patients with open (Gustilo Types I-IIIB) or closed (Tscherne Types 0–3) fractures of the tibial shaft amenable to surgical treatment with an intramedullary nail. Patients received a statically locked intramedullary nail with either reamed or non-reamed insertion. The first strategy involved fixation of the fracture with an intramedullary nail following reaming to enlarge the intramedullary canal (Reamed Group). The second treatment strategy involved fixation of the fracture with an intramedullary nail without prior reaming of the intramedullary canal (Non-Reamed Group). Patients, outcome assessors, and data analysts were blinded to treatment allocation. Peri-operative care was standardized, and re-operations before 6 months were proscribed. Patients were followed at discharge, 2 weeks post-discharge, and at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post surgery. A committee, blinded to allocation, adjudicated all outcomes.DiscussionThe primary outcome was re-operation to promote healing, treat infection, or preserve the limb (fasciotomy for compartment syndrome after nailing). The primary outcome was a composite comprising the following re-operations: bone grafts, implant exchanges, and dynamizations, in patients with fracture gaps less than 1 cm post intramedullary nail insertion. Infections and fasciotomies were considered events irrespective of the fracture gap. We planned a priori to conduct a subgroup analysis of outcomes in patients with open and closed fractures. S.P.R.I.N.T is the largest collaborative trial evaluating alternative orthopaedic surgical interventions in patients with tibial shaft fractures. The methodological rigor will set new benchmarks for future trials in the field and its results will have important impact on patient care. The S.P.R.I.N.T trial was registered [ID NCT00038129] and received research ethics approval (REB#99-077).

Highlights

  • Surgeons agree on the benefits of operative treatment of tibial fractures – the most common of long bone fractures – with an intramedullary rod or nail

  • The S.P.R.I.N.T trial protocol was developed as a multicenter, blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare alternative intramedullary techniques in 900 patients with closed and open tibial shaft fractures

  • Patients with tibial fractures remain in hospital for a total of 569,000 hospital days and incur 825,000 physician visits per year in the United States [1]

Read more

Summary

Discussion

Trials in orthopaedic surgery have typically been single center initiatives that often lack sufficient power to make recommendations regarding surgical practice, and suffer from methodological limitations This is the first large scale co-operative trial among orthopaedic traumatologists in North America and Europe to assess an orthopaedic surgical treatment. Based on previous trials and our beliefs that treatment effects would be conserved across open and closed fractures, S.P.R.I.N.T is powered to detect patient-important differences in reoperation risk. Previous trials with large reported benefits to reamed nails and S.P.R.I.N.T surgeons' increased experiences with reamed nails risked a http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/9/91 differential threshold towards early re-operation in patients randomized to non-reamed nail insertion. One major limitation of S.P.R.I.N.T was the fact that surgeons could not be blinded to treatment allocation leaving the assessment of outcomes and decisions to reoperate vulnerable to bias. This trial will change current orthopaedic practice, but will set a benchmark for the conduct of future orthopaedic trials

Background
Methods/Design
Month 12 Month
Russell TA
Findings
32. Rhinelander FW
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call