Retrograde intramedullary nailing of comminuted intra-articular distal femur fractures results in high union rate

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.

Comparative study of retrograde intramedullary nailing versus locking extramedullary plating in complete articular fractures with metaphyseal comminution of the distal femur

INTRODUCTION

Fractures of the distal femur with metaphyseal comminution and complete intra-articular involvement (AO/OTA classifications 33C2 and 33C3) present challenges for reduction and fixation. However, an optimal fixation method remains unknown. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of locking extramedullary plating (LEP) and retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIN) for complete distal femoral intra-articular fractures with metaphyseal comminution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2016 and May 2022, 80 patients (45 men and 35 women; average age, 56.7 years) diagnosed with AO/OTA 33C2 and 33C3 were treated with either LEP or RIN and followed up for at least one year. Post-operative evaluations included radiographic assessments of bone union rate, timing, and alignment. Clinically, the knee joint range of motion (ROM), lower extremity functional scale (LEFS), and Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grade were analyzed. The complications were also compared.

RESULTS

36 underwent LEP and 44 underwent RIN. Bone union was observed in 69.4% and 63.6% of the patients in the LEP and RIN groups, respectively (p = 0.64). The average union time was 6.9 months for the LEP group and 6.6 months for the RIN group (p = 0.51). A tendency toward varus deformity was observed in the RIN group, although the difference was not statistically significant. No significant differences were observed in knee ROM, LEFS, or KL grade. Complications included non-union (33.8%; RIN, 11; LEP, 16), varus deformity (5%; RIN, 4; LEP, 0), infection (1.3%; RIN, 0; LEP, 1), heterotrophic ossification (1.3%; RIN, 0; LEP, 1), and wound dehiscence (2.5%; RIN, 2; LEP, 0).

CONCLUSIONS

The surgical fixation methods, RIN and LEP, for complete distal femoral intra-articular fractures with metaphyseal comminution showed similar clinical and radiological outcomes. However, regardless of the type of fixation device used, there was a reduced rate of bone union owing to high energy and a less favorable prognosis.

Outcomes of Distal Third Femur Fractures in Patients 18 Years and Older: A Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

The selection of the most optimal fixation method for fractures of the distal femur, whether intramedullary nail (NL), lateral locking plate (PL), or nail/plate (NP) is not always clear. This study retrospectively evaluates surgical patients with distal femur fractures and introduces a pilot study using cluster analysis to identify the most optimal fracture fixation method for a given fracture type.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients 18 years and older with an isolated distal femur fracture who presented to our Level-1 trauma center between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2022, and obtained NL, PL, or NP implants. Patients with polytrauma and those without at least six months of follow-up were excluded. A chart review was used to obtain demographics, fracture classification, fixation method, and postoperative complications. A cluster analysis was performed. The following factors were used to determine a successful outcome: ambulatory status pre-injury and 6-12 months postoperatively, infection, non-union, mortality, and implant failure.

RESULTS

A total of 169 patients met inclusion criteria. No statistically significant association between the fracture classification and fixation type with overall outcome was found. However, patients treated with an NP (n = 14) had a success rate of 92.9% vs only a 68.1% success rate in those treated with a PL (n = 116) (p = 0.106). The most notable findings in the cluster analysis (15 total clusters) included transverse extraarticular fractures demonstrating 100% success if treated with NP (n = 6), 50% success with NL (n=2), and 78.57% success with PL fixation (n=14). NP constructs in complete articular fractures demonstrated success in 100% of patients (n = 5), whereas 77.78% of patients treated with NL (n = 9) and 61.36% of those treated with PL (n = 44).

CONCLUSIONS

Plate fixation was the predominant fixation method used for distal third femur fractures regardless of fracture classification. However, NP constructs trended towards improved success rates, especially in complete intraarticular and transverse extraarticular fractures, suggesting the potential benefit of additional fixation with these fractures. Cluster analysis provided a heuristic way of creating patient profiles in patients with distal third femur fractures. However, a larger cohort study is needed to corroborate these findings to ultimately develop a clinical decision-making tool that also accounts for patient specific characteristics.

Which fixation produces the best outcome for distal femoral fractures? Meta-analysis and systematic review of retrograde nailing versus distal femoral plating in 2432 patients and 33 studies

PURPOSE

The distal femur comprises a wide intramedullary cavity and thin cortical bone. Firm internal fixation of comminuted fractures with displacement is challenging. Although many comparative studies have reported retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIN) and distal femoral plating (DFP) as the usual fixation methods for distal femoral fractures, no clear conclusion has been reached. Therefore, a meta-analysis and systematic review of the clinical and radiological results were conducted to determine the appropriate treatment method for distal femoral fractures.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases from their inception to December 19, 2022, was performed using predefined criteria. Studies comparing the effects of RIN and DFP were considered. The analyzed outcome measures included duration of surgery, blood loss, time to union, delayed union, nonunion, malalignment, implant failure, infection, reoperation, limb length discrepancy, range of motion, persistent anterior knee pain, knee stiffness, and functional scores. Meta-analysis of pooled data was conducted using a random-effects model to determine the standard mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies with 2,432 patients were included. Compared to DFP, RIN was associated with a shorter time to fracture union (SMD, 1.83 months; 95% CI - 2.76 to - 0.90; P < 0.001) and a lower incidence of postoperative infection (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.31-0.94; P = 0.03). Pooled analysis revealed no significant differences in other outcome measures between the two treatment modalities.

CONCLUSION

In distal femoral fractures, RIN had a shorter bone union time and was more resistant to infection than DFP. However, there were no significant differences in the other clinical parameters. Therefore, the characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of RIN and DFP should be carefully identified, and appropriate treatment should be provided based on the patient's medical condition and fracture pattern.

Induced Membrane Technique for the Management of Segmental Femoral Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data

Several modifications of the induced membrane technique (IMT) have been reported, but there is no consensus regarding their results and prognosis. Moreover, most studies have focused on tibial defects; no meta-analysis of the treatment of femoral defects using the IMT has been reported. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the potential risk factors of post-procedural complications following the treatment of segmental femoral defects using the IMT. A comprehensive search was performed on the Cochrane Library, EBSCO, EMBASE, Ovid, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, using the keywords "femur," "Masquelet technique," and "induced membrane technique." Original articles composed in English, having accessible individual patient data, and reporting more than two cases of bony defect or nonunion of femur or more than five cases of any body part were included. Post-procedural bone graft infections, final union status, and union time after second-stage operation were analyzed. Fourteen reports, including 90 patients, were used in this study. External fixation in second-stage surgery had an odds ratio of 9.267 for post-procedural bone graft infection (p = 0.047). The odds ratio of post-procedural bone graft infection and age >65 years for final non-union status was 51.05 (p = 0.003) and 9.18 (p = 0.042). Shorter union time was related to impregnated antibiotics in the spacer (p = 0.005), transplanting all-autologous grafts (p = 0.042), and the application of intramedullary nails as the second-stage fixation method (p = 0.050). The IMT appears to be reasonable and reproducible for femoral segmental bone defects. Several preoperative and surgical factors may affect post-procedural complications and union time.