• J Orthop Trauma · Oct 2017

    Comparative Study

    Ilizarov Treatment Protocols in the Management of Infected Nonunion of the Tibia.

    • Martin McNally, Jamie Ferguson, Raj Kugan, and David Stubbs.
    • Bone Infection Unit, Nuffield Orthopaedic Center, Oxford, United Kingdom.
    • J Orthop Trauma. 2017 Oct 1; 31 Suppl 5: S47-S54.

    ObjectivesWe present a treatment algorithm comprising 4 Ilizarov methods in managing infected tibial nonunion, using nonunion mobility and segmental defect size to govern treatment choice.DesignDecision protocol analysis study.SettingA university-affiliated teaching hospital.Patients/ParticipantsSeventy-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.InterventionTwenty-six cases were treated with monofocal distraction, 19 with monofocal compression, 16 with bifocal compression/distraction, and 18 with bone transport.Main Outcome MeasurementsThe 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.ResultsInfection 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.ConclusionsMonofocal 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 EvidenceLevel III.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.