The use of the taylor spatial frame for the treatment of unstable tibial fractures in children

Nonoperative Management of Closed Displaced Tibia Shaft Fractures in Patients Under 18 Years of Age: Low Failure Rate

BACKGROUND

Tibial shaft fractures are the third most common pediatric long bone fracture pattern. Historically, these fractures have been initially treated with closed reduction and casting (CRC). Recently, there has been an increasing trend toward surgical intervention as an initial treatment for these injuries. In an effort to better understand whether this trend is warranted, this study seeks to characterize the clinical and radiographic outcomes of a large number of children who underwent nonoperative treatment with CRC as their initial treatment for pediatric tibial shaft fractures at a single tertiary care center.

METHODS

Outcomes measured included final alignment, other procedures performed, length of time to full radiographic healing, and length of time in each method of immobilization before progressing to full weight-bearing status. Patients were separated by ages into the following cohorts during statistical analysis: 4 to 8 years, 9 to 12 years, and 13+ years. Differences between continuous variables were analyzed with independent-samples t tests. χ 2 tests were used to analyze differences in categorical variables. An α<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients met our inclusion criteria. The median age was 10.19 years (4.03 to 17.43). The average initial displacement among all age groups was 27.42% (±15.05%). After the initial intervention with CRC, all age groups demonstrated an average of <5 degrees of residual angulation and <20% of residual displacement. Complete radiographic healing was seen in 127 (92.7%) patients by 3 months. Loss of reduction requiring additional clinical intervention was seen in 30 (21.9%) patients with only 5% requiring surgical intervention, whereas malunion was seen in a total of 16 (11.7%) patients at the final visit. There were no cases of compartment syndrome or deep wound infection. Male and initial angulation were the only factors predictive of loss of reduction.

CONCLUSION

Initial intervention with CRC is a safe and effective treatment for the majority of children in all age groups presenting with tibial shaft fractures demonstrating minimal angulation and displacement with surgical intervention being required in only 5% of patients. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the characteristics of patients who may benefit most from initial surgical intervention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-retrospective study.

Intraoperative acute correction versus postoperative gradual correction for tibial shaft fractures with multiplanar posttraumatic deformities using the hexapod external fixator

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in clinical outcomes, if any, between intraoperative acute correction and postoperative gradual correction for tibial shaft fractures with multiplanar posttraumatic deformities using the hexapod external fixator.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 58 consecutive patients with tibial shaft fractures treated by the hexapod external fixator at our institution from January 2015 to April 2019. Twenty-three patients (Group I) underwent intraoperative acute correction, from January 2015 to October 2016. Starting in November 2016, the other 35 patients (Group II) all underwent postoperative gradual correction. The demographic data, operation duration, original residual deformities before correction, residual deformities after correction, and external fixation time were collected and analyzed. The clinical outcomes were evaluated by the Johner-Wruhs criteria at the last clinical visit.

RESULTS

All patients achieved complete bone union with a mean time of 28.7 ± 4.6 weeks (range 21 to 37 weeks) in Group I and 27.9 ± 4.8 weeks (range 19 to 38 weeks) in Group II (P > 0.05). The operation duration in Group I (88.9 ± 7.7 min) was longer than that in Group II (61.9 ± 8.4 min), and there was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in original residual deformities before correction and residual deformities after correction (P > 0.05). The rate of postoperative complication was similar between the two groups. There was no statistical significance in demographic data and clinical outcomes between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in clinical outcomes between intraoperative acute correction and postoperative gradual correction for tibial shaft fractures with multiplanar posttraumatic deformities using the hexapod external fixator. Postoperative gradual correction may shorten the duration in the operation room and decrease the potential intraoperative risk.

Taylor Spatial Frame or Reamed Intramedullary Nailing for Closed Fractures of the Tibial Shaft: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare a modern ring fixator [Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF)] and reamed intramedullary nailing (IMN) for the treatment of closed tibial shaft fractures.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Two university hospitals.

PATIENTS

Patients between 18 and 70 years of age surgically treated for an acute tibial shaft fracture.

INTERVENTION

TSF (n = 31) versus a reamed intramedullary nail (n = 32). The patients were followed up for 2 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The physical component summary of Short Form 36 (SF-36) at 2 years was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes included the other components of the SF-36, pain assessed by a visual analogue scale (VAS), complications, and resource consumption.

RESULTS

The mean age was 43 years (SD 14.0), and 42 (67%) were men. The physical component summary at 2 years was 52.4 (SD 6.3) in the TSF group and 53.3 (SD 8.0) in the IMN group (P = 0.35). There were modest differences in the other SF-36 scores during the follow-up period. Up to and including 12 months, the TSF group had less knee pain [at 12 months: VAS 0.5 (SD 1.2) vs. VAS 2.4 (SD 2.2; P < 0.001)], but this was not statistically significant at 24 months [VAS 0.7 (SD 1.4) vs. VAS 1.5 (SD 2.0; P = 0.11)]. Superficial skin infections were more frequent in the TSF group [22 (71%) vs. 4 (13%); P < 0.001]. The number of other complications was similar between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both TSF and IMN provided good clinical results. TSF had more pin-track infections but less knee pain the first year.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[A comparative study of Taylor spatial frame and unilateral external fixator in treatment of tibiofibular open fractures]

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of Taylor spatial frame (TSF) and unilateral external fixator in the treatment of tibiofibular open fractures.

Methods

Between January 2016 and July 2018, 74 patients with tibiofibular open fracture who met the selection criteria were divided into TSF group (43 cases, fixed with TSF) and unilateral group (31 cases, fixed with unilateral external fixator) according to the principle of entering the group every other day. There was no significant difference in gender, age, affected side, cause of injury, type of fracture between the two groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, fracture healing time, removal time of external fixator, and complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. The limb function was evaluated according to Johner-Wruhs criteria for evaluating the final effectiveness of tibial shaft fracture treatment. The recovery of lower limb force line was ecaluated by LUO Congfeng et al. criteria.

Results

All patients were followed up 8-22 months, with a median of 12 months. All fractures healed, and no complication such as delayed union, nonunion, or osteomyelitis occurred. The operation time, fracture healing time, and removal time of external fixator in TSF group were significantly shorter than those in unilateral group ( P<0.05). At 3 months after the removal of the external fixator, the limb function was evaluated according to the Johner-Wruhs standard. In TSF group, 41 cases were excellent, 1 case was good, and 1 case was fair, and the excellent and good rate was 97.67%; in unilateral group, 30 cases were excellent and 1 case was fair, and the excellent and good rate was 96.77%; there was no significant difference between the two groups ( P=0.666). At 4 months after operation, the recovery of lower limb force line was ecaluated by LUO Congfeng et al. criterion. In TSF group, 41 cases were excellent, 2 cases were good, and 1 case was fair, and the excellent and good rate was 97.67%; in unilateral group, 29 cases were excellent, 1 case was good, 1 case was fair, and the excellent and good rate was 96.77%; there was no significant difference between the two groups ( P=0.666).

Conclusion

For tibiofibular open fracture, on the premise of fracture healing, TSF technology is superior to unilateral external fixation in terms of shortening operation time, fracture healing time, and removal time of external fixator.

[Application of Taylor spatial frame combined with computer-assisted closed reduction in the treatment of tibiofibular fractures]

Objective

To explore the effectiveness of Taylor spatial frame (TSF) in the treatment of tibiofibular fractures and computer-assisted closed reduction.

Methods

The clinical data of 30 cases of tibiofibular fractures with soft tissue injury treated with TSF between January 2015 and September 2017 was retrospectively analyzed. According to different reduction methods, the patients were divided into control group (15 cases, open reduction in TSF external fixation) and trial group (15 cases, closed reduction in 1-3 days after TSF external fixation). There was no significant difference in the general data such as gender, age, affected side, cause of injury, AO classification of fracture, time from injury to operation between the two groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, and removal time of external fixator were recorded and compared between the two groups. At 3 months after removal of external fixator, the limb function was evaluated according to Johner-Wruhs criteria for evaluating the final effect of tibial shaft fracture treatment.

Results

Both groups were followed up 9-16 months, with an average of 14 months. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, and removal time of external fixator in the trial group were significantly shorter than those in the control group ( P<0.05). There were 2 cases of superficial infection of the external fixation (1 case in each group), 1 case of incision infection (control group), 1 case of delayed fracture healing (control group), 2 cases of traumatic arthritis (1 case in each group); no significant difference was found in the incidence of complications between the two groups ( χ2=0.370, P=0.543). The wounds of soft tissue defect healed by the first intension in both groups. At 3 months after removal of the external fixator, the limb function results in the trial group were excellent in 3 cases, good in 9 cases, fair in 2 cases, and poor in 1 case, and the excellent and good rate was 80.0%; in the control group, the results were excellent in 3 cases, good in 8 cases, fair in 3 cases, and poor in 1 case, and the excellent and good rate was 73.3%. There was no significant difference in incidence of complication between the two groups ( χ2=0.917, P=0.821).

Conclusion

Compared with intraoperative open reduction, postoperative computer-aided closed reduction can shorten the operation time, reduce the intraoperative blood loss, reduce the risk of long-term operation, avoid to destroy the blood supply of fracture end, shorten the healing time of fracture and the wearing time of stent, and alleviate the pain of patients after TSF treatment of tibiofibular fracture.

[The assessment of the application of Taylor spatial frame in treatment of intermediate or distal tibiofibula fractures]

Objective

To determine the effectiveness and the safety of the Taylor spatial frame in treatment of intermediate or distal tibiofibula fractures.

Methods

The clinical data of 74 patients with intermediate or distal tibiofibular fractures treated between January 2015 and January 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. According to fixation methods, they were divided into internal fixation group (26 cases) and external fixation group (48 cases). There was no significant difference in the age, gender, cause of injury, type of fracture, time from injury to operation between 2 groups ( P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, fixator removal time, and complications were recorded and compared. The final function evaluation criteria of Johner-Wruhs humeral shaft fracture were used to evaluate the function of the affected limb. The lower limb force line recovery after operation was evaluated according to the standard evaluation of LUO Congfeng et al.

Results

Both groups were followed up 6-22 months (median, 14 months). All patients obtained the fracture healing. The intraoperative blood loss, fracture healing time, and fixator removal time were significantly higher in the internal fixation group than those in the external fixation group ( P<0.05). There were 1 case of plate exposure, 1 case of delayed fracture healing, and 1 case of plate fracture in the internal fixation group; and there were 2 cases of delayed fracture healing and 4 cases of soft tissue defect in the external fixation group; no significant difference was found in the incidence of complications between 2 groups ( χ2=0.015, P=0.904). The function of the affected limb was evaluated by Johner-Wruhs standard at 10 months after operation, the results was excellent in 19 cases, good in 5 cases, and fair in 2 cases in the internal fixation group, with an excellent and good rate of 92.3%; the results was excellent in 42 cases, good in 3 cases, and fair in 2 cases in the external fixation group, with an excellent and good rate of 95.7%; showing no significant difference between 2 groups ( χ2=0.392, P=0.531). The lower limb force line recovery after operation was evaluated according to the standard evaluation of LUO Congfeng et al.at 4 months after operation, the results was excellent in 24 cases, fair in 1 case, poor in 1 case in the internal fixation group, with an excellent and good rate of 92.3%; the results was excellent in 46 cases, fair in 1 case, poor in 1 case in the external fixation group, with an excellent and good rate of 95.8%; showing no significant difference between 2 groups ( χ2=0.520, P=0.471).

Conclusion

The use of Taylor spatial frame in the treatment of the intermediate or distal tibiofibular fractures can obviously reduce the healing time and complications than the internal fixation of the plate. It can reduce the fracture treatment cycle and is beneficial to the fracture healing and limb function recovery, which is relatively safe and reliable.

Effects of Taylor Spatial Frame on tumors and tumor-like lesions with pathological fractures of lower extremities

Objective:

We aimed to evaluate the clinical effects of Taylor spatial frame (TSF) on tumors and tumor-like lesions complicated with pathological fractures of the lower extremities.

Methods:

Eighty-two patients admitted from September 2013 to January 2015 were selected. Forty-two cases were included in Group-A to receive TSF fixation and forty were included in Group-B to receive locking plate fixation. The surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative healing rate of primary incision, incidence rate of complications, hospitalization stay length, and fracture healing time as well as rate of excellent and good Enneking scores one year after surgery were compared.

Results:

The intraoperative blood losses of Group-A and Group-B were (150.0±6.5) ml and (201.9±7.4) ml respectively (P<0.05). The surgical times were (77.3±8.9) minutes and (96.5±5.9) minutes respectively (P<0.05). The postoperative rates of complications in the two groups (4.76% vs. 10.00%) were similar (P>0.05). The primary incision healing rates of Group-A and Group-B were 97.62% and 82.50% respectively. The hospitalization stays were (15.7±0.9) days and (15.2±0.7) days respectively (P>0.05). The fracture healing times were (30.1±2.1) weeks and (32.4±2.2) weeks respectively (P<0.05). The rate of excellent and good Enneking scores one year after surgery was 97.61% in Group-A and 95.00% in Group-B (P>0.05).

Conclusions:

Tumors and tumor-like lesions complicated with pathological fractures of the lower extremities can be effectively treated by TSF.

Treatment and functional outcomes of complex tibial fractures in children and adolescents using the Ilizarov method

Aims

The aim of this study was to report the clinical, functional and radiological outcomes of children and adolescents with tibial fractures treated using the Ilizarov method.

Patients and Methods

Between 2013 and 2016 a total of 74 children with 75 tibial fractures underwent treatment at our major trauma centre using an Ilizarov frame. Demographic and clinical information from a prospective database was supplemented by routine functional and psychological assessment and a retrospective review of the notes and radiographs.

Results

Of the 75 fractures, 26 (35%) were open injuries, of which six (8%) had segmental bone loss. There were associated physeal injuries in 18 (24%), and 12 (16%) involved conversion of treatment following failure of previous management. The remaining children had a closed unstable fracture or significant soft-tissue compromise. The median follow-up was 16 months (7 to 31). All fractures united with a median duration in a frame of 3.6 months (interquartile range 3.1 to 4.6); there was no significant difference between the types of fracture and the demographics of the patients. There were no serious complications and no secondary procedures were required to achieve union. Health-related quality of life measures were available for 60 patients (80%) at a minimum of six months after removal of the frame. These indicated a good return to function (median Paediatric quality of life score, 88.0; interquartile range 70.3 to 100).

Conclusion

The Ilizarov method is a safe, effective and reliable method for the treatment of complex paediatric tibial fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:396-403.

Clinical utility of the Taylor spatial frame for limb deformities

The Taylor spatial frame (TSF) is a hexapod external fixator that can correct six-axis deformities. The mathematical base of all hexapod systems is projective geometry, which describes complex repositioning of an object in space. The Taylor brothers developed one of the first six-axis correction systems, which is known today as TSF. Over the years, this system has become the most used six-axis deformity correction device. In this review, we describe the history behind TSF development, and describe the principles and clinical utility for application of the TSF in different settings, such as acute trauma, malunions, and various deformities of the lower and upper limb.

The management of open tibial fractures in children

Aims

Following the introduction of national standards in 2009, most major paediatric trauma is now triaged to specialist units offering combined orthopaedic and plastic surgical expertise. We investigated the management of open tibia fractures at a paediatric trauma centre, primarily reporting the risk of infection and rate of union.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective review was performed on 61 children who between 2007 and 2015 presented with an open tibia fracture. Their mean age was nine years (2 to 16) and the median follow-up was ten months (interquartile range 5 to 18). Management involved IV antibiotics, early debridement and combined treatment of the skeletal and soft-tissue injuries in line with standards proposed by the British Orthopaedic Association.

Results

There were 36 diaphyseal fractures and 25 distal tibial fractures. Of the distal fractures, eight involved the physis. Motor vehicle collisions accounted for two thirds of the injuries and 38 patients (62%) arrived outside of normal working hours. The initial method of stabilisation comprised: casting in nine cases (15%); elastic nailing in 19 (31%); Kirschner (K)-wiring in 13 (21%); intramedullary nailing in one (2%); open reduction and plate fixation in four (7%); and external fixation in 15 (25%). Wound management comprised: primary wound closure in 24 (39%), delayed primary closure in 11 (18%), split skin graft (SSG) in eight (13%), local flap with SSG in 17 (28%) and a free flap in one. A total of 43 fractures (70%) were Gustilo-Anderson grade III. There were four superficial (6.6%) and three (4.9%) deep infections. Two deep infections occurred following open reduction and plate fixation and the third after K-wire fixation of a distal fracture. No patient who underwent primary wound closure developed an infection. All the fractures united, although nine patients required revision of a mono-lateral to circular frame for delayed union (two) or for altered alignment or length (seven). The mean time to union was two weeks longer in diaphyseal fractures than in distal fractures (13 weeks versus 10.8 weeks, p = 0.016). Children aged > 12 years had a significantly longer time to union than those aged < 12 years (16.3 weeks versus 11.4 weeks, p = 0.045). The length of stay in hospital for patients with a Gustilo-Anderson grade IIIB fracture was twice as long as for less severe injuries.

Conclusion

Fractures in children heal better than those in adults. Based on our experience of deep infection we discourage the use of internal fixation with a plate for open tibial fractures in children. We advocate aggressive initial wound debridement in theatre with early definitive combined orthopaedic and plastic surgery in order to obtain skeletal stabilisation and soft-tissue cover. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:544–53.

Uniplanar Versus Taylor Spatial Frame External Fixation For Pediatric Diaphyseal Tibia Fractures: A Comparison of Cost and Complications

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and cost variations between uniplanar (UNI) and Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) external fixation for unstable pediatric tibial diaphyseal fractures.

METHODS

We performed an IRB approved, retrospective review of 44 diaphyseal tibial fractures in 42 children treated with external fixation (16 TSF and 28 UNI) between 2003 and 2011, at a single level 1 pediatric trauma center. Data on demographic, clinical, radiographic, treatment cost, and complication differences were analyzed between the 2 groups. The Student t tests, Fisher's exact tests, χ trend tests, logistic regression, and a cost analysis comparison was used to assess the differences.

RESULTS

The mean age in both groups was 13 years (range: 6 to 18 y TSF, 9 to 17 y UNI). The mean follow-up was 8 months (TSF) and 13 months (UNI). According to the AO classification, there were 28 type A, 13 type B, and 3 type C fractures with no significant difference between the 2 groups (P=0.69). Total time in the fixator was not different between the 2 groups (UNI 14 wk, TSF 12 wk, P=0.10), but time to union was less in the TSF group (UNI 16 wk, TSF 13 wk, P<0.01). There were no differences in the final radiographic alignment between the groups. The UNI group experienced more complications (7 pin-site infections and 9 reoperations) compared with 4 pin-site infections and 2 reoperations in the TSF group. A cost analysis revealed significant differences in equipment cost (UNI frame=$5074 vs. TSF frame=$10,675; P<0.0001); however, after corrected cost analysis with calculated return to the operating room for complications, there was no difference in cost of treatment (UNI treatment=$20,113 vs. TSF treatment=$19,138).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an initial equipment cost difference between UNI and TSF frames, corrected cost analysis reveals equivalent costs for care delivery. Therefore, TSF can be considered as a cost-conscious device for the treatment of unstable pediatric tibial diaphyseal fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-retrospective comparative cohort study.

Surgical stabilization for open tibial fractures in children: External fixation or elastic stable intramedullary nail - which method is optimal?

BACKGROUND

Management of open tibial fractures is well documented in adults, with existing protocols outlining detailed treatment strategies. No clear guidelines exist for children. Surgical stabilization of tibial fractures in the pediatric population requires implants that do not disrupt the open epiphyses (growth plate). Both elastic stable intramedullary nails and external fixation can be used. The objective of this study was to identify the optimal method of surgical stabilization in the treatment of open tibial fractures in children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were searched from their inception to March 2014 using the following advanced search terms (Key words): "open tibia fracture," "fracture fixation," "external fixation," "intramedullary," and "bone nail." Only studies in English and pertaining to children with open fractures treated with elastic stable intramedullary nails or external fixation between 1994 and 2014 were included. Twelve clinical studies were critically appraised.

RESULTS

Due to a paucity in the literature coupled with a nonsystematic presentation of results, it proved to be very difficult in extracting relevant results from the studies. This was further added by a variation in outcome measures. Consequently, the results we obtained were difficult to draw conclusions from.

CONCLUSION

There is no conclusive evidence or best practice guidelines for their management. Thus, as is highlighted in this study, more research is needed to determine the optimum treatment strategy for this common pediatric injury. The existing literature is of poor quality; consisting mainly of retrospective reviews of patients' medical records, charts, and radiographs. Carefully designed, high-quality prospective cohort studies utilizing a nationalized multi-hospital approach are needed to improve understanding before protocols and guidelines can be developed and implemented.

Tibial shaft fractures in adolescents: analysis of cast treatment successes and failures

This study retrospectively analyzed cast treatment of 75 adolescent closed tibial diaphyseal fractures. The average age was 13.3 years (range, 10-17.4 years). Of the patients, 21% (16/75) required cast change/wedging in the clinic for loss of reduction, and three patients (4%, 3/75) injured in vehicular collisions had failure of cast treatment, requiring an unplanned surgical intervention. Initial and immediate postreduction radiographic deformities were greater (P<0.05) in patients who required cast change/wedging. Of the patients, 59% (44/75) required over 3 months of cast immobilization. Casting is successful in the majority of adolescent patients despite prolonged immobilization and the need for cast change/wedging.