External Fixation versus Unreamed Tibial Intramedullary Nailing for Open Tibial Fractures: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Qiang Fu, Lei Zhu, Jiajia Lu, Jun Ma, Aimin Chen, Qiang Fu, Lei Zhu, Jiajia Lu, Jun Ma, Aimin Chen

Abstract

Controversy exists over whether the use of external fixation (EF) or unreamed tibial intramedullary nailing (UTN) is optimal for the treatment of open tibial fractures. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes in terms of postoperative superficial and deep infection, malunion, delayed union, nonunion and hardware failure between these two treatment methods. So a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. All available randomized controlled trials that compared the clinical results of EF to those of UTN were obtained and the reported numbers of citations for each observed item were extracted to perform data synthesis. Six published randomized controlled trials with a total of 407 cases fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Data analysis revealed that UTN reduced the incidence rates of superficial infection and malunion after fixation compared with EF. However, EF led to a significant reduction in hardware failure. For postoperative deep infection, delayed union and nonunion, the treatment effects were similar between these two groups. Therefore, we recommend UTN over EF for the management of open tibial fractures. However, patients' postoperative weight bearing should be controlled to avoid hardware failure.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA 2009 flow diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Table and forest plot illustrating the risk ratios for superficial infection for EF and UTN during the follow-up period.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Table and forest plot illustrating the risk ratios for deep infection for EF and UTN during the follow-up period.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Table and forest plot illustrating the risk ratios for malunion for EF and UTN during the follow-up period.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Table and forest plot illustrating the risk ratios for delayed union for EF and UTN during the follow-up period.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Table and forest plot illustrating the risk ratios for nonunion for EF and UTN during the follow-up period.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Table and forest plot illustrating the risk ratios for hardware failure for EF and UTN during the follow-up period.

References

    1. Court-Brown CM, Rimmer S, Prakash U, McQueen MM. The epidemiology of open long bone fractures. Injury. 1998;29:529–534. doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(98)00125-9.
    1. Giannoudis PV, Papakostidis C, Roberts C. A review of the management of open fractures of the tibia and femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:281–289. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B3.16465.
    1. French, B. & Tornetta, P. 3rd. High-energy tibial shaft fractures. Orthop Clin North Am33, 211–230, ix (2002).
    1. Shannon FJ, Mullett H, O’Rourke K. Unreamed intramedullary nail versus external fixation in grade III open tibial fractures. J Trauma. 2002;52:650–654.
    1. Edwards, C. C., Simmons, S. C., Browner, B. D. & Weigel, M. C. Severe open tibial fractures. Results treating 202 injuries with external fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 98–115 (1988).
    1. Gershuni DH, Halma G. The A-O external skeletal fixator in the treatment of severe tibia fractures. J Trauma. 1983;23:986–990. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198311000-00005.
    1. Court-Brown CM, Wheelwright EF, Christie J, McQueen MM. External fixation for type III open tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72:801–804. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.72B5.2211760.
    1. Rommens PM, Van Raemdonck DE, Broos PL. Reosteosynthesis of the tibial shaft. Part I. Changement of procedure after external fixation. Acta Chir Belg. 1989;89:281–286.
    1. Whittle AP, Russell TA, Taylor JC, Lavelle DG. Treatment of open fractures of the tibial shaft with the use of interlocking nailing without reaming. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74:1162–1171. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199274080-00005.
    1. Aslani H, Tabrizi A, Sadighi A, Mirblok AR. Treatment of open pediatric tibial fractures by external fixation versus flexible intramedullary nailing: a comparative study. Arch Trauma Res. 2013;2:108–112. doi: 10.5812/atr.13826.
    1. Stegemann P, Lorio M, Soriano R, Bone L. Management protocol for unreamed interlocking tibial nails for open tibial fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 1995;9:117–120. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199504000-00005.
    1. Krettek C, Haas N, Schandelmaier P, Frigg R, Tscherne H. Unreamed tibial nail in tibial shaft fractures with severe soft tissue damage. Initial clinical experiences. Unfallchirurg. 1991;94:579–587.
    1. Zalavras CG, Patzakis MJ. Open fractures: evaluation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2003;11:212–219. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200305000-00008.
    1. Rohde C, et al. Gustilo grade IIIB tibial fractures requiring microvascular free flaps: external fixation versus intramedullary rod fixation. Ann Plast Surg. 2007;59:14–17. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31803403c8.
    1. Fang X, Jiang L, Wang Y, Zhao L. Treatment of Gustilo grade III tibial fractures with unreamed intramedullary nailing versus external fixator: a meta-analysis. Med Sci Monit. 2012;18:RA49–56.
    1. Zhang, F. et al. Unreamed Intramedullary Nailing is a better alternative than External Fixator for Gustilo grade IIIB Tibial Fractures based on a meta-analysis. Scand J Surg (2015).
    1. Xu X, Li X, Liu L, Wu W. A meta-analysis of external fixator versus intramedullary nails for open tibial fracture fixation. J Orthop Surg Res. 2014;9:75. doi: 10.1186/s13018-014-0075-6.
    1. Gustilo RB, Anderson JT. Prevention of infection in the treatment of one thousand and twenty-five open fractures of long bones: retrospective and prospective analyses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58:453–458. doi: 10.2106/00004623-197658040-00004.
    1. Higgins JP, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5928.
    1. Liberati A, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:W65–94. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136.
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557–560. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557.
    1. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–188. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2.
    1. Holbrook JL, Swiontkowski MF, Sanders R. Treatment of open fractures of the tibial shaft: Ender nailing versus external fixation. A randomized, prospective comparison. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71:1231–1238. doi: 10.2106/00004623-198971080-00017.
    1. Inan M, Halici M, Ayan I, Tuncel M, Karaoglu S. Treatment of type IIIA open fractures of tibial shaft with Ilizarov external fixator versus unreamed tibial nailing. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2007;127:617–623. doi: 10.1007/s00402-007-0332-9.
    1. Mohseni MA, Soleimanpour J, Mohammadpour H, Shahsavari A. AO tubular external fixation vs. unreamed intramedullary nailing in open grade IIIA-IIIB tibial shaft fractures: a single-center randomized clinical trial. Pak J Biol Sci. 2011;14:490–495. doi: 10.3923/pjbs.2011.490.495.
    1. Tornetta P, III, Bergman M, Watnik N, Berkowitz G, Steuer J. Treatment of grade-IIIb open tibial fractures. A prospective randomised comparison of external fixation and non-reamed locked nailing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994;76:13–19. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.76B1.8300656.
    1. Tu YK, Lin CH, Su JI, Hsu DT, Chen RJ. Unreamed interlocking nail versus external fixator for open type III tibia fractures. J Trauma. 1995;39:361–367. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199508000-00029.
    1. Henley MB, et al. Treatment of type II, IIIA, and IIIB open fractures of the tibial shaft: a prospective comparison of unreamed interlocking intramedullary nails and half-pin external fixators. J Orthop Trauma. 1998;12:1–7. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199801000-00001.
    1. Gustilo RB, Anderson JT. JSBS classics. Prevention of infection in the treatment of one thousand and twenty-five open fractures of long bones. Retrospective and prospective analyses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A,:682. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200204000-00029.
    1. Chapman, M. W. The role of intramedullary fixation in open fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 26–34 (1986).
    1. Yokoyama K, et al. Risk factors for deep infection in secondary intramedullary nailing after external fixation for open tibial fractures. Injury. 2006;37:554–560. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2005.08.026.
    1. Kaftandziev I, Pejkova S, Saveski J. Operative treatment of III grade open fractures of the tibial diaphysis. Prilozi. 2006;27:121–131.
    1. Schandelmaier, P. et al. Superior results of tibial rodding versus external fixation in grade 3B fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 164–172 (1997).
    1. Dervin, G. F. Skeletal fixation of grade IIIB tibial fractures. The potential of metaanalysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 10–15 (1996).
    1. Keating JF, Gardner E, Leach WJ, Macpherson S, Abrami G. Management of tibial fractures with the orthofix dynamic external fixator. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1991;36:272–277.
    1. Hutson, J. J. et al. Mechanical failures of intramedullary tibial nails applied without reaming. Clin Orthop Relat Res 129–137 (1995).
    1. Greitbauer, M., Heinz, T., Gaebler, C., Stoik, W. & Vecsei, V. Unreamed nailing of tibial fractures with the solid tibial nail. Clin Orthop Relat Res 105–114 (1998).
    1. Court-Brown CM, Will E, Christie J, McQueen MM. Reamed or unreamed nailing for closed tibial fractures. A prospective study in Tscherne C1 fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:580–583. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.78B4.0780580.
    1. Alberts KA, Loohagen G, Einarsdottir H. Open tibial fractures: faster union after unreamed nailing than external fixation. Injury. 1999;30:519–523. doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(99)00143-6.
    1. Inan M, Tuncel M, Karaoglu S, Halici M. Treatment of type II and III open tibial fractures with Ilizarov external fixation. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2002;36:390–396.
    1. Paley, D. Problems, obstacles, and complications of limb lengthening by the Ilizarov technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res 81–104 (1990).

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera