Advertisement

Results of medullary wiring of 145 fractures of the tibia shaft

  • N. Schwarz
  • B. Schneider
Article
  • 14 Downloads

Summary

145 acute fractures of the tibial shaft treated by medullary wiring were reviewed retrospectively. 63 fractures were open, 33 belonging to Gustilo type II and III. 87% of the patients were operated on the day of the accident. There were no intraoperative complications. Fracture healing was delayed (>16 weeks) in 39% and failed in 8%. Soft tissue infection and wound healing problems were encountered in 14% of the patients, but there were no osseous infections. Clinical results more than two years after trauma were excellent and good in half of the patients. Medullary wiring of the tibia has a relatively high rate of bone union and wound problems and limited clinical results, but it is a simple and safe operation with a very low risk of deep infection.

Key words

Wiring Tibia Fractures 

Code Méary

0796.0 4794.0 

Résultats de l’embrochage centro-médullaire des fractures de la diaphyse tibiale A propos de 145 cas

Résumé

145 fractures fraîches du tibia traitées par embrochage centro-médullaire ont été revues rétrospectivement. 63 étaient des fractures ouvertes, 33 correspondaient aux types Gustilo II et III. 87% des patients avaient été opérés le jour même du traumatisme. Il n’y avait eu aucune complication peropératoire. Dans 39% des cas, il y eut retard de consolidation et dans 8% des cas, pseudarthrose sèche. Dans 14% des cas, il y eut infection des tissus mous, mais aucune infection osseuse ne se produisit. Les résultats cliniques, avec plus de deux ans de recul, sont excellents et bons dans la moitié des cas. L’embrochage centro-médullaire a un taux assez important de problèmes de consolidation et donne des résultats cliniques plutôt limites, mais constitue néanmoins une intervention simple et sans grand risque infectieux.

Mots-clés

Embrochage Tibia Fractures 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Eitel F, Schenk RK, Schweiberer L (1980) Corticale Revitalisierung nach Marknagelung an der Hundetibia. Unfallheilkd 83: 202–207Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gustilo RB, Mendoza RM, Williams DN (1984) Problems in the management of type III severe open fractures — A new classification of type III open fractures. J Trauma 24: 742–746PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hasenhuttl K (1981) The treatment of unstable fractures of the tibia and fibula with flexible intramedullary wires. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 63-A: 921–931Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Krettek C, Haas N, Schandelmaier P, Frigg R, Tscherne H (1991) Der unaufgebohrte Tibianagel bei Unterschenkelfrakturen mit schwerem Weichteilschaden. Unfallchirurg 94: 589–597Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Muller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P (1987) Classification AO des fractures. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Perren SM, Cordey PD, Rahn BA, Gautier E, Schneider E (1988) Early temporary porosis of bone induced by internal fixation implants. Clin Orthop 232: 139–152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ruedi T, Webb JK, Allgower M (1976) Experience with the dynamic compression plate (DCP) in 418 recent fractures of the tibial shaft. Injury 7: 252–257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. Schwarz
    • 1
  • B. Schneider
    • 1
  1. 1.Unfallkrankenhaus MeidlingWienAutriche

Personalised recommendations