9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Smart implants in fracture care – only buzzword or real opportunity?

      , ,
      Injury
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Evolution of the internal fixation of long bone fractures. The scientific basis of biological internal fixation: choosing a new balance between stability and biology.

          The advent of 'biological internal fixation' is an important development in the surgical management of fractures. Locked nailing has demonstrated that flexible fixation without precise reduction results in reliable healing. While external fixators are mainly used today to provide temporary fixation in fractures after severe injury, the internal fixator offers flexible fixation, maintaining the advantages of the external fixator but allowing long-term treatment. The internal fixator resembles a plate but functions differently. It is based on pure splinting rather than compression. The resulting flexible stabilisation induces the formation of callus. With the use of locked threaded bolts, the application of the internal fixator foregoes the need of adaptation of the shape of the splint to that of the bone during surgery. Thus, it is possible to apply the internal fixator as a minimally invasive percutaneous osteosynthesis (MIPO). Minimal surgical trauma and flexible fixation allow prompt healing when the blood supply to bone is maintained or can be restored early. The scientific basis of the fixation and function of these new implants has been reviewed. The biomechanical aspects principally address the degree of instability which may be tolerated by fracture healing under different biological conditions. Fractures may heal spontaneously in spite of gross instability while minimal, even non-visible, instability may be deleterious for rigidly fixed small fracture gaps. The theory of strain offers an explanation for the maximum instability which will be tolerated and the minimal degree required for induction of callus formation. The biological aspects of damage to the blood supply, necrosis and temporary porosity explain the importance of avoiding extensive contact of the implant with bone. The phenomenon of bone loss and stress protection has a biological rather than a mechanical explanation. The same mechanism of necrosis-induced internal remodelling may explain the basic process of direct healing.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Development of the radiographic union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation.

            : The objective was to evaluate the newly developed Radiographic Union Score for Tibial fractures (RUST). Because there is no "gold standard," it was hypothesized that the RUST score would provide substantial improvements compared with previous scores presented in the literature. : Forty-five sets of X-rays of tibial shaft fractures treated with intramedullary fixation were selected. Seven orthopedic reviewers independently scored bony union using RUST. Radiographs were reassessed at 9 weeks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) measured agreement. : Overall agreement was substantial (ICC, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91). There was improved reliability among traumatologists compared with others (ICC = 0.86, 0.81, and 0.83, respectively). Overall intraobserver reliability was also substantial (ICC, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96). : The RUST score exhibits substantial improvements in reliability from previously published scores and produces equally reproducible results among a variety of orthopedic specialties and experience levels. Because no "gold standards" currently exist against which RUST can be compared, this study provides only the initial step in the score's full validation for use in a clinical context.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Incidence, Costs and Predictors of Non-Union, Delayed Union and Mal-Union Following Long Bone Fracture

              Fracture healing complications are common and result in significant healthcare burden. The aim of this study was to determine the rate, costs and predictors of two-year readmission for surgical management of healing complications (delayed, mal, non-union) following fracture of the humerus, tibia or femur. Humeral, tibial and femoral (excluding proximal) fractures registered by the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry over five years (n = 3962) were linked with population-level hospital admissions data to identify two-year readmissions for delayed, mal or non-union. Study outcomes included hospital length-of-stay (LOS) and inpatient costs. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine demographic and injury-related factors associated with admission for fracture healing complications. Of the 3886 patients linked, 8.1% were readmitted for healing complications within two years post-fracture, with non-union the most common complication and higher rates for femoral and tibial shaft fractures. Admissions for fracture healing complications incurred total costs of $4.9 million AUD, with a median LOS of two days. After adjusting for confounders, patients had higher odds of developing complications if they were older, receiving compensation or had tibial or femoral shaft fractures. Patients who are older, with tibial and femoral shaft fractures should be targeted for future research aimed at preventing complications.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Injury
                Injury
                Elsevier BV
                00201383
                September 2020
                September 2020
                : 9021
                Article
                10.1016/j.injury.2020.09.026
                32980139
                efd772bc-c90b-400c-8531-303e8f9bbf38
                © 2020

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article