medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2022, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2022; 36 (6)

Impact of the nail diameter on consolidation of tibial diaphyseal fractures. Retrospective analysis of 96 patients

Garabano G, Crossa J, Cullari M, Pérez-Alamino L, Pesciallo C

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 346-351
PDF size: 182.47 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: the gold standard for tibial diaphyseal fracture treatment is represented by the intramedullary nail (IMN). This study aimed to assess the relevance of nail diameter in bone healing of tibial diaphyseal fractures. Material and methods: a retrospective study was conducted analyzing patients with closed 42 OTA/AO tibial fractures, treated with a reamed and locked IMN between January 2014 and December 2020. The variables assessed were gender, age, comorbidities, number of bolts used, canal/nail index (difference between the diameter of the medullary canal and nail), nail/canal ratio (ratio between nail diameter and medullary canal), related to consolidation and failure rates (delay – and non-union). Results: 96 patients were included. The consolidation rate was 91.7% (n = 88). Patients with consolidation had a significantly larger nail diameter than those who failed (p = 0.0014), increasing the chance of consolidation 5.30 (p = 0.04) times for each millimeter that the nail increased its diameter. Using a nail > 10 mm increased the chance of consolidation 13.56 times (p = 0.018). A nail/canal ratio ≥ 0.80 increased the chance of consolidation 23.33 times (p = 0.005). Conclusion: our findings suggested that reamed and locked IMN in tibial diaphyseal fractures should be implanted with the largest possible diameter (> 10 mm and with a nail-to-canal ratio ≥ 0.80) to promote bone healing.


REFERENCES

  1. Mahajan A, Kumar N, Gupta B. Delayed tibial shaft fracture healing associated with smoking: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies conducted worldwide. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(19): 10228.

  2. Bhandari M, Guyatt G, Tornetta P 3rd, Schemitsch EH, Swiontkowski M, Sanders D, et al. Randomized trial of reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90(12): 2567-78.

  3. Álvarez LA, García LY. Fracturas cerradas de la diáfisis tibial. Acta Ortop Mex. 2005; 19(3): 122-7.

  4. Clark D, Vo LU, Piscoya AS, Chan A, Dunn JC. Systematic review and analysis of the quality of randomized controlled trials comparing reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing of tibial fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2021; 35(2): 59-64.

  5. Im GI, Tae SK. Distal metaphyseal fractures of tibia: a prospective randomized trial of closed reduction and intramedullary nail versus open reduction and plate and screws fixation. J Trauma. 2005; 59(5): 1219-23.

  6. Xia L, Zhou J, Zhang Y, Mei G, Jin D. A meta-analysis of reamed versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of closed tibial fractures. Orthopedics. 2014; 37(4): e332-8.

  7. Gaebler C, McQueen MM, Vécsei V, Court-Brown CM. Reamed versus minimally reamed nailing: a prospectively randomised study of 100 patients with closed fractures of the tibia. Injury. 2011; 42 Suppl 4: S17-21.

  8. Bhandari M, Guyatt GH, Swiontkowski MF, Schemitsch EH. Treatment of open fractures of the shaft of the tibia. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001; 83(1): 62-8.

  9. Bilat C, Leutenegger A, Ruedi T. Osteosynthesis of 245 tibial shaft fractures: early and late complications. Injury. 1994; 25(6): 349-58.

  10. Hupel TM, Askenov SA, Schemitsch EH. Cortical bone blood flow in loose and tight fitting locked unreamed intramedullary nailing: a canine segmental tibia fracture model. J Orthop Trauma. 1998; 12(2): 127-35.

  11. Fairbank AC, Thomas D, Cunningham B, Curtis M, Jinnah RH. Stability of reamed and unreamed intramedullary tibial nails: a biomechanical study. Injury. 1995; 26(7): 483-5.

  12. Claes LE, Heigele CA, Neidlinger-Wilke C, Kaspar D, Seidl W, Margevicius KJ, et al. Effects of mechanical factors on the fracture healing process. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998; (355 Suppl): S132-47.

  13. Kessler SB, Hallfeldt KK, Perren SM, Schweiberer L. The effects of reaming and intramedullary nailing on fracture healing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986; (212): 18-25.

  14. Penzkofer R, Maier M, Nolte A, von Oldenburg G, Puschel K, Buhren V, et al. Influence of intramedullary nail diameter and locking mode on the stability of tibial shaft fracture fixation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009; 129(4): 525-31.

  15. Sanders R, Jersinovich I, Anglen J, DiPasquale T, Herscovici D Jr. The treatment of open tibial shaft fractures using an interlocked intramedullary nail without reaming. J Orthop Trauma. 1994; 8(6): 504-10.

  16. Donegan DJ, Akinleye S, Taylor RM, Baldwin K, Mehta S. Intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures: size matters. J Orthop Trauma. 2016; 30(7): 377-80.

  17. Kawasaki N, Takegami Y, Sakai R, Todoroki K, Uemi R, Imagama S; Hospitals of Trauma Research of Nagoya (TRON) group. Prediction of delayed union of tibial shaft fracture treated with intramedullary nailing: multicenter-study analysis and literature review-the TRON study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2022; 32(1): 129-35.

  18. Bedeir FK, Mohamed MAS, Hegazy MM, Zawam SH. Are small-diameter intramedullary nails enough for treating simple diaphyseal tibial fractures? A comparative study between small versus large nails. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022; 48(5): 3677-81.

  19. Whelan DB, Bhandari M, Stephen D, Kreder H, McKee MD, Zdero R, et al. Development of the radiographic union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation. J Trauma. 2010; 68(3): 629-32.

  20. Smith RM. Aseptic nonunion. In: AO Principles of fracture management. 3rd ed. Davos, Switzerland: AO Foundation; 2017. pp. 513-528.

  21. Perren SM. Evolution of the internal fixation of long bone fractures. The scientific basis of biological internal fixation: choosing a new balance between stability and biology. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002; 84(8): 1093-110.

  22. Henley M, Mayo K. Prospective comparison of unreamed interlocking intramedullary nail vs half pin external fixation for grade II and III open tibial fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 1990; 4(2): 223-9.

  23. Blachut PA, O'Brien PJ, Meek RN, Broekhuyse HM. Interlocking intramedullary nailing with and without reaming treatment of closed fractures of the tibial shaft. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997; 79(5): 640-6.

  24. Nork SE, Schwartz AK, Agel J, Holt SK, Schrick JL, Winquist RA. Intramedullary nailing of distal metaphyseal tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87(6): 1213-21.

  25. Bone LB, Johnson KD. Treatment of tibial fractures by reaming and intramedullary nailing. J Bone Joint Surgery Am. 1986; 68(6): 877-87.

  26. Cui Y, Hua X, Schmidutz F, Zhou J, Yin Z, Yan SG. Suprapatellar versus infrapatellar approaches in the treatment of tibia intramedullary nailing: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019; 20(1): 573-83.

  27. Metsemakers WJ, Kortram K, Ferreira N, Morgenstern M, Joeris A, Pape HC, et al. Fracture-related outcome study for operatively treated tibia shaft fractures (F.R.O.S.T.): registry rationale and design. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021; 22(1): 57.



EVIDENCE LEVEL

III




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com