Healing, nonunion, and re-operation after internal fixation of diaphyseal and distal femoral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 430 Downloads
Nonunion is a highly morbid complication that exacerbates the pain, disability and financial burden of distal and diaphyseal femur fractures. This study examined the modern rates of healing, nonunion, and other complications requiring reoperation of different fixation methods for distal and diaphyseal femur fractures.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of all records from PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Review system was performed. Included studies had >20 acute, non-pathologic distal or diaphyseal femur fractures treated with primary internal fixation. Excluded were studies on abnormal patient/fracture populations, external fixation, or cement/bone graft use.
Thirty-eight studies with 2,829 femoral shaft fractures and 11 studies with 505 distal femur fractures were included. Distal fractures had a lower healing rate (86.6% vs. 93.7%) and a higher re-operation rate (13.4% vs 6.1%) than shaft fractures (p < 0.00001), primarily due to higher rates of mechanical failure (p < 0.00001). Nonunion was the most frequent complication, occurring in 4.7% of distal fractures and 2.8% of shaft fractures. There was no difference between plate and nail fixation of distal fractures in healing, nonunion, or other causes of re-operation. Shaft fractures developed nonunion in 6.6% of unreamed nails and 2.1% of reamed nails (p = 0.002). Nonunion occurred in 2.3% of antegrade nailed fractures and 1.5% of retrograde nailed fractures (p = 0.66).
Approximately one out of every eight distal fractures and one of every 16 shaft fractures requires re-operation. The most common cause of fixation failure is nonunion. Further research is needed to improve outcomes, particularly in distal femur fractures.
KeywordsFemoral shaft fracture Mechanical failure Plate fixation Unreamed nail Reamed nail
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare they have no conflict of interest. There was no funding source for this study. This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. This study was IRB exempt; informed consent from individual participants was not applicable to study methods.
- 6.Bhandari M, Fong K, Sprague S, Williams D, Petrisor B (2012) Variability in the definition and perceived causes of delayed unions and nonunions: a cross-sectional, multinational survey of orthopaedic surgeons. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(15):e1091–e1096. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.01344 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Bong MR, Koval KJ, Egol KA (2006) The history of intramedullary nailing. Bull NYU Hospital Joint Dis 64(3-4):94–97Google Scholar
- 26.Papadokostakis G, Papakostidis C, Dimitriou R, Giannoudis PV (2005) The role and efficacy of retrograding nailing for the treatment of diaphyseal and distal femoral fractures: a systematic review of the literature. Injury 36(7):813–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2004.11.029 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.Tucker MC, Schwappach JR, Leighton RK, Coupe K, Ricci WM (2007) Results of femoral intramedullary nailing in patients who are obese versus those who are not obese: a prospective multicenter comparison study. J Orthop Trauma 21(8):523–529. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e31813347ac CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.Gansslen A, Gosling T, Hildebrand F, Pape HC, Oestern HJ (2014) Femoral shaft fractures in adults: treatment options and controversies. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cechoslov 81(2):108–117Google Scholar
- 33.Li AB, Zhang WJ, Guo WJ, Wang XH, Jin HM, Zhao YM (2016) Reamed versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of femoral fractures: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials. Medicine 95(29):e4248. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000004248 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 37.Wolinsky PR, Banit D, Parker RE, Shyr Y, Snapper JR, Rutherford EJ, Johnson KD (1998) Reamed intramedullary femoral nailing after induction of an "ARDS-like" state in sheep: effect on clinically applicable markers of pulmonary function. J Orthop Trauma 12(3):169–175 discussion 175-166 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Hall JA, McKee MD, Vicente MR, Morison ZA, Dehghan N, Schemitsch CE, Kreder HJ, Petrisor B, Schemitsch EH (2017) Prospective randomized clinical trial investigating the effect of the reamer-irrigator-aspirator on the volume of embolic load and respiratory function during intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures. J Orthop Trauma 31(4):200–204. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000000744 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 47.Dar GN, Tak SR, Kangoo KA, Halwai MA (2009) Bridge plate osteosynthesis using dynamic condylar screw (DCS) or retrograde intramedullary supracondylar nail (RIMSN) in the treatment of distal femoral fractures: comparison of two methods in a prospective randomized study. Turkish J Trauma Emerg Surg 15(2):148–153Google Scholar
- 51.Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma S (2016) Are locking constructs in distal femoral fractures always best? A prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing the less invasive stabilization system with the minimally invasive dynamic Condylar screw system. J Orthop Trauma 30(1):e1–e6. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000000450 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 52.Kayali C, Agus H, Turgut A (2007) Successful results of minimally invasive surgery for comminuted supracondylar femoral fractures with LISS: comparative study of multiply injured and isolated femoral fractures. J Orthop Sci 12(5):458–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-007-1156-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 56.Kao FC, Tu YK, Su JY, Hsu KY, Wu CH, Chou MC (2009) Treatment of distal femoral fracture by minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis: comparison between the dynamic condylar screw and the less invasive stabilization system. J Trauma 67(4):719–726. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e31819d9cb2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 57.Hanschen M, Aschenbrenner IM, Fehske K, Kirchhoff S, Keil L, Holzapfel BM, Winkler S, Fuechtmeier B, Neugebauer R, Luehrs S, Liener U, Biberthaler P (2014) Mono-versus polyaxial locking plates in distal femur fractures: a prospective randomized multicentre clinical trial. Int Orthop 38(4):857–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-2210-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar