Risk factors for refracture of the femoral shaft in children after removal of external fixation

External fixator versus elastic stable intramedullary nail for treatment of metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction fractures of the pediatric distal femur: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Several methods have been used for the treatment of pediatric distal femoral fractures, such as elastic stable intramedullary nail (ESIN), external fixator (EF) and plate osteosynthesis, but there has been no consensus about the optimal method. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome between EF and ESIN techniques used in metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction (MDJ) fractures of the pediatric distal femur.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed operatively treated MDJ fractures of pediatric distal femur between January 2015 and January 2022. Patient charts were reviewed for demographics, injury and data of radiography. All of the patients were divided into EF and ESIN groups according to the operation techniques. Malalignment was defined as more than 5 degrees of angular deformity in either plane. Clinical outcomes were measured by Flynn scoring system.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients were included in this study, among which, 23 were treated with EF, and 15 with ESIN. The mean follow-up time was 18 months (12-24 months). At the final follow-up, all of the fractures were healed. Although there were no statistical differences between the two groups in demographic data, length of stay, estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of open reduction, time to fracture healing and Flynn score, the EF was superior to ESIN in operative time, fluoroscopic exposure and time to partial weight-bearing. The EF group had a significantly higher rate of skin irritation, while the ESIN had a significantly higher rate of malalignment.

CONCLUSION

EF and ESIN are both effective methods in the treatment of MDJ fractures of the pediatric distal femur. ESIN is associated with lower rates of skin irritation. However, EF technique has the advantages of shorter operative time, reduced fluoroscopic exposure, and shorter time to partial weight-bearing, as well as lower incidence of malalignment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Pediatric fractures following implant removal: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the available literature for postoperative fracture rates following implant removal in the pediatric population.

METHODS

A systematic review of articles in the PubMed and Embase computerized literature databases from January 2000 to June 2022 was performed using PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, cohort studies (retrospective and prospective), and case series involving pediatric patients that included data on fracture rate following removal of orthopedic implants were eligible for review. Two authors independently extracted data from selected studies for predefined data fields for implant type, anatomic location of the implant, indication for implantation, fracture or refracture rate following implant removal, mean time to implant removal, and mean follow-up time.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Reported fracture rates following implant removal vary based on several factors, with an overall reported incidence of 0%-14.9%. The available literature did not offer sufficient data for conduction of a meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our systematic review demonstrates that fracture following implant removal in pediatric patients is a relatively frequent complication. In children, the forearm and femur are the most commonly reported sites of fracture following removal of implants. Traumatic fractures treated definitively with external fixation have the highest reported aggregate rate of refracture. Knowledge of the incidence of this risk is important for orthopedic surgeons. There remains a need for well-designed studies and trials to further clarify the roles of the variables that contribute to this complication.

Elastic Stable Intramedullary Nailing and Temporary External Fixation for the Treatment of Unstable Femoral Shaft Fractures in Children Aged 5-11 Years Old: A Retrospective Study of 28 Cases

PURPOSE

Unstable femoral shaft fractures (UFSFs) in children aged 5-11 years remain challenging due to their intrinsic instability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of UFSF in children aged 5 to 11 years managed by the combined use of ESIN and temporary EF.

METHODS

Children with UFSF (long oblique and comminuted) treated by ESIN and temporary EF were retrospectively reviewed. Sex, age at injury, side involved, type of fracture, presence or absence of associated lesions or neurovascular complications, type of treatment, time from trauma to surgery, duration of surgery, radiation exposure and length of postoperative immobilization were collected from the medical charts. Radiological and functional outcomes were evaluated according to Beaty's and Flynn's criteria, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 28 consecutive patients with closed or open (Gustilo type I or II) UFSF were reviewed (18 boys and 10 girls). The mean age at injury was 8.7 ± 1.6 years (range, 5-11); the average weight was 38.1 ± 7.6 kg (range, 26-55). The mean hospital stay was 3.7 ± 1.4 days (range, 2-7), and the mean time to EF and ESIN removal was 6.5 ± 1.1 weeks (range, 4-8) and 9.4 ± 1.6 months (range, 6-12), respectively. Twenty-seven out of 28 patients had excellent radiographic outcomes according to Beaty's criteria, and 24/28 had excellent functional outcomes according to Flynn's criteria. Overall, 4 complications (14.3%) were recorded. No statistically significant correlation was found between complication rates and sex, age, weight or fracture characteristics (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The combined use of ESIN and temporary EF provides good clinical and radiological outcomes in children with UFSF aged between 5 and 11 years, with a reduced complication rate.

Which is the better choice for open tibial shaft fracture in overweight adolescent with open physis: A comparative study of external fixator plus elastic stable intramedullary nail versus external fixator alone

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes of external fixator + elastic stable intramedullary nail (EF+ESIN) vs. external fixator (EF) in the treatment for open tibial shaft fracture in overweight adolescents.

METHODS

Patients of open tibial shaft fractures younger than 14 years old with body weight over 50 Kg treated with EF + ESIN or EF at our institute from 2010 to 2018 were reviewed. Patients with Gustilo Type III open fractures, pathological fractures, previous fracture or instrumentation in the operative leg were excluded. Baseline information and clinical data were collected from the hospital database and during out-patient visits.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients, including 27 males and 19 females, were included in the EF group, whereas 35 patients, including 18 males and 17 females, were included in the EF + ESIN group (p = 0.527). The incidence of superficial infection was higher in the EF group (26/46, 56.5%) than the EF + ESIN group (12/35, 34.3%), p < 0.001. The frontal and sagittal angulation was higher in the EF group (p < 0.001), but the degrees in both groups were within the acceptable range. The union time was longer in the EF group (68.0 ± 12.7, d) than the EF + ESIN group (61.9 ± 11.9), p < 0.001. The retaining of EF (11.9 ± 3.2, w) was longer in the EF group than the EF +ESIN group (5.7 ± 1.2, w), p < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

EF+ESIN is a safe and alternative choice for selected overweight adolescents with open tibial shaft fracture.

Operative Choice for Length-Unstable Femoral Shaft Fracture in School-Aged Children: Locking Plate vs. Monolateral External Fixator

BACKGROUND

Locking plate (LP) is a good choice in the treatment of length-unstable femoral shaft fracture in children. Monolateral external fixator (EF) has been reported for this condition for decades. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of school-aged children with length-unstable femoral shaft fracture treated with LP vs. EF.

METHODS

Patients aged 5-11 years old with length-unstable femoral shaft fractures treated at our institute from January 2014 to January 2018 were retrospectively reviewed and categorized into LP and EF groups. The preoperative data, including baseline information of the patients, radiographic parameters, and types of surgical procedure, were collected from the hospital database, and postoperative data, including complications, were collected during the follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Overall, 36 patients (average, 8.2 ± 2.1 years; male, 20; female, 16) in the LP group and 35 patients (average, 8.3 ± 2.3 years; male 20, female 15) in the EF group were included. There was significantly less operative time for EF (45.4 ± 7.8 min) compared with LP (67.8 ± 11.3 min) (P < 0.001). As for the frequency of fluoroscopy, there was a significant difference between the EF (13.9 ± 2.4) and LP (16.5 ± 3.2) groups (p < 0.001). The rate of major complications was not significantly different between these two groups. There was a significant difference between the EF group (11.2 ± 5.8 mm) and the LP group (7.5 ± 1.6 mm) group concerning limb length discrepancy (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both LP and EF produce satisfactory outcomes in school-aged children with length unstable femoral shaft fractures. External fixation remains a viable choice without the necessity of secondary surgery for hardware removal.