Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 91-B, Issue SUPP_II, 207.  
Copyright © 2009 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gakhar, H.
Right arrow Articles by Dhillon, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Gakhar, H.
Right arrow Articles by Dhillon, M.

British Orthopaedic Specialists Association


London, England: 25 April 2007

President: Mr A Choudhary


UNREAMED INTRAMEDULLARY NAIL OR EXTERNAL FIXATION FOR OPEN TIBIAL FRACTURES? A RANDOMISED PROSPECTIVE STUDY

HPS Gakhar; KSRK Prasad; SS Gill; and MS Dhillon

Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh.

As management of open tibial fractures remains controversial, we hypothesised that unreamed intramedullary nail offers inherent advantages of a nail as well as external fixation, while limiting the morbidity of external fixation.

We undertook a prospective randomised study to compare management of open tibial fractures with external fixator or intramedullary nail until fracture union or failure. Our study included 30 consecutive open tibial fractures (Gustilo I, II & IIIA) between 4 cm distal to knee and 4 cm proximal to ankle in skeletally mature adults, who presented to a level-1 trauma centre. Alternate patients were treated by external fixation or unreamed nail i.e. 15 in each group. Standard protocol for debridement and fixation was followed. External fixators were removed at 6 weeks. All cases were followed until fracture union, the main outcome measurement.

26 (87%) males and 4 (13%) females; age 20–60 years (Mean 33.8). All fractures in both groups united. Time to union averaged 7.9 months for both groups. Incidence of wound problems, infection, hardware failure and delayed union were comparable. However, there was higher incidence of angular deformities and stiffness of knee and ankle in external fixation group, although not statistically significant.

We found no statistically significant difference between unreamed intramedullary nailing and external fixation for the management of open tibial diaphyseal fractures. Ease of weight bearing as well as absence of angular deformities and joint stiffness were distinct advantages in the nailing group. Therefore we recommend unreamed nail for Gustilo I, II & IIIA open tibial fractures.

Correspondence should be addressed to Mr Bimal Singh, c/o BOSA at the Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE






(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General