» Articles » PMID: 36604668

Comparing External Fixators and Intramedullary Nailing for Treating Open Tibia Fractures: a Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2023 Jan 5
PMID 36604668
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: External fixators (EFs) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) are two effective methods for open tibial fractures. However, both methods have advantages and disadvantages, and the optimal surgical approach remains controversial. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare EF with IMN to evaluate their efficacy and safety.

Methods: A systematic study of the literature was conducted in relevant studies published in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang and Weipu from database inception to April 2022. All eligible literature was critically appraised for methodological quality via the Cochrane's collaboration tool. The primary outcome measurements included postoperative superficial infection, postoperative deep infection, union time, delayed union, malunion, nonunion, and hardware failure.

Results: Nine RCTs involving 733 cases were included in the current meta-analysis. The pooled results suggested that cases in the IMN group had a significantly lower postoperative superficial infection rate [risk ratio (RR) = 2.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.83 to 4.39; P < 0.00001)] and malunion rate (RR = 3.05; 95% CI = 2.06 to 4.52; P < 0.00001) versus EF, but IMN had a significantly higher hardware failure occurrence versus EF (RR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.17 to 0.83; P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in the postoperative deep infection rate, union time, delayed union rate or nonunion rate between the two groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: Compared to EF, IMN had a significantly lower risk of postoperative superficial infection and malunion in patients with open tibial fractures. Meanwhile, IMN did not prolong the union time and increased the risk of the deep infection rate, delayed union rate and nonunion rate but had a higher hardware failure rate. The reanalysis of union time showed that it was significantly shorter in the IMN group than in the EF group after excluding the study with significant heterogeneity during sensitivity analysis. Therefore, IMN is recommended as a preferred method of fracture fixation for patients with open tibial fractures, but more attention should be given to the problem of hardware failure.

Citing Articles

Marginal bone resection and immediate internal fixation in multidrug resistant chronic septic nonunions of lower limb long bones: a case series.

Kalantar S, Hoveidaei A, Bagheri N, Khabiri S, Poursalehian M Int Orthop. 2024; 49(1):5-17.

PMID: 39432119 DOI: 10.1007/s00264-024-06349-4.


A Scoping Review on the Management of Open Fractures in African Trauma and Orthopaedics Centres.

Zubair A, Abdullateef R, Davis S, Olaniyi A, Joshua I, Emma-Nwachukwu M Cureus. 2024; 16(9):e68925.

PMID: 39381475 PMC: 11459879. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.68925.


What influences post-operative opioid requirements for tibial fractures?.

Zhang J, Limonard A, Bradshaw F, Hussain I, Josipovic M, Krkovic M Br J Pain. 2024; 18(5):433-443.

PMID: 39355571 PMC: 11440535. DOI: 10.1177/20494637241261013.


Temporary Stabilization of Tibia Fractures: Does External Fixation or Temporary Plate Fixation Result in Better Outcomes?.

Walters C, Simister S, Tse S, Saade A, Megerian M, Fitzpatrick E Iowa Orthop J. 2024; 44(1):179-184.

PMID: 38919353 PMC: 11195873.


Comparison of Nanocrystalline Hydroxyapatite Bone Graft with Empty Defects in Long Bone Fractures: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Pawelke J, Vinayahalingam V, Heiss C, Budak M, Khassawna T, Knapp G Med Sci Monit. 2023; 29:e941112.

PMID: 37872747 PMC: 10612429. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.941112.


References
1.
Rohde C, Greives M, Cetrulo C, Lerman O, Levine J, Hazen A . Gustilo grade IIIB tibial fractures requiring microvascular free flaps: external fixation versus intramedullary rod fixation. Ann Plast Surg. 2007; 59(1):14-7. DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31803403c8. View

2.
Perisano C, Greco T, Polichetti C, Inverso M, Maccauro G . Antibiotic-Coated Nail in Open Tibial Fracture: A Retrospective Case Series. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2021; 6(4). PMC: 8704641. DOI: 10.3390/jfmk6040097. View

3.
Garg S, Khanna V, Goyal M, Joshi N . Unreamed Intra-Medullary Nail Versus Half Pin External Fixator in Grade III [A & B] Open tibia fractures. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2019; 10(5):941-948. PMC: 6739465. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2018.10.016. View

4.
Court-Brown C, Rimmer S, Prakash U, McQueen M . The epidemiology of open long bone fractures. Injury. 1999; 29(7):529-34. DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(98)00125-9. View

5.
Lin J, Lin S, Chen P, Yang S . Stress analysis of the distal locking screws for femoral interlocking nailing. J Orthop Res. 2001; 19(1):57-63. DOI: 10.1016/S0736-0266(00)00020-6. View