All patients achieved complete union and eradication of infection. The results were evaluated according to Association for the Study of the Method of Ilizarov criteria: 83% were excellent and 17% were good in terms of bony outcomes; functional results were excellent in 50%, good in 42%, and fair in 8%. Combined Ilizarov/TSF trifocal and bifocal techniques for the treatment of segmental tibial bone defects achieve union without malalignment of the mechanical axis.

No 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.

The treatment of tibial plafond fractures requires careful management of the soft tissue envelope, reconstruction of the articular surface and stable fixation with minimal additional damage. Thirty cases of AO type 43 C tibial fractures were treated by transosseous osteosynthesis (Ilizarov technique). The external fixator constructs used were Ilizarov (Transosseous osteosynthesis: theoretical and clinical aspects of the regeneration and growth of tissue, Springer, Berlin, 1992) and Sheffield (Classification AO des fractures, Springer, Berlin, 1987) circular fixator systems. All tibial plafond fractures healed. Using radiological criteria for assessment of reduction of the articular fragments and the clinical scoring system described by Teeny and Wiss, there were excellent and good restoration of articular structure in 27 cases and good clinical results in 14. This treatment method compares well with previous published series and is to be recommended for this group of difficult fractures.

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

No abstract

This retrospective review assesses 55 tibial nonunions with bone loss to compare union achieved with combined Ilizarov and Taylor spatial frames (I–TSF) versus a conventional circular frame with the standard Ilizarov procedure. Seventeen (31 %) of the 55 nonunions were infected. Thirty patients treated with I–TSF were compared with 25 patients treated with a conventional circular frame. In the I–TSF group, an average of 7.6 cm of bone was resected and the lengthening index (treatment time in months divided by lengthening amount in centimeters) was 1.97. In the conventional circular frame group, a mean of 6.5 cm was resected and the lengthening index was 2.1. Consolidation at the docking site and at the regenerate bone occurred in 49 (89 %) of 55 cases after the first procedure. No statistically significant difference was shown between the two groups. Superiority of one modality of treatment over the other cannot be concluded from our data. Application of combined Ilizarov and Taylor spatial frames for bone transport is useful for treatment of tibial nonunion with bone loss. Level of evidence Case series, Level III.

Injudicious reaming of the tibial shaft can lead to extreme local hyperthermia,