No difference in the long term final functional outcome after nailing or cast bracing of high energy displaced tibial shaft fractures

Journal of Trauma Management & Outcomes

Bobby John¹  Maharaj K Mam¹  Jeevan Prakash¹  Aashish Gulati¹  Amitabh J Dwyer¹  Vineet Batta¹ 

[1] Department of Orthopedics, Christian Medical College & Hospital, Brown Road, Ludhiana, 141008, Punjab, India

关键词: Intramedullary nail;    Plaster cast brace;    Treatment methods;    Fracture shaft tibia;   

Others  :  801151
DOI  :  10.1186/1752-2897-6-5

 received in 2011-03-23, accepted in 2012-05-20,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Cast bracing (CB) has been a well established method of treating tibial shaft fractures. Majority of the recent literature on treatment of tibial shaft fractures have upheld intramedullary nailing (IMN) as the treatment of choice. Most of these studies are from the west, in public funded health set ups and in hospitals with very low rates of infection. This has lead to bewilderment in the minds of surgeons wishing to opt for conservative treatment in countries with scarcity of health resources. We therefore undertook this study to compare the two modalities in the scenario of the developing world.

Material and methods

Sixty-eight consecutive patients were treated alternately with CB and IMN for high energy, displaced, closed and Gustilo Grade 1 open fractures of the tibial shaft, between 1995 and 2001.

Results

An average follow up at 4.3 years revealed no statistical difference in the final functional outcome as per Johner and Wruhs' criteria with modification to Indian lifestyle. IMN group had a) slightly shorter time to fracture union (mean 21.3 weeks versus 23.1 weeks for CB, p > 0.05), (b) lesser time off work (mean 17.6 weeks versus 25.6 weeks for CB, p <0.01), (c) fewer outpatient visits (mean 6.2 versus 9.7 for CB, p < 0.05), (d) less limb length discrepancy (mean 4.3 mm versus 6.6 mm for CB, p < 0.05). The difference in residual antero-posterior angulation (mean 3.2 degrees for IMN versus 4.9 degrees for CB, p = 0.14) and varus-valgus angulation (mean 3.7 degrees for IMN versus 5.1 degrees for CB, p = 0.7) were not statistically significant. However CB group had no deep infections as compared to two in the IMN group. The average cost of hospital treatment of CB group was less than half incurred by the IMN group (average USD 831 versus USD 2071 for nailed group, p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Treating tibial shaft fracture either with IMN or CB provided equally gratifying results with no statistical difference in final functional outcome. The economic cost to the patient in Indian conditions is significantly less with CB and therefore stands as an equally reliable treatment option, especially in countries with fewer resources.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Batta et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Hooper GJ, Keddell RG, Penny ID: Conservative management or closed nailing for tibial shaft fractures. A randomised prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991, 73:83-85.
• [2]Kenwright J, Richardson JB, Cunningham JL: Axial movement and tibial fractures. A controlled randomised trial of treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991, 73:654-659.
• [3]RE l: Fractures in adults. Edited by Rockwood CA, Green DP. JB Lippincott Company, Philadelphia; 1984.
• [4]Müller MENS, Koch P, Schatzker J: The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures of Long Bones. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York; 1990.
• [5]Haines JF, Williams EA, Hargadon EJ, et al.: Is conservative treatment of displaced tibial shaft fractures justified? J Bone Joint Surg Br 1984, 66:84-88.
• [6]Sarmiento A: A functional below-the-knee cast for tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1967, 49:855-875.
• [7]Bolhofner BR: Indirect reduction and composite fixation of extraarticular proximal tibial fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995, 315:75-83.
• [8]Orfaly R, Keating JE, O'Brien PJ: Knee pain after tibial nailing: does the entry point matter? J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995, 77:976-977.
• [9]Alho A, Benterud JG, Hogevold HE: Comparison of functional bracing and locked intramedullary nailing in the treatment of displaced tibial shaft fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992, 243-250.
• [10]Alho A, Ekeland A, Stromsoe K, et al.: Locked intramedullary nailing for displaced tibial shaft fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1990, 72:805-809.
• [11]Court-Brown CM, McBirnie J: The epidemiology of tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995, 77:417-421.
• [12]Court-Brown CM, Keating JF, Christie J, et al.: Exchange intramedullary nailing. Its use in aseptic tibial nonunion. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995, 77:407-411.
• [13]Johner R, Wruhs O: Classification of tibial shaft fractures and correlation with results after rigid internal fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1983, 178:7-25.
• [14]Oni OO, Hui A, Gregg PJ: The healing of closed tibial shaft fractures. The natural history of union with closed treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1988, 70:787-790.
• [15]Per capita income in Punjab vis-à-vis India at current and constant prices (1999-2000). Available at: http://pbplanning.gov.in/pdf/PER%20CAPITA%20INCOME%20Punjab%20vs%20India.pdf webcite Accessed on .January 18, 2011
• [16]Toivanen JA, Honkonen SE, Koivisto AM, et al.: Treatment of low-energy tibial shaft fractures: plaster cast compared with intramedullary nailing. Int Orthop 2001, 25:110-113.
• [17]Sarmiento A: A functional below-the-knee cast for tibial fractures. 1967. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86-A:2777.
• [18]Keating JF, Orfaly R, O'Brien PJ: Knee pain after tibial nailing. J Orthop Trauma 1997, 11:10-13.
• [19]Busse JW, Bhandari M, Sprague S, et al.: An economic analysis of management strategies for closed and open grade I tibial shaft fractures. Acta Orthop 2005, 76:705-712.
• [20]Downing ND, Griffin DR, Davis TR: A comparison of the relative costs of cast treatment and intramedullary nailing for tibial diaphyseal fractures in the UK. Injury 1997, 28:373-375.