Department of Orthopaedic & Trauma Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, 5042, Australia; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Department of Orthopaedic & Trauma Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, 5042, Australia.
Injury. 2020 Jul;51(7):1647-1654. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.04.021. Epub 2020 Apr 22.
Intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures has been common practice for decades. Nevertheless, complications occur frequently, and subsequent surgery is often required. To improve our understanding on how we may improve trauma care for patients with tibial shaft fractures, this study systematically reviewed all currently available evidence to assess the incidence of complications and rate of re-operations following intramedullary nailing of traumatic tibial fractures.
Trip Database, Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Library were searched on September 7th, 2018. Searches were limited to English studies published after January 1st, 1998. Studies were included if authors included more than 50 patients treated with intramedullary nailing for traumatic tibial fractures. Inclusion of studies and critical appraisal of the evidence was performed by two independent authors. Incidence of complications and rate of re-operations were reported with descriptive statistics.
Fifty-one studies involving 8110 patients treated with intramedullary nailing for traumatic tibial fractures were included. Mean age of patients was 37.5 years. The most frequent complication was anterior knee pain (23%), followed by non-union (11%). Eighteen percent of patients required at least one subsequent surgery. The most frequent indication of subsequent surgery was screw removal due to pain or discomfort (9%). Dynamization of the nail to promote union was reported in 8% of the cases. Nail revision and bone-grafting to promote union were applied in 4% and 2% respectively.
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: Patients treated with intramedullary nailing for tibial fractures need to be consented for high probability of adverse events as anterior knee pain, subsequent surgical procedures and bone healing problems are relatively common. However, based on current data it remains difficult to identify specifiers and determinants of an individual patient with specific fracture characteristics at risk for complications. Future studies should aim to establish patient specific risks models for complications and re-operations, such that clinicians can anticipate them and adjust and individualize treatment strategies.
髓内钉治疗胫骨骨折已有数十年的历史。尽管如此,并发症仍频繁发生,后续手术往往是必要的。为了提高我们对如何改善胫骨骨折患者创伤护理的理解,本研究系统地回顾了所有现有的证据,以评估创伤性胫骨骨折髓内钉固定后并发症的发生率和再次手术的比率。
于 2018 年 9 月 7 日检索 Trip 数据库、Medline、Scopus 和 Cochrane Library。检索仅限于 1998 年 1 月 1 日以后发表的英文研究。如果作者纳入了超过 50 例接受髓内钉治疗创伤性胫骨骨折的患者,则纳入研究。两名独立作者对研究的纳入和证据的批判性评价进行了评估。并发症的发生率和再次手术的比率用描述性统计进行报告。
共纳入 51 项研究,涉及 8110 例接受髓内钉治疗创伤性胫骨骨折的患者。患者的平均年龄为 37.5 岁。最常见的并发症是前膝痛(23%),其次是骨不连(11%)。18%的患者至少需要进行一次后续手术。后续手术最常见的指征是因疼痛或不适而取出螺钉(9%)。为促进愈合而对髓内钉进行动力化的报道占 8%。钉revision 和骨移植以促进愈合分别应用于 4%和 2%的患者。
接受髓内钉治疗胫骨骨折的患者需要获得高概率不良事件的同意,因为前膝痛、后续手术和骨愈合问题相对常见。然而,根据目前的数据,仍然很难确定具有特定骨折特征的个体患者的具体并发症和决定因素。未来的研究应旨在建立并发症和再次手术的患者特定风险模型,以便临床医生能够预测并调整和个体化治疗策略。