Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Int Wound J ; 21(1): e14361, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37641210

ABSTRACT

More and more meta-analyses have been conducted to compare the effects of intramedullary fixation (IF) and plate fixation (PF) on the outcome of midshaft clavicle fractures. It can affect the doctors' treatment decisions. A number of studies have been conducted in order to assist surgeons in selecting optimal operative procedures and to recommend operative treatment of clavicle fractures in accordance with the best available research. Our analysis of the IF and PF of clavicle fractures was done through a search for PubMed, Emabase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Two different researchers analysed the research literature for quality of analysis and data extraction. The analysis of the data was done with RevMan 5.3. The 95% CI and OR models have been computed by means of either fixed-dose or randomize. In addition, RCT in 114 references have been reviewed and added for further analysis. It is concluded that the application of plate and intramedullary fixation in the middle clavicle operation has remarkable influence on the outcome of post-operation. There was a lower risk of postoperative wound infection in IF (OR, 5.92; 95% CI, 2.46, 14.27 p < 0.0001), smaller surgical incisions (MD, 6.57; 95% CI, 4.90, 8.25 p < 0.0001), and shorter operative time (MD, 17.09; 95% CI 10.42, 23.77 p < 0.0001), less blood loss (MD, 63.62; 95% CI, 55.84, 71.39 p < 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (MD, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84, 1.25 p < 0.0001). However, there is no statistical significance in the incidence of wound dehiscence. Thus, the effect of IF on the incidence of injury is better than that of the inner plate in the middle of the clavicle.


Subject(s)
Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary , Fractures, Bone , Humans , Clavicle/surgery , Clavicle/injuries , Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary/methods , Fractures, Bone/surgery , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/etiology , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Reoperation , Treatment Outcome , Fracture Fixation, Internal/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/surgery
2.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 24(1): 962, 2023 Dec 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38082305

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Open distal tibial fractures pose significant challenges regarding treatment options and patient outcomes. This retrospective single-centre study aimed to compare the stability, clinical outcomes, complications, and financial implications of two surgical interventions, namely the external locking plate and the combined frame external fixator, to manage open distal tibial fractures. METHODS: Forty-four patients with distal open tibial (metaphyseal extraarticular) fractures treated between 2020 and 2022 were selected and formed into two main groups, Group A and Group B. Group A (19 patients) are patients that underwent treatment using the external locking plate technique, while Group B (25 patients) received the combined frame external fixator approach. Age, gender, inpatient stay, re-operation rates, complications, functional recovery (measured by the Johner-Wrush score), pain ratings (measured by the Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]), and cost analyses were evaluated for each group. Statistical analyses using SPSS were conducted to compare the outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: The research found significant variations in clinical outcomes, complications, and cost consequences between Group A and Group B. Group A had fewer hospitalisation periods (23.687.74) than Group B (33.5619.47). Re-operation rates were also considerably lower in Group A (26.3%) than in Group B (48%), owing to a greater prevalence of pin-tract infections and subsequent pin loosening in the combination frame external fixator group. The estimated cost of both techniques was recorded and analysed with the locking average of 26,619.69 ± 9,602.352 and the combined frame average of 39,095.64 ± 20,070.077. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that although the two approaches effectively manage open distal tibia fractures, the locking compression plate approach (Group A) has an advantage in treating open distal tibia fractures. Shorter hospitalisation times, reduced re-operation rates, and fewer complications will benefit patients, healthcare systems, and budget allocation. Group A's functional recovery results demonstrate the locking plate technique's ability to improve recovery and patient quality of life. According to the cost analysis, the locking plate technique's economic viability and cost-effectiveness may optimise healthcare resources for open distal tibia fractures. These findings might improve patient outcomes and inform evidence-based orthopaedic surgery.


Subject(s)
Fractures, Open , Tibial Fractures , Humans , Tibia/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Quality of Life , External Fixators , Tibial Fractures/diagnostic imaging , Tibial Fractures/surgery , Fracture Fixation/adverse effects , Fracture Fixation/methods , Fractures, Open/surgery , Bone Plates , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...