Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Outcome of limb reconstruction system in open tibial diaphyseal fractures

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Management of open tibial diaphyseal fractures with bone loss is a matter of debate. The treatment options range from external fixators, nailing, ring fixators or grafting with or without plastic reconstruction. All the procedures have their own set of complications, like acute docking problems, shortening, difficulty in soft tissue management, chronic infection, increased morbidity, multiple surgeries, longer hospital stay, mal union, nonunion and higher patient dissatisfaction. We evaluated the outcome of the limb reconstruction system (LRS) in the treatment of open fractures of tibial diaphysis with bone loss as a definative mode of treatment to achieve union, as well as limb lengthening, simultaneously.

Materials and Methods: Thirty open fractures of tibial diaphysis with bone loss of at least 4 cm or more with a mean age 32.5 years were treated by using the LRS after debridement. Distraction osteogenesis at rate of 1 mm/day was done away from the fracture site to maintain the limb length. On the approximation of fracture ends, the dynamized LRS was left for further 15-20 weeks and patient was mobilized with weight bearing to achieve union. Functional assessment was done by Association for the Study and Application of the Methods of Illizarov (ASAMI) criteria.

Results: Mean followup period was 15 months. The mean bone loss was 5.5 cm (range 4–9 cm). The mean duration of bone transport was 13 weeks (range 8–30 weeks) with a mean time for LRS in place was 44 weeks (range 24–51 weeks). The mean implant index was 56.4 days/cm. Mean union time was 52 weeks (range 31–60 weeks) with mean union index of 74.5 days/cm. Bony results as per the ASAMI scoring were excellent in 76% (19/25), good in 12% (3/25) and fair in 4% (1/25) with union in all except 2 patients, which showed poor results (8%) with only 2 patients having leg length discrepancy more than 2.5 cm. Functional results were excellent in 84% (21/25), good in 8% (2/25), fair in 8% (2/25). Pin tract infection was seen in 5 cases, out of which 4 being superficial, which healed to dressings and antibiotics. One patient had a deep infection which required frame removal.

Conclusion: Limb reconstruction system proved to be an effective modality of treatment in cases of open fractures of the tibia with bone loss as definite modality of treatment for damage control as well as for achieving union and lengthening, simultaneously, with the advantage of early union with attainment of limb length, simple surgical technique, minimal invasive, high patient compliance, easy wound management, lesser hospitalization and the lower rate of complications like infection, deformity or shortening.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Watson JT, Anders M, Moed BR. Management strategies for bone loss in tibial shaft fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995;315:138–52.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Maurer RC, Dillin L. Multistaged surgical management of posttraumatic segmental tibial bone loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987;216:162–70.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Keating JF, Simpson AH, Robinson CM. The management of fractures with bone loss. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87:142–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cole JD, Ansel LJ, Schwartzberg R. A sequential protocol for management of severe open tibial fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995;315:84–103.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Krappinger D, Irenberger A, Zegg M, Huber B. Treatment of large posttraumatic tibial bone defects using the Ilizarov method: A subjective outcome assessment. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2013;133:789–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pavolini B, Maritato M, Turelli L, D’Arienzo M. The Ilizarov fixator in trauma: A 10-year experience. J Orthop Sci 2000;5:108–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. García-Cimbrelo E, Olsen B, Ruiz-Yagüe M, Fernandez-Baíllo N, Munuera-Martínez L. Ilizarov technique. Results and difficulties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992;283:116–23.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Agarwal S, Agarwal R, Jain UK, Chandra R. Management of soft-tissue problems in leg trauma in conjunction with application of the Ilizarov fixator assembly. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;107:1732–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Paley D. Problems, obstacles, and complications of limb lengthening by the Ilizarov technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990;250:81–104.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rajasekaran S, Naresh Babu J, Dheenadhayalan J, Shetty AP, Sundararajan SR, Kumar M, et al. A score for predicting salvage and outcome in Gustilo type-IIIA and type-IIIB open tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006;88:1351–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Paley D, Catagni MA, Argnani F, Villa A, Benedetti GB, Cattaneo R. Ilizarov treatment of tibial nonunions with bone loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;241:146–65.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Korkala O, Antti-Poika I, Karaharju EO. External fixation in open fractures of leg. Analysis of traps and complications of the method. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 1987;73:637–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tropet Y, Garbuio P, Obert L, Jeunet L, Elias B. One-stage emergency treatment of open grade IIIB tibial shaft fractures with bone loss. Ann Plast Surg 2001;46:113–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Blachut PA, Meek RN, O’Brien PJ. External fixation and delayed intramedullary nailing of open fractures of the tibial shaft. A sequential protocol. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990;72:729–35.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Reuss BL, Cole JD. Effect of delayed treatment on open tibial shaft fractures. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2007;36:215–20.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Maurer DJ, Merkow RL, Gustilo RB. Infection after intramedullary nailing of severe open tibial fractures initially treated with external fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989;71:835–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Do H, Sadove RC. The Ilizarov method (callus distraction) in the treatment of open fractures of the tibia. J Ky Med Assoc 1992;90:74–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hoffman WR, Henry SL, Seligson D. A preliminary experience: The Ilizarov external fixator. J Ky Med Assoc 1990;88:229–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zheng Q, Wu HB, Li H, Pan ZJ. Tibial infected nonunion treated by internal bone transport using the mono-lateral external fixation. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 2006;44:544–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Raschke MJ, Mann JW, Oedekoven G, Claudi BF. Segmental transport after unreamed intramedullary nailing. Preliminary report of a “Monorail” system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992;282:233–40.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hessmann M, Rommens PM, Hainson K. Callus distraction of femur and tibia. Experiences with the mono-fixateur–indications for procedural changes. Unfallchirurg 1998;101:370–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Noonan KJ, Leyes M, Forriol F, Cañadell J. Distraction osteogenesis of the lower extremity with use of monolateral external fixation. A study of two hundred and sixty-one femora and tibiae. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998;80:793–806.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Paley D. The ilizarov corticotomy. Tech orthop. 1990:5:4;41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kulkarni M. Operative techniques of ilizarov method. In: Kulkarani GS, editor. Textbook of Orthopaedics and Trauma. 1st ed. Jaypee. 1999. pp. 1510–22.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Eralp L, Kocaoglu M, Ozkan K, Turker M. A comparison of two osteotomy techniques of tibial lengthening. Arch orthop trauma surg. 2004;124;5;298–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. McKee MD, Yoo DJ, Zdero R, Dupere M, Wild L, Schemitsch EH, et al. Combined single-stage osseous and soft tissue reconstruction of the tibia with the Ilizarov method and tissue transfer. J Orthop Trauma 2008;22:183–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Robert Rozbruch S, Weitzman AM, Tracey Watson J, Freudigman P, Katz HV, Ilizarov S. Simultaneous treatment of tibial bone and soft-tissue defects with the Ilizarov method. J Orthop Trauma 2006;20:197–205.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sen C, Kocaoglu M, Eralp L, Gulsen M, Cinar M. Bifocal compression-distraction in the acute treatment of grade III open tibia fractures with bone and soft-tissue loss: A report of 24 cases. J Orthop Trauma 2004;18:150–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mekhail AO, Abraham E, Gruber B, Gonzalez M. Bone transport in the management of posttraumatic bone defects in the lower extremity. J Trauma 2004;56:368–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Donnan LT, Saleh M, Rigby AS, McAndrew A. Radiographic assessment of bone formation in tibia during distraction osteogenesis. J Pediatr Orthop 2002;22:645–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bumbasirevic M, Tomic S, Lesic A, Milosevic I, Atkinson HD. War-related infected tibial nonunion with bone and soft-tissue loss treated with bone transport using the Ilizarov method. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2010;130:739–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wani N, Baba A, Kangoo K, Mir M. Role of early Ilizarov ring fixator in the definitive management of type II, IIIA and IIIB open tibial shaft fractures. Int Orthop 2011;35:915–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Atef A, El-Tantawy A. Management of open infected comminuted tibial fractures using Ilizarov concept. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2014;24:403–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saurabh Jain.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ajmera, A., Verma, A., Agrawal, M. et al. Outcome of limb reconstruction system in open tibial diaphyseal fractures. IJOO 49, 429–435 (2015). https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.159638

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.159638

Key words

MeSH terms

Navigation