LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS

Mohamed Arafa

doi:10.1302/1358-992X.2021.2.080

Article alerts Social media

Current issue

Research

LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS

The British Orthopaedic Research Society (BORS) Annual Meeting 2020, held online, 7–8 September 2020.

Mohamed Arafa

LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS

Arafa M. LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS. Orthop Procs. 2021;103-B(SUPP_2):80-80. doi:10.1302/1358-992X.2021.2.080

Arafa, Mohamed. “LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS.” Orthopaedic Proceedings, vol. 103-B, no. SUPP_2, 2021, pp. 80-80., https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.2021.2.080

Arafa, M. (2021). LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS. Orthopaedic Proceedings, 103-B(SUPP_2), 80-80. https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.2021.2.080

Arafa, M. (2021) “LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS.” Orthopaedic Proceedings, 103-B(SUPP_2), pp. 80-80. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.2021.2.080

Arafa, Mohamed. “LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS.” Orthopaedic Proceedings 103-B, no. SUPP_2 (2021): 80-80. https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.2021.2.080

Arafa M. LESS INVASIVE STABILIZATION SYSTEM VERSUS OPEN REDUCTION AND INTERNAL FIXATION OF CLOSED PROXIMAL TIBIAL FRACTURES IN ADULTS. Orthop Procs. 2021 Mar 1;103-B(SUPP_2):80-80. https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.2021.2.080

Copy to clipboard

BibTeX

EndNote

RIS

Abstract

Objective

To compare the clinical and radiological outcome between less invasive stabilization system (LISS, Synthes, Paoli, PA.) and open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) for the treatment of extraarticular proximal tibia fractures through the lateral approach.

Background

Proximal tibial fractures present a difficult treatment challenge with historically high complication rates. ORIF has been in vogue for long time with good outcome. But these are associated with problems especially overlying skin conditions, delayed recovery and rehabilitation with limited functional outcome. LISS is an emerging procedure for the treatment of proximal tibial fractures. It preserves soft tissue and the periosteal circulation, which promotes fracture healing.

Patients and methods

Thirty patients with closed proximal tibial fractures were included in this study. They were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group I (n=15) patients were treated by LISS and group II (n=15) by ORIF. Major characteristics of the two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, mode of injury, fracture location, and associated injuries. All patients were followed up at least 6 months.

Results

In each group, 12 patients were united, 2 patients were non- united and one patient showed delayed union. The mean operative time in LISS patients was 79.3 min, while in ORIF patients; it was 122 min. All patients of LISS group were exposed to radiation, while only 40% of ORIF group were exposed. The mean time of union of LISS patients was 10.87weeks. While in ORIF patients, the mean time of union was 21.13 weeks. There was no significant difference between both groups regarding the postoperative complications. Functional outcome was satisfactory in both groups.

Conclusion

LISS achieves comparable results with ORIF in extraarticular fractures of the proximal tibia. Although LISS potentially has the radiation hazard, it reduces the perioperative complications with a shortened operation time and minimal soft tissue dissection.

Declaration of Interest

(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.