Journals / Eastern Journal of Medicine / 2017 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 3

Comparison of plaque and distal-wedge tibial nail in the treatment of extra-articular distal tibia fractures

Pages
91–96
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We have found and concluded that DSBLS (Distal Supportive Bolt Locking Screw) screw of this tibial nailing fixation system could provide distal interlocking strong enough especially when fracture is quite close to the distal tibial articular face, using distal wedge tibial nails and components.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Tibial fractures are encountered in various age-groups.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Between 2013 and 2016 (in Van Regional, Education and Research Hospital, Turkey) 38 patients (25 male, 13 female patients: ages range 18 to 61 years, mean age is 41) treated surgically using distal-wedge tibial nail fixation (amount:16) and plate fixation (amount:22).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We have found and concluded that DSBLS (Distal Supportive Bolt Locking Screw) screw of this tibial nailing fixation system could provide distal interlocking strong enough especially when fracture is quite close to the distal tibial articular face, using distal wedge tibial nails and components.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Tibial fractures are encountered in various age-groups. Depending on fracture type and pattern, many types of treatment options including plate fixation, intramedullary fixation, circular external fixation are widely used. Depending on implant design, surgical approach and accompanying soft tissue conditions, success of these fractures could be various and be jeopardised. In this study, we wish to evaluate the benefits and side effects between plate and distal-wedge tibial nail fixation. Between 2013 and 2016 (in Van Regional, Education and Research Hospital, Turkey) 38 patients (25 male, 13 female patients: ages range 18 to 61 years, mean age is 41) treated surgically using distal-wedge tibial nail fixation (amount:16) and plate fixation (amount:22). The patients were evaluated by AOFAS score (documentated 1.5 and 6 months postoperatively), postop hospitalisation days, perop fluouruscopy imaging (scopy shooting) times and union time (months). Average follow-up time was 11 months (range: 9 to 28 months). There was a shorter recovery period in the nail group and the hospital stay was shorter. (P <0.001)The AOFAS score was higher at 1.5 months postoperatively and the number of scopies was higher at 1.5 months olds (p <0.001) No significant difference was found in postoperative 6th month AOFAS score between plate and nailing groups. We have found and concluded that DSBLS (Distal Supportive Bolt Locking Screw) screw of this tibial nailing fixation system could provide distal interlocking strong enough especially when fracture is quite close to the distal tibial articular face, using distal wedge tibial nails and components.

🔖

Cite This Article

ADANAŞ, C., UYMUR, Y. E., ÖZKAN, S., KAYA, Ş. (2017). Comparison of plaque and distal-wedge tibial nail in the treatment of extra-articular distal tibia fractures. Eastern Journal of Medicine, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 3, 91–96. https://ajindex.com/articles/205770

References (14)

  1. Horne G, Iceton J, Twist J, Malony R. Disability following fractures of the tibial shaft. Orthopedics 1990; 13: 423-426
  2. Im GI, Tae SK. Distal metaphyseal fractures of tibia: a prospective randomized trial of closed reduction and intramedllary nail versus open reduction and plate and screws fixation. J Trauma 2005; 59: 1219-1223
  3. Janssen KW, Biert J, van Kampen A. Treatment of distal tibial fractures: plate versus nail: a retrospective outcome analysis of matched pairs of patients. Int Orthop 2007; 31: 709-714
  4. Küçükdurmaz F, Akpınar F, Saka G, Sağlam N, Acı C. A newly designed intramedullary nail with distal interlocking system for tibia fractures in adults-the clinical results. Turkish Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 2012; 18: 243- 249
  5. Kitaoka HB, Alexander IJ, Adelaar RS, et al. Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int 1994; 15: 349-353
  6. Goldhahn S, Moser R, Bigler R, Matter P. Treatment methods and outcomes of tibial shaft fractures in Switzerland. A prospective multicenter study of the Swiss AO. Swiss Surg 2000; 6: 315-322
  7. Yavuz U, Sökücü S, Demir B, et al. Comparison of intramedullary nail and plate fixation in distal tibia diaphyseal fractures close to the motrise. Turkish Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 2014; 20: 189-193
  8. Fan CY, Chiang CC, Chuang TY, et al. Interlocking nails for displaced metaphyseal fractures of the distal tibia. Injury 2005; 36: 669- 674
  9. Whatling GM, Nokes LD. Literature review of current techniques for the insertion of distal screws into intramedullary locking nails. Injury 2006; 37: 109-119
  10. Schnettler R, Borner M, Soldner E. Results of interlocking nailing of distal tibial fractures. Unfallchirurg 1990; 93: 534-537
  11. Boenisch UW, de Boer PG, Journeaux SF. Unreamed intramedullary tibial nailing--fatigue oflocking bolts. Injury 1996; 27: 265-270
  12. Robinson CM, McLauchlan GJ, McLean IP, Court-Brown CM. Distal metaphyseal fractures of the tibia with minimal involvement ofthe ankle: classification and treatment by locked intramedullary nailing. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995; 77: 781-787
  13. Mosheiff R, Safran O, Segal D, Liebergall M. The unreamed tibial nailing in the treatment of distal metaphyseal fractures. Injury 1999; 30: 83-90
  14. Hou T, Li Q, Luo F, et al. Controlled dynamization to enhance reconstruction capacity of tissue-engineered bone in healing critically sized bone defects: an in vivo study in goats. Tissue