A Current Concepts Update in Pilon Fracture Management

Utomo, Pamudji; Idulhaq, Mujaddid; Abdulhamid, Muhammad

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2022.9124

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(73 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies showed that infection as a consequence of complications from traumatic wounds might have devastating effects. The incidence of wound complications may be decreased by postponing the surgical procedure for 5-14 days till posttraumatic edema substantially subsided (Mair et al, 2021;Utomo et al, 2022). In the current study, the mean interval between the 2 stages was 12.3 days.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 48%

Does a two-stage approach to treat tibia pilon fractures have a favorable consequence?

Alruwaili¹,

Almarek²,

Alharbi³

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Tibial pilon fractures are generally challenging to manage. The pattern of trauma and skin status all contribute to greater management outcomes. Despite the existence of numerous treatment techniques, no one has yet evolved the perfect method. Due to extended immobility, casts are frequently increasing the probability of non-union, malunion and joint stiffness. Aim: The study intended to assess the function and quality outcomes as well as the prevalence of sequelae in those who underwent the two-staged procedure in adults. Methodology: The research employed 21 patients with pilon fractures consecutively. The whole patients who were included in the study were older than 18 years and were given two staged processes of treatments for their fracture through the period between April 2019 and March 2022 at King Saud Medical City. The AO-OTA Classification is used to categorize fractured sides. The patients were followed up at predetermined intervals of 1,2,3,4,12,18,24 and 36 months and functional outcomes were reviewed utilizing AOFAS. Results: With a mean follow-up of 24.7 months (range, 12-36), a total of 21 pilon fractures (2 type 43-A, 10 type 43-B and 9 type 43-C) were studied. The average AOFAS score was 86.91.Thirteen individuals (61.9%) showed early, late, temporary or permanent concerns. Conclusion: All varieties of Pilon fractures are best treated with a two-stage orthopedic surgery owing to the high perceived functional result and briefer length of hospitalization.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 48%

Does a two-stage approach to treat tibia pilon fractures have a favorable consequence?

Alruwaili¹,

Almarek²,

Alharbi³

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(8,9) The target of pilon fracture management, is the restoration of the normal anatomy of the articular surface and ankle joint mechanical axes through a stable fixation technique allowing early ankle joint range of motion (ROM). (10,11) Different Modalities were described for surgical management of pilon fractures; (a) primary Ilizarov fixator (IF), (b) primary open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), (c) temporary external delta frame fixator (DFF) followed by delayed ORIF. (12) Using external fixation depends on the capsuloligamentotaxis theory through tightening the soft tissues of the ankle joint but is associated with disadvantages such as patient noncompliance, pin tract infection, and development of osteomyelitis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The outcome of pilon fracture management using different fixation modalities

Yassin,

Awad,

Elrefae

et al. 2023

Aswan University Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: treatment of pilon fractures is challenging and the appropriate method is still uncertain. Purpose: detection of the best modality for the treatment of pilon fractures. Patients and Methods: This prospective study was conducted on 40 patients with pilon fractures. The patients were subdivided into 3 groups; Group A: 12 patients underwent temporary DFF followed by later ORIF, and Group B: 8 patients underwent fixation with primary IF. Group C: 20 patients underwent fixation with Primary ORIF. Results : The adequacy of anatomical reduction was significantly higher in group C than in groups A and B. The union rate was 97.5%. In group C, 1 (5%) case of late postoperative infection, 2 (10%) cases of skin breakdown, and 5 (25%) cases of ankle stiffness. AOFAS was significantly excellent in group C than in group A with no significant difference between groups A, B, and B, C. Conclusion: using the primary Ilizarov fixator is the best treatment for all open and closed type RA III pilon fractures. It is more successful than primary ORIF surgery. primary ORIF is the ideal option for closed pilon fracture RA I and II with mild oedema. Using temporary DFF followed by later ORIF is reliable technique for open fracture RA I and III.

show abstract

A Current Concepts Update in Pilon Fracture Management

Cited by 2 publications

References 43 publications

Does a two-stage approach to treat tibia pilon fractures have a favorable consequence?

Does a two-stage approach to treat tibia pilon fractures have a favorable consequence?

The outcome of pilon fracture management using different fixation modalities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About