Free tissue versus local tissue: A comparison of outcomes when managing open tibial diaphyseal fractures.

INTRODUCTION

Open lower extremity fractures pose a challenge for treating surgeons. All surgical strategies have the common aim to facilitate fracture healing. Fracture union, however, should be critically considered in the context of functional recovery and not in isolation. Both local and free tissue transfer have benefits and drawbacks.

AIM

This study aims to compare the functional outcomes of open tibial diaphyseal fractures managed with internal fixation, comparing outcomes of those receiving free tissue transfer as opposed to local flaps METHODS: This study follows the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) criteria. Data were collected retrospectively from a prospectively maintained database at our institution. Inclusion criteria included a non-comminuted Gustilo type-IIIB open tibial diaphyseal fracture requiring intramedullary nailing. Forty three patients with local flaps and 180 patients with free flaps were included RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: 233 patient underwent reconstruction for open fracture using local flaps (n=43) or free flaps (n=180). In the context of Gustilo type-IIIB non-comminuted, mid-tibial diaphyseal fractures treated with intramedullary nailing, free fasciocutaneous flap reconstructions leads to significantly improved functional outcomes in patients of all ages when compared to local fasciocutaenous flaps. (77 ± 19 v 50 ± 22 % for local flaps; P < 0.001).