Aim: Although nonunions are among the most common complications after long-bone fracture fixation, the definition of fracture nonunion remains controversial and varies widely. The aim of this study was to identify the definitions and diagnostic criteria used in the scientific literature to describe nonunions after long-bone fractures. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. Prospective clinical studies, in which adult long-bone fracture nonunions were investigated as main subject, were included in this analysis. Data on nonunion definitions described in each study were extracted and collected in a database. Results: Although 148 studies met the inclusion criteria, only 50% (74/148) provided a definition for their main study subject. Nonunion was defined in these studies based on time-related criteria in 85% (63/74), on radiographic criteria in 62% (46/74), and on clinical criteria in 45% (33/74). A combination of clinical, radiographic and time-related criteria for definition was found in 38% (28/74). The time interval between fracture and the time point when authors defined an unhealed fracture as a nonunion showed considerable heterogeneity, ranging from three to twelve months. Conclusion:In the current orthopaedic literature, we found a lack of consensus with regard to the definition of long-bone nonunions. Without valid and reliable definition criteria for nonunion, standardization of diagnostic and treatment algorithms as well as the comparison of clinical studies remains problematic. The lack of a clear definition emphasizes the need for a consensus-based approach to the diagnosis of fracture nonunion centred on clinical, radiographical and time-related criteria.
Background Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) has been reported to be superior to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in the treatment of different long bone fractures. Nevertheless, in distal fibula fractures, the evidence of MIPO remains scarce. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of the minimally invasive techniques applied to the distal fibula with open reduction and internal fixation within a 12 months follow-up. Methods A consecutive series of patients who underwent surgery using either ORIF or MIPO for the treatment of distal fibula fractures between 2010 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. All distal fibular fractures requiring an operative treatment (Danis-Weber type B ≙ AO type 44 B1, 2, 3 and Danis-Weber type C ≙ AO type 44 C1, 2) were included (ORIF n = 35, MIPO n = 35). Patients were assessed for postoperative pain using a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain (ranging from 0 to 10) and classified into 4 groups: “no pain” for VAS = 0, “low” for VAS = 1–3, “moderate” for VAS = 3–5, and “severe” for VAS = 5–10. In addition, complications of postoperative fracture-related infection, wound healing disorders, vascular and nerve injury and development of nonunion were evaluated and analyzed. Radiologic outcome measures assessing the talocrural angle, lateral and medial clear space, tibiofibular overlap, and talar tilt angle were evaluated postoperatively. Results The overall complication rate showed to be lower in the MIPO group compared to the ORIF group (14% vs. 37%, p = 0.029). Even though not statistically significant, specific surgery-related complications such as skin necrosis (3% vs. 9%, p = 0.275), nonunion (0% vs. 6%, p = 0.139), infections and wound healing disorders (9% vs. 20%, p = 0.141), as well as postoperative pain (17% vs. 26%, p = 0.5) were found more frequently in the ORIF group. The tibiofibular overlap demonstrated to be significantly lower in the ORIF group (3.3 mm vs. 2.7 mm, p = 0.033). The talocrural angle, talar tilt angle, and lateral and medial clear space showed to be equivalent in both groups. Conclusion In this retrospective single-center consecutive series, MIPO was superior to ORIF in the surgical treatment of distal fibula fractures with respect to the overall complication rate. Trial registration EKNZ Project-ID: 2019-02310, registered on the 20th of December 2019 with swissethics
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.