• H J Park, M Uchino, M Nakamura, M Ueno, Y Kojima, M Itoman, K Yokoyama, T Suzuki, and M Nemoto.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Kitasato University, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, Japan.
• J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2007 Aug 1; 15 (2): 131-6.

PurposeTo compare immediate interlocking nailing with external fixation followed by delayed interlocking nailing, for Gustilo type IIIB open tibial fractures.Methods23 patients with Gustilo IIIB open tibial fractures were treated with either immediate unreamed interlocking nailing (n=9) or external fixation followed by delayed unreamed interlocking nailing (n=14). Patient age, sex ratio, fracture site, fracture type, and severity were similar in both groups. The time to union, deep infection rate, and nonunion rate in the 2 groups were compared.ResultsIn the immediate and delayed nailing groups, respective mean times to union were 21 (standard deviation [SD], 14) months and 14 (SD, 8) months; nonunion rates were 44% (4/9) and 36% (5/14), and deep infection rates were 22% (2/9) and 7% (1/14). All corresponding differences were not statistically significant.ConclusionProspective, randomised, multicentre studies are needed to assess whether there are significant differences between the 2 treatment methods.

24 keywords...

hide…