Comparison of dynamic compression plating and reamed intramedullary nailing in the treatment of aseptic tibial shaft nonunions.

Contemporary orthopaedics Pub Date : 1994-01-01
C C Wu, C H Shih
{"title":"Comparison of dynamic compression plating and reamed intramedullary nailing in the treatment of aseptic tibial shaft nonunions.","authors":"C C Wu,&nbsp;C H Shih","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Among 105 tibial shaft aseptic nonunions followed for a mean of 32 months, 30 were treated with dynamic compression plating and 75 were treated with either Küntscher or Grosse-Kempf interlocking intramedullary nailing. With the plating technique, the union rate was 90.0% (27/30), the period of time to union was 5.2 +/- 1.7 months, the complication rate was 16.7% (5/30), the infection rate was 13.3% (4/30), and the surgical time was 110 +/- 30 minutes. With the intramedullary nailing technique, the union rate was 93.3% (70/75), the period of time to union was 5.0 +/- 1.6 months, the complication rate was 17.3% (13/75), the infection rate was 13.3% (10/75), and the surgical time was 70 +/- 30 minutes. Thus, while the union rate was high with both techniques, the complication rate also was high, especially deep infection. However, the technique for nailing was simpler and required less surgical time than plating (p less than 0.001). With open reamed intramedullary nailing, a higher infection rate was noted in the cases initially treated with an external fixator than for cases in which other forms of treatment initially were used (p less than 0.05).</p>","PeriodicalId":79846,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary orthopaedics","volume":"28 1","pages":"28-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Among 105 tibial shaft aseptic nonunions followed for a mean of 32 months, 30 were treated with dynamic compression plating and 75 were treated with either Küntscher or Grosse-Kempf interlocking intramedullary nailing. With the plating technique, the union rate was 90.0% (27/30), the period of time to union was 5.2 +/- 1.7 months, the complication rate was 16.7% (5/30), the infection rate was 13.3% (4/30), and the surgical time was 110 +/- 30 minutes. With the intramedullary nailing technique, the union rate was 93.3% (70/75), the period of time to union was 5.0 +/- 1.6 months, the complication rate was 17.3% (13/75), the infection rate was 13.3% (10/75), and the surgical time was 70 +/- 30 minutes. Thus, while the union rate was high with both techniques, the complication rate also was high, especially deep infection. However, the technique for nailing was simpler and required less surgical time than plating (p less than 0.001). With open reamed intramedullary nailing, a higher infection rate was noted in the cases initially treated with an external fixator than for cases in which other forms of treatment initially were used (p less than 0.05).

动态加压钢板与扩孔髓内钉治疗无菌性胫干不连的比较。
105例胫骨干无菌性骨不连患者平均随访32个月,其中30例采用动态加压钢板治疗,75例采用k ntscher或Grosse-Kempf交锁髓内钉治疗。钢板术愈合率90.0%(27/30),愈合时间5.2 +/- 1.7个月,并发症发生率16.7%(5/30),感染率13.3%(4/30),手术时间110 +/- 30分钟。髓内钉技术愈合率93.3%(70/75),愈合时间5.0 +/- 1.6个月,并发症率17.3%(13/75),感染率13.3%(10/75),手术时间70 +/- 30分钟。因此,虽然两种技术的愈合率都很高,但并发症发生率也很高,尤其是深度感染。然而,与钢板相比,钉入技术更简单,所需手术时间更短(p < 0.001)。在开孔髓内钉治疗中,最初使用外固定架治疗的病例感染率高于最初使用其他形式治疗的病例(p < 0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信