Taylor Spatial Frame or Reamed Intramedullary Nailing for Closed Fractures of the Tibial Shaft: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Chronic knee pain following infrapatellar/suprapatellar magnetic intramedullary lengthening nails versus external fixators in limb length discrepancy: A retrospective review

Aims & objectives

Prior to the popularization of magnetic intramedullary nails (MILNs), gradual deformity correction using external fixation was the norm in limb lengthening. Trauma literature has shown MILN via a suprapatellar approach (SP) to be associated with less knee pain than either an infrapatellar entry (IP) or external fixation. Yet, no research has investigated chronic knee pain and MILNs. We assessed differences in chronic knee pain following lengthening via an IP or SP approach with an MILN versus external fixation.

Materials & methods

We reviewed 147 limbs (55 MILN/IP, 22 MILN/SP, 71 external fixator) in 124 patients who underwent tibial lengthening with ≥12 months follow-up between February 2012 and July 2020. Knee pain was assessed pre- and postoperatively at 6 and 12 months, with the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale (LKSS) and numeric pain scale (0-10). Differences in knee pain outcomes were compared across methods, with subgroup analysis of MILN/SP and MILN/IP.

Results

Mean LKSS was 96.3 for external fixation and 88.5 for MILN (P = .011). In the MILN subgroups, mean LKSS was 91.7 for IP and 85.3 for SP. The IP group reported a lesser mean pain score (0.6 versus 2.1) at 12 months. Bilateral nail recipients demonstrated no knee pain differences versus unilateral. At 12 months postoperative, external fixation had better knee outcomes.

Conclusion

Tibial lengthening with external fixation was associated with less chronic anterior knee pain and better functional outcomes than MILN overall. In terms of MILN approach, IP surpassed SP on subjective pain scores. Larger tibial lengthening and knee pain studies are warranted.

Hexaxial external fixator versus intramedullary nail in treating segmental tibial fractures: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

It's difficult to treat segmental tibial fractures (STFs), which are intricate injuries associated with significant soft tissue damage. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effect of hexaxial external fixator (HEF) and intramedullary nail (IMN) in treatment of STFs.

METHODS

A total of 42 patients with STFs were finally recruited between January 2018 and June 2022. There were 25 males and 17 females with age range of 20 to 60 years. All fractures were classified as type 42C2 using the Arbeitsgemeinschaftfür Osteosythese/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification. 22 patients were treated with HEF and 20 patients were treated with IMN. The condition of vascular and neural injuries, time of full weight bearing, bone union time and infection rate were documented and analyzed between the two groups. The mechanical medial proximal tibial angle (mMPTA), mechanical posterior proximal tibial angle (mPPTA), mechanical lateral distal tibial angle (mLDTA), mechanical anterior distal tibial angle (mADTA), hospital for special surgery (HSS) knee joint score, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle joint score, range of motion (ROM) of flexion of keen joint and ROM of plantar flexion and dorsal flexion of ankle joint were compared between the two groups at the last clinical visit.

RESULTS

There were no vascular and neural injuries or other severe complications in both groups. All 22 patients in HEF group underwent closed reduction but 3 patients in IMN group were treated by open reduction. The time of full weight bearing was (11.3 ± 3.2) days in HEF group and (67.8 ± 5.8) days in IMN group(P < 0.05), with bone union time for (6.9 ± 0.8) months and (7.7 ± 1.4) months, respectively(P < 0.05). There was no deep infection in both groups. In the HEF group and IMN group, mMPTA was (86.9 ± 1.5)° and (89.7 ± 1.8)°(P < 0.05), mPPTA was (80.8 ± 1.9)° and (78.6 ± 2.0)°(P < 0.05), mLDTA was (88.5 ± 1.7)° and (90.3 ± 1.7)°(P < 0.05), while mADTA was (80.8 ± 1.5)° and (78.4 ± 1.3)°(P < 0.05). No significant differences were found between the two groups at the last clinical visit concerning HSS knee joint score and AOFAS ankle joint score, ROM of flexion of keen joint and ROM of plantar flexion of ankle joint (P > 0.05). The ROM of dorsal flexion of ankle joint in IMN group was (30.4 ± 3.5)°, better than (21.6 ± 2.8)° in HEF group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In terms of final clinical outcomes, the use of either HEF or IMN for STFs can achieve good therapeutic effects. While HEF is superior to IMN in terms of completely closed reduction, early full weight bearing, early bone union and alignment. Nevertheless, HEF has a greater impact on the ROM of dorsal flexion of the ankle joint, and much more care and adjustment are needed for the patients than IMN.

Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing External Fixation to Intramedullary Nailing in the Treatment of Open Tibial Fractures

Background: The purpose of this study was to collect all available randomized controlled trials (RCT) on the treatment of open tibial fractures with an external fixator (EF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for meta-analysis to provide reliable evidence-based data for clinical decision-making. Material and methods: The systematic review was undertaken in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Review). An electronic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was performed until 1 March 2023 to identify RCTs which compared either IMN or EF to fix the open tibial fracture. Outcome measures were: postoperative superficial and deep infection, time to union, delayed union, malunion, nonunion and hardware failure. In addition, pain and health-related quality of life were evaluated after 3 and 12 months of follow-up. Results: Sixteen publications comprising 1011 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results suggested that the IMN technique had a lower postoperative superficial infection and malunion rate (RR = 3.56, 95%CI = 2.56-4.95 and RR = 1.96, 95%CI = 1.12-3.44, respectively), but higher hardware failure occurrence in contrast to EF (RR = 0.30; 95%CI = 0.13-0.69). No significant differences were found in the union time, delayed union or nonunion rate, and postoperative deep infection rate between the treatments. Lower levels of pain were found in the EF group (RR = 0.05, 95%CI = 0.02-0.17, p < 0.001). A difference in quality of life favoring IMN after 3 months was found (RR = -0.04, 95%CI = -0.05-0.03, p < 0.001), however, no statistical difference was found after 12 months (RR = 0.03, 95%CI = -0.05-0.11, p = 0.44). Conclusions: Meta-analysis presented reduced incidence rates of superficial infection, malunion, and health-related quality of life 3 months after treatment in IMN. However, EF led to a significant reduction in pain and incidence rate of hardware failure. Postoperative deep infection, delayed union, nonunion and health-related quality of life 12 months following therapy were similar between groups. More high-quality RCTs should be conducted to provide reliable evidence-based data for clinical decision-making.

Definitive Taylor Spatial Frame management for the treatment of high-energy open tibial fractures: Clinical and patient-reported outcomes

BACKGROUND

High energy open tibial fractures are complex injuries with no consensus on the optimal method of fixation. Treatment outcomes are often reported with union and re-operation rates, often without specific definitions being provided.  We sought to describe union, reoperation rates, and patient reported outcomes, using the validated EQ-VAS and Disability Rating Index (DRI) scores, following stabilisation with a Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) and a combined orthoplastic approach for the management of soft tissues. A literature review is also provided.

METHOD

A prospective cross-sectional follow up of open tibial fractures, treated at a level 1 major trauma centre, managed with a TSF using a one ring per segment technique between January 2014 and December 2019 were identified. Demographic, injury and operative data were recorded, along with Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM) scores, specifically the EQ-VAS and Disability Rating Index (DRI). Union rates, defined by radiographic union scale in tibia (RUST) scores, and re-operation rates were recorded. Appropriate statistical analyses were performed, with a p<0.05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Overall, 51 patients were included. Mean age was 51.2 ± 17.4 years, with a 4:1 male preponderance. Diaphyseal and distal fractures accounted for 76% of cases. Mean time in frame was 206.7 ± 149.4 days. Union was defined and was achieved in 41/51 (80.4%) patients. Deep infection occurred in 6/51 (11.8%) patients. Amputation was performed in 1 case (1.9%). Overall re-operation rate was 33%. Time to union were significantly longer if re-operation was required for any reason (uncomplicated 204±189 vs complicated 304±155 days; p = 0.0017) . EQ-VAS and DRI scores significantly deteriorated at 1 year follow-up (EQVAS 87.5 ± 11.7 vs 66.5 ± 20.4;p<0.0001 and DRI 11.9 ± 17.8 vs 39.3 ± 23.3;p<0.0001). At 1 year post op, 23/51(45.1%) required a walking aid, and 17/29 (58.6%) of those working pre-injury had returned to work.

CONCLUSION

Open tibial fracture have significant morbidity and long recovery periods as determined by EQVAS and DRI outcome measures.  We report the largest series of open tibial feature treated primarily with a TSF construct, which has similar outcomes to other techniques, and should therefore be considered as a useful technique for managing these injuries.

Effect of Transverse Versus Longitudinal Incisions on Anterior Knee Pain After Tibial Nailing (TRAVEL): A Multicenter Randomized Trial with 1-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Anterior knee pain is common after tibial nailing, and its origin is poorly understood. Literature suggests it may be related to infrapatellar nerve injury. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of a transverse (potentially infrapatellar nerve-sparing) incision versus a longitudinal incision for the insertion of a tibial nail with respect to anterior knee pain.

METHODS

Patients with a tibial shaft fracture undergoing treatment with use of an intramedullary nail were randomized to a transverse incision (n = 68) or longitudinal incision (n = 68) in multiple centers. The primary outcome measure was kneeling pain based on a numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary outcome measures included knee pain during daily activities, functional outcome (Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment and Lower Extremity Functional Scale), quality of life (EuroQol-5 Dimensions), activity resumption, complications, reoperations, and costs within 1 year after trauma.

RESULTS

At 12 months, the estimated marginal mean for kneeling pain was 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6 to 3.2) in the transverse incision group and 3.7 (95% CI, 3.0 to 4.5) in the longitudinal incision group. Regression analysis showed no significant difference between the groups over time. Knee pain scores for daily activities, functional outcome scores, and quality of life were also comparable between the groups. Signs of infrapatellar nerve injury were found less often after a transverse incision (18% versus 54%; p < 0.001). The median total (direct and indirect) costs per patient were €10,468 in the transverse incision group and €11,066 in the longitudinal incision group. Loss of productivity accounted for 67% and 52% of the total costs in the 2 groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A transverse incision reduces injury to the infrapatellar nerve, but anterior knee pain scores and function are comparable after use of a transverse or longitudinal incision for tibial nail insertion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Modern External Ring Fixation Versus Internal Fixation for Treatment of Severe Open Tibial Fractures: A Randomized Clinical Trial (FIXIT Study)

BACKGROUND

Modern external ring fixation has been hypothesized to reduce complications requiring hospital readmission compared with internal fixation when treating patients with high-energy open tibial shaft fractures. In this study, the 1-year probability of a major limb complication was compared between external and internal fixation of severe open tibial fractures.

METHODS

This multicenter randomized clinical trial included patients 18 to 64 years of age with severe open tibial shaft fractures randomly assigned to either modern external ring fixation (n = 127) or internal fixation (n = 133). The primary outcome was a major limb complication within 365 days after randomization; these complications included amputation, infection, a soft-tissue problem, nonunion, malunion, and a loss of reduction/implant failure.

RESULTS

Of 260 randomized patients, 254 were included in the final analysis. Their mean age (standard deviation) was 39 (13) years; 214 (84%) were men. The probability of at least 1 major limb complication was higher for external fixation (62.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 53.4% to 70.8%]) than internal fixation (43.7% [95% CI: 35.5% to 52.9%]), with a risk difference of 18.4% (95% CI: 5.8% to 30.4%); p = 0.005). The most notable difference was in loss of reduction/implant failure, the rate of which was higher for external fixation (risk difference: 14.4% [95% CI: 7.0% to 21.6%]; p = 0.002). There was no appreciable difference in the probability of deep infection between external fixation (26.1%) and internal fixation (29.7%) (risk difference: -3.5% [95% CI: -14.8% to 7.8%]; p = 0.54). There were also no appreciable differences in the probabilities of amputation, nonunion, soft-tissue problems, malunion, or fracture healing between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These results argue against routine use of modern external ring fixation for the treatment of these severe open tibial fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Opening Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy with Combined Use of Patient-Specific 3D-Printed Plates and Taylor Spatial Frame for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

Background

High tibial osteotomy (HTO) is used to treat medial degeneration of the osteoarthritis (OA) knee. However, shortcomings still exist in the current procedure, like unprecise creation, inability to correct knee rotation, and internal fixed failure. Here, we reported a novel procedure: patient-specific 3D-printed plates for opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) combined with Taylor spatial frame (TSF). The detailed technique was described, and the clinical outcomes were evaluated.

Methods

We prospectively evaluate outcomes of patient-specific 3D-printed plates for OWHTO with use of TSF in 25 patients with knee OA and varus alignment. Postoperative efficacy was evaluated using the HSS knee score, pain visual simulation score (VAS), and knee joint motion (ROM), and lower limb alignment was evaluated by measuring femorotibial angle (FTA) and hip-knee-ankle (HKA). Results and Conclusion. All patients did not experience complications such as wound infection, nerve damage, or bone amputation. 25 patients were followed up for 6–18 months. The bony union at bone amputation was achieved in 3 months after surgery, and the pain symptoms were significantly alleviated or disappeared. The VAS score was significantly reduced in 6 months after surgery compared with preoperative; the HSSS score was significantly added in 6 months after surgery compared with preoperative. The ROM of knee joint increased significantly 6 months after operation compared with that before operation, and the difference was statically significant (P < 0.05). The FTA and HKA after operation were significantly superior to that before operation, and the difference was statically significant (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

Our study showed that patient-specific 3D-printed plates for HTO with the use of TSF have the advantages of small trauma, few complications, simple operation, and fast recovery in treating knee OA and varus alignment.

Intraoperative acute correction versus postoperative gradual correction for tibial shaft fractures with multiplanar posttraumatic deformities using the hexapod external fixator

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in clinical outcomes, if any, between intraoperative acute correction and postoperative gradual correction for tibial shaft fractures with multiplanar posttraumatic deformities using the hexapod external fixator.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 58 consecutive patients with tibial shaft fractures treated by the hexapod external fixator at our institution from January 2015 to April 2019. Twenty-three patients (Group I) underwent intraoperative acute correction, from January 2015 to October 2016. Starting in November 2016, the other 35 patients (Group II) all underwent postoperative gradual correction. The demographic data, operation duration, original residual deformities before correction, residual deformities after correction, and external fixation time were collected and analyzed. The clinical outcomes were evaluated by the Johner-Wruhs criteria at the last clinical visit.

RESULTS

All patients achieved complete bone union with a mean time of 28.7 ± 4.6 weeks (range 21 to 37 weeks) in Group I and 27.9 ± 4.8 weeks (range 19 to 38 weeks) in Group II (P > 0.05). The operation duration in Group I (88.9 ± 7.7 min) was longer than that in Group II (61.9 ± 8.4 min), and there was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in original residual deformities before correction and residual deformities after correction (P > 0.05). The rate of postoperative complication was similar between the two groups. There was no statistical significance in demographic data and clinical outcomes between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in clinical outcomes between intraoperative acute correction and postoperative gradual correction for tibial shaft fractures with multiplanar posttraumatic deformities using the hexapod external fixator. Postoperative gradual correction may shorten the duration in the operation room and decrease the potential intraoperative risk.

Management of high-energy tibial shaft fractures using the hexapod circular external fixator

Background

The hexapod external fixator (HEF) is increasingly used for high-energy tibial shaft fracture care as more general orthopedic surgeons are gaining expertise of this versatile device. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the HEF for definitive management in patients with high-energy tibial shaft fractures.

Methods

The study was conducted on 34 patients with tibial shaft fractures who were admitted or referred to our institution and consented to HEF treatment from Jan 2016 to June 2019, including 27 males and 7 females with a mean age of 39 years (range 18 to 65 years). Patients' clinical and radiological data, and the final clinical outcomes at a minimum of 12 months follow-up were collected and retrospectively analyzed. All complications were documented according to Paley’s classification. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Association for the Study and Application of the Method of Ilizarov criteria (ASAMI) at the last clinical visit.

Results

All patients remained in the HEF for a mean of 26 weeks (range 15 to 52 weeks) and acquired complete bone union. The satisfactory alignment was achieved in all patients, and all the patients were able to perform daily activities with no difficulty at the last clinical visit. Complications included pin tract infection (44%), delayed union (6%), nonunion (3%), and joint stiffness (3%). The ASAMI bony result was excellent in 31 patients and good in 3. The ASAMI functional result was excellent in 27 patients, good in 6, and fair in 1.

Conclusions

Definitive management using the hexapod external fixator is an alternative and effective method for high-energy tibial shaft fractures, including technical advantages of early trauma-control, the versatility of achieving excellent alignment, and the continuity of device until bone union.