Off-label use of orthopedical trauma implants in a low-income country

Standard or Fin SIGN® nail? which option is better for the treatment of femoral fractures in low and middle-income countries?

PURPOSE

Femoral fractures are common in low and middle-income countries (LMIC), predominantly caused by high-energy trauma. The surgical implant generation network (SIGN®) program offers two different intramedullary nails in LMIC which are designed to be used without image intensifier free of charge for the patients: the SIGN standard nail (SSN®) and the SIGN Fin nail (SFN®). This study aimed to compare the results of the SSN® and the SFN® for the treatment of middle and distal shaft femoral fractures through a retrograde approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a retrospective, descriptive, and non-experimental study including all consecutive patients who underwent surgical management of middle or distal shaft femoral fracture between January 2017 and May 2022 in an NGO hospital located in Freetown, Sierra Leone. The duration of surgery, type of reduction, complications like screw loosening, implant migration, anterior knee pain and non-union rate at six months of follow up were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients were included in the study. Group A: 60 patients were managed with SSN® and Group B: 62 patients with SFN®. The mean operative time was 104 min with SSN® and 78 with SFN® (p < 0.001). Open reduction of the fracture was necessary in ten (16.7%) patients with SSN® and 12 (19.4%) patients treated with SFN® (p = 0.69). Non-union was observed in one (1.7%) patient with SSN® and two (3.2%) patients with SFN® (p = 0.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Both options seem equally effective in treating midshaft and distal femoral shaft fractures. The SFN® reduces the surgical time, due to this fact, in polytraumatized patients, patients with bilateral femur fracture or patients with ipsilateral tibia fracture, it can be considered as the best option to be used. There was no statistical difference in the complications presented by the two groups.

Usefulness of external fixation and reverse Sural fasciocutaneous flap: Treatment of grade III B open tibial fractures in resource-limited settings

PURPOSE

Sierra Leone is a low-income country located on the west coast of Africa where the majority of the population does not have free access to emergency medical and surgical services, the principal cause of open tibia fractures is motorcycle collision. Open fractures of the middle and distal third of the tibial segments, particularly those classified as type III B, represent a challenge for orthopedic surgeons because of the loss of soft tissue coverage. The Reverse Sural Fasciocutaneous Flap (RSFF) has been shown to be an ideal and reproducible option for the treatment of soft tissue defects. The main aim of this study was to demonstrate the experience in Resource Limited Settings (RLS) by means of a short series of the efficacy of using a combination of external fixation and RSFF in the treatment of grade III B open tibia fractures where plastic surgeons were not available.

METHODS

This retrospective, descriptive, and non-experimental study included 8 patients who underwent surgical intervention between September 2020 and September 2021.

RESULTS

The skin defects were of various sizes; the smallest size was 4 × 7 cm, and the biggest size of 12 × 18 cm. We obtained a success rate in seven of the eight cases.

CONCLUSIONS

External fixation and reverse sural fasciocutaneous sural flap are excellent therapeutic options for the treatment of open grade III B diaphyseal and metaphyseal distal tibial fractures.

Regulation, approval, and access of spinal implants in low-middle-income countries: a narrative review and case study

INTRODUCTION

Spinal implants play a vital role in healthcare delivery, and regulations are necessary to ensure their quality, approval, access, and use. In this article, we examine the current state of regulation and approval procedures for medical devices in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), emphasizing the situation in Tanzania.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a systematic literature search and interviewed a local spine implant representative to investigate the approval, availability, and access of surgical and spinal implants in LMICs, particularly in Africa. Out of the 18 included articles, six referred to African regulations, with no mention of spinal implants. Our analysis revealed that LMICs face challenges in accessing implants due to affordability, poor supply chain, and lack of expertise for their application. However, surgeons have found alternative solutions, such as using lower-cost implants from Turkish manufacturers. The Tanzania Medical Devices and Drugs Authority oversees the local regulatory and approval process for implants.

EXPERT OPINION

Regulation and accessibility of spinal implants in LMICs, particularly in Africa, are limited and negatively impact patient care and best medical practice. Potential solutions include capacity building within and collaboration among regulatory organizations to improve regulatory processes and allocating financial resources to qualitative and quantitative implant access.

Off-Label Treatment for Severe Craniomaxillofacial Fractures in Low-Income Countries-A Novel Operation Method with the External Face Fixator

Introduction: Craniomaxillofacial fractures (CMF) are common in low-income countries (LIC). Due to limited resources, treatment of these fractures usually consists of interdental wiring or immobilization with a Barton bandage to maintain the reduction by permanent occlusion. These non-surgical treatment methods often lead to unsatisfactory results, such as a disturbed dental occlusion and lockjaw. The aim of this study is to present an off-label treatment option for CMF by applying a hand fixator as external face fixator (EFF) and to demonstrate the surgical method in detail. Materials and Methods: The feasibility and postoperative outcomes of this new off-label operation technique were evaluated by analyzing patients with CMF (n = 13) treated at an NGO hospital in Sierra Leone between 2015 and 2019. Results: The application of the EFF was feasible. The biggest advantage compared to the conventional non-operative methods was, that a dynamic occlusion was still possible during the 6 weeks healing period. Hence, patients could eat and drink almost normally and perform dental hygiene with the EFF in place. We did not discover pintrack infections or other complications. Three patients developed an oronasal fistula due to traumatic a palatal bone loss of about 7–8 mm which was treated by a palatal mucoperiosteal flap 15–20 days after the first operation. Discussion and Conclusions: In LIC, where plate osteosynthesis for CMF cannot be performed due to limited resources the application of an EFF is a promising alternative for a better outcome and an improved quality of life for the patients.

Locally developed external fixators as definitive treatment of open tibia diaphyseal fractures: a clinical prospective study conducted in Ivory Coast

BACKGROUND

This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of locally developed external fixators (LDEF) as definitive treatment for open tibia diaphyseal fractures (OTDF) in Ivory Coast.

METHODS

Gustilo I, II, and IIIA OTDFs of patients admitted within 24 hours of injury were prospectively included and treated with LDEF. The rates of union, mal-union, septic complications, as well as the functional results were assessed, in addition to the LDEF construct's integrity. Predictive factors of failure or poor results were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 40 OTDF patients were admitted within 24 hours of injury. Gustilo I, II, and IIIA fractures were observed in three, 13, and 24 patients, respectively. Uneventful fracture healing was obtained in 29 cases, with an average union time of 8.47 months. Mal-union and non-union were registered in three and four cases, respectively. Pin-track infection (PTI) was observed in 13 cases and deep infection in seven. Infection resolved in all patients except four, who developed chronic osteomyelitis. None of the non-unions were associated with an infection. The overall functional result was satisfactory in 32 patients. PTI was the only predictive factor for chronic infection. Biplanar frames, when compared to monoplanar constructs, were associated with a significantly improved functional outcome.

CONCLUSION

LDEF improved significantly the OTDF management, as it provided better stability and superior fracture healing rates than what is observed with the standard of care in the same environment. PTI remains an essential problem but with, hopefully, limited negative consequences.