We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Ilizarov Treatment Protocols in the Management of Infected Nonunion of the Tibia.
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 2017 October
OBJECTIVES: We present a treatment algorithm comprising 4 Ilizarov methods in managing infected tibial nonunion, using nonunion mobility and segmental defect size to govern treatment choice.
DESIGN: Decision protocol analysis study.
SETTING: A university-affiliated teaching hospital.
PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-nine patients were treated with 1 of 4 Ilizarov protocols. All patients had undergone at least one previous operation, 38 had associated limb deformity, and 49 had nonviable nonunions. Twenty-six had a new muscle flap at the time of Ilizarov surgery, and 25 had preexisting flaps reused.
INTERVENTION: Twenty-six cases were treated with monofocal distraction, 19 with monofocal compression, 16 with bifocal compression/distraction, and 18 with bone transport.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was the absence of recurrent infection. Secondary outcomes included bone union, complications, the Association for the Advancement of Methods of Ilizarov (ASAMI) bone and functional classification scores, and any need for further unplanned surgery.
RESULTS: Infection was eradicated in 76 cases (96.2%) with a mean follow-up duration of 40.8 months (range 6-131). All 3 infection recurrences occurred in the monofocal compression group. Following the initial Ilizarov method alone, union was achieved in 68 cases (86.1%) and was highest among the monofocal distraction (96.2%) and bifocal compression/distraction groups (93.8%). Monofocal compression achieved the lowest union rate (73.7%), significantly lower ASAMI scores, and a refracture rate of 31.6%. Bone transport secured union in 77.8% with a 44.4% unplanned reoperation rate. However, infection-free union was 100% after further treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Monofocal compression is not recommended for treating infected, mobile nonunions. Distraction (monofocal or bifocal) was effective and achieved higher rates of union and infection clearance.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
DESIGN: Decision protocol analysis study.
SETTING: A university-affiliated teaching hospital.
PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-nine patients were treated with 1 of 4 Ilizarov protocols. All patients had undergone at least one previous operation, 38 had associated limb deformity, and 49 had nonviable nonunions. Twenty-six had a new muscle flap at the time of Ilizarov surgery, and 25 had preexisting flaps reused.
INTERVENTION: Twenty-six cases were treated with monofocal distraction, 19 with monofocal compression, 16 with bifocal compression/distraction, and 18 with bone transport.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was the absence of recurrent infection. Secondary outcomes included bone union, complications, the Association for the Advancement of Methods of Ilizarov (ASAMI) bone and functional classification scores, and any need for further unplanned surgery.
RESULTS: Infection was eradicated in 76 cases (96.2%) with a mean follow-up duration of 40.8 months (range 6-131). All 3 infection recurrences occurred in the monofocal compression group. Following the initial Ilizarov method alone, union was achieved in 68 cases (86.1%) and was highest among the monofocal distraction (96.2%) and bifocal compression/distraction groups (93.8%). Monofocal compression achieved the lowest union rate (73.7%), significantly lower ASAMI scores, and a refracture rate of 31.6%. Bone transport secured union in 77.8% with a 44.4% unplanned reoperation rate. However, infection-free union was 100% after further treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Monofocal compression is not recommended for treating infected, mobile nonunions. Distraction (monofocal or bifocal) was effective and achieved higher rates of union and infection clearance.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app