Banner

Clinical reliability of closed techniques and comparison with open strategies to achieve union at the docking site

• 2011
Back
Publication Information
Authors Giovanni Lovisetti & Francesco Sala & Anna N. Miller & Ahmed M. Thabet & Vincenzo Zottola & Dario Capitani
Keywords Not Available
Journal Not Available
Publisher Not Available
Volume Not Available
Issue Not Available
Pages Not Available
publication.type International
Paper Link Not Available
Supplementary Materials Not Available
Abstract
Purpose This retrospective review follows 31 tibial nonunions
to compare union at the docking site using closed versus open
strategies. In this cohort of patients, all but five were infected
nonunions.
Methods Thirteen patients initially treated with single
compression were compared with 18 patients treated by
open revision of the docking site. In the single compression
group, an average of 6.5 cm of bone was resected and index
lengthening was 2.04. In the open revision group, a mean
of 9.4 cm was resected and the index lengthening was 1.73.
Results Consolidation at the docking site occurred in all
subjects in both groups. There was no statistical difference
between the two groups. Conclusive evidence of superiority
of one modality of treatment over the other cannot be
drawn from our data.
Conclusions The simple compression procedure requires
less invasive surgery and is probably less demanding and
more cost-effective in short transports.