Supplemental fixation of distal femur fractures: a review of biomechanical and clinical evidence

IF 0.2 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Harsh Wadhwa, L. H. Goodnough, Jigyasa Sharma, Clayton W. Maschhoff, Noelle L. Van Rysselberghe, J. Bishop, Michael J. Gardner
{"title":"Supplemental fixation of distal femur fractures: a review of biomechanical and clinical evidence","authors":"Harsh Wadhwa, L. H. Goodnough, Jigyasa Sharma, Clayton W. Maschhoff, Noelle L. Van Rysselberghe, J. Bishop, Michael J. Gardner","doi":"10.1097/BCO.0000000000001209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Fixation of distal femur fractures with lateral locking plates has relatively high rates of clinical failure. Supplemental fixation has shown promising results, and may reduce rates of fixation failure or nonunion. This review aimed to assess the biomechanical and clinical evidence regarding the use of supplemental fixation of distal femur fractures. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for English language studies up to December 4, 2020, identifying 1,829 studies. Biomechanical studies that assessed fracture displacement, load/cycles to failure, or construct stiffness and clinical studies that assessed fixation failure or nonunion after supplemental fixation of distal femur fractures were included. Studies with sample size ≤5, ORIF with non-locking plates, periprosthetic distal femoral fractures, nonunions or revision surgeries were excluded. Results: Seventeen studies were included, of which 8 were biomechanical and 9 clinical. Overall, biomechanical studies demonstrated increased construct stability and load to failure with various supplemental fixation strategies. Clinical studies demonstrated more mixed outcomes for nonunion and fixation failure rate among the various techniques. Conclusions: Biomechanical studies have demonstrated potential benefits of these strategies, but there remains a dearth of high-quality evidence evaluating their effect on clinical outcomes. Prospective RCTs are necessary to address these issues and confirm the results in the existing literature. Level of Evidence: IID","PeriodicalId":10732,"journal":{"name":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","volume":"34 1","pages":"201 - 207"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BCO.0000000000001209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Fixation of distal femur fractures with lateral locking plates has relatively high rates of clinical failure. Supplemental fixation has shown promising results, and may reduce rates of fixation failure or nonunion. This review aimed to assess the biomechanical and clinical evidence regarding the use of supplemental fixation of distal femur fractures. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for English language studies up to December 4, 2020, identifying 1,829 studies. Biomechanical studies that assessed fracture displacement, load/cycles to failure, or construct stiffness and clinical studies that assessed fixation failure or nonunion after supplemental fixation of distal femur fractures were included. Studies with sample size ≤5, ORIF with non-locking plates, periprosthetic distal femoral fractures, nonunions or revision surgeries were excluded. Results: Seventeen studies were included, of which 8 were biomechanical and 9 clinical. Overall, biomechanical studies demonstrated increased construct stability and load to failure with various supplemental fixation strategies. Clinical studies demonstrated more mixed outcomes for nonunion and fixation failure rate among the various techniques. Conclusions: Biomechanical studies have demonstrated potential benefits of these strategies, but there remains a dearth of high-quality evidence evaluating their effect on clinical outcomes. Prospective RCTs are necessary to address these issues and confirm the results in the existing literature. Level of Evidence: IID
股骨远端骨折的补充固定:生物力学和临床证据综述
背景:外侧锁定钢板固定股骨远端骨折的临床失败率相对较高。补充固定已显示出有希望的结果,并可能降低固定失败或骨不连的发生率。本综述旨在评估股骨远端骨折辅助固定的生物力学和临床证据。方法:检索截至2020年12月4日的PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库中的英语研究,确定1829项研究。包括评估骨折位移、负荷/失效周期或结构刚度的生物力学研究,以及评估股骨远端骨折补充固定后固定失败或骨不连的临床研究。排除样本量≤5的研究、使用非锁定钢板的ORIF、假体周围股骨远端骨折、不愈合或翻修手术。结果:纳入17项研究,其中8项为生物力学研究,9项为临床研究。总体而言,生物力学研究表明,通过各种补充固定策略,结构稳定性和失效负荷增加。临床研究表明,在各种技术中,骨不连和固定失败率的结果更为复杂。结论:生物力学研究已经证明了这些策略的潜在益处,但仍然缺乏高质量的证据来评估它们对临床结果的影响。前瞻性随机对照试验对于解决这些问题和确认现有文献中的结果是必要的。证据级别:IID
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Current Orthopaedic Practice is a peer-reviewed, general orthopaedic journal that translates clinical research into best practices for diagnosing, treating, and managing musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical research, invited special focus reviews and general reviews, as well as original articles on innovations in practice, case reports, point/counterpoint, and diagnostic imaging.
×
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