scholarly journals Complications after operative treatment of femoral shaft fractures in childhood and adolescence

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiane Kruppa ◽  
Gabriele Wiechert ◽  
Thomas A. Schildhauer ◽  
Marcel Dudda

Purpose of the study was to retrospectively analyze the complication rates after operatively treated femoral shaft fractures in childhood and adolescence. Retrospective evaluation of 42 children with operatively treated femoral shaft fractures between 2000 and 2014. Fractures were classified as 27 A type, 12 B type and 3 C type fractures according the OTA/AO classification. 8 (19.05%) fractures were open. Age averaged 10.2 years (3-16). Fracture treatment was recorded as temporary or definitive external fixation, ESIN, plate fixation or IMN. Complications such as wound infection, re-fractures, nonunion and malunion were analyzed. Six (14.29%) fractures were temporarily stabilized using an external fixator. In 22 (52.38%) children the femoral shaft fracture was stabilized using ESINs. 10 (23.81%) children had a plate fixation and 9 (21.43%) adolescents were treated using an IMN. ESIN treated children were significantly younger (P=0.000) and had less weight (P=0.000) than children treated with both other methods. Complications were two (4.76%) superficial and two deep (4.76%) wound infections, one (2.38%) re-fracture with the ESIN in situ, one (2.38%) nonunion and one (2.38%) malunion. Six (14.29%) children required a reoperation for a complication. Risk factors for complications were temporarily applied external fixators, open fractures, C Type fractures (P=0.031) and an increasing age (P=0.048) and weight (P=0.047) of the child. The majority of children in our study population were successfully treated using ESIN presenting a low complication rate. Complications were observed following open fractures and more complex fracture types. Furthermore we observed an increasing complication rate with increasing ages and weights of the children.

1992 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 497
Author(s):  
P. J. Kregor ◽  
K. M. Song ◽  
M. L. Routt ◽  
R. M. Liddell ◽  
B. J. Sangeorzan

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ha Yong Kim ◽  
Jong Hyun Park ◽  
Seung Hun Lee ◽  
Kap Jung Kim ◽  
Kwang Won Lee ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Collin May ◽  
Yi-Meng Yen ◽  
Adam Y. Nasreddine ◽  
Daniel Hedequist ◽  
Michael T. Hresko ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (32) ◽  
pp. 2933-2937
Author(s):  
Supantha Panja

BACKGROUND Femoral shaft fractures result from high energy trauma and maybe associated with life threatening conditions. Typical in younger people is associated with polytrauma. Though intramedullary nailing (IMN) is the gold standard option of treatment, external fixation (EF) can also be used temporarily or definitively, in such cases. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome of these two procedures. METHODS This prospective comparative study was conducted at our centre over a period of 6 years. Age, sex of the patients, laterality, type of fracture with mean follow up, union time, and complications such as delayed union, angular deformities, and limb length discrepancies were tabulated and compared. RESULTS There were more cases of open fractures in the EF group compared to IMN group. In the IMN group the average surgery duration was 95.76 minutes and it was 69.4 minutes in the EF group. The average time for bone union was 25.66 weeks in IMF group and 28.22 weeks in EF group. Complication rate was higher in EF group with 11 complications (7 major & 4 minor) compared to IMN group with only 6 cases presenting with complications (3 each of major & minor). CONCLUSIONS Though IMN is the gold standard in treatment of femoral shaft fractures, EF in polytrauma is an alternative method for definitive fracture stabilization, with minimal additional operative trauma and an acceptable complication rate. KEYWORDS Femoral Shaft Fractures, Intramedullary Nailing, External Fixation, Polytrauma, Definitive Treatment


2017 ◽  
Vol 137 (9) ◽  
pp. 1193-1200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Bom Kim ◽  
Jae-Woo Cho ◽  
Young Ho Lee ◽  
Won-Yong Shon ◽  
Jung Wee Park ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 190-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osman Tugrul Eren ◽  
Metin Kucukkaya ◽  
Caglar Kockesen ◽  
Yavuz Kabukcuoglu ◽  
Unal Kuzgun

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document