The ideal timing for nail dynamization in femoral shaft delayed union and non-union
- 141 Downloads
Nail dynamization is one of the proposed surgical options to manage femoral shaft non-union. This study aims to assess the efficacy and the ideal timing for dynamization in patients with femoral shaft delayed union or non-union.
Material and methods
Sixty-eight patients (38 male and 30 female, mean age 36.85 years old, range 22–58) were recruited. The patients were divided into three groups according to the fracture healing time: groupa A, fracture healing occurred within nine months; group B, fracture healing occurred between nine and 12 months; and group C, fracture healing after 12 months or secondary procedure needed for union. Callus-to-diaphysis ratio was calculated on femur X-rays at the time of dynamization.
In 30 patients out of 68, the fracture healing was observed at nine month follow-up; in 26 patients, the fracture healed within 12 months; eight fractures healed in more than 12 months and only four fractures required a secondary procedure for union. Dynamization was successful in 64 patients out of 68 (94.12%). The mean callus-diaphysis ratio was significantly different in group A (p = 0.001) and in group B (p = 0.03), compared with group C. The timing of dynamization resulted significantly different between the three groups. Linear regression analysis revealed that nail dynamization should be performed between three and six months after trauma. The optimal callus-to-diaphysis ratio should be comprised between 1.47 and 1.19, at the time of dynamization.
Nail dynamization revealed safe and effective in the treatment of femoral delayed union and non-union. It should be considered as a first-line treatment for femoral non-union or delayed union.
KeywordsFemoral non-union Femoral delayed union Nail dynamization Femoral shaft fractures
Compliance with ethical standard
This study was conducted in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
- 1.Arneson TJ, Melton LJ, Lewallen DG, O’Fallon WM (1988) Epidemiology of diaphyseal and distal femoral fractures in Rochester, Minnesota, 1965-1984. Clin Orthop Relat Res:188–194Google Scholar
- 2.Salminen ST, Pihlajamäki HK, Avikainen VJ, Böstman OM (2000) Population based epidemiologic and morphologic study of femoral shaft fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res:241–249Google Scholar
- 9.Koso RE, Terhoeve C, Steen RG, Zura R (2018) Healing, nonunion, and re-operation after internal fixation of diaphyseal and distal femoral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Orthop. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-3864-4
- 10.Vaughn J, Gotha H, Cohen E et al (2016) Nail dynamization for delayed union and nonunion in femur and tibia fractures. Orthopedics. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20160819-01
- 15.Wu CC, Shih CH (1993) Effect of dynamization of a static interlocking nail on fracture healing. Can J Surg 36:302–306Google Scholar
- 20.Vécsei V, Häupl J (1989) The value of dynamic adjustment in locking intramedullary nailing. Aktuelle Traumatol 19:162–168Google Scholar