Abstract
Introduction
Temporary spanning fixation aims to provide bony stability whilst allowing access and resuscitation of traumatised soft-tissues. Conventional monolateral fixators are prone to half-pin morbidity in feet, variation in construct stability and limited weight-bearing potential. This study compares traditional delta-frame fixators to a circular trauma frame; a virtual tibial ring block spanned onto a fine-wire foot ring fixation.
Materials and Methods
The two cohorts were compared for demographics and fracture patterns. The quality of initial reduction and the maintenance of reduction until definitive surgery was assessed by two authors and categorised into four domains. Secondary measures included fixator costs, time to definitive surgery and complications.
Results
Fifty-six delta-frames and 48 circular fixators were statistically matched for demographics and fracture pattern. Good or excellent initial reduction was achieved in 51 (91%) delta-frames and 48 (100%) circular fixators (p=0.022). Loss of reduction was observed in 15 (27%) delta-frames and 3 (6%) circular fixators (p<0.001). Post-fixator dislocation occurred in five (9%) delta-frames and one (2%) circular fixator (p=0.147). Duration in spanned fixation was equivalent (11.5 and 11.6 days respectively, p=0.211). Three (5%) delta-frames and 12 (25%) circular fixators were used as definitive fixation. The mean hardware cost was £3,116 for delta-frames and £2,712 for circular fixators.
Conclusions
Temporary circular fixation offers statistically superior intra-operative reduction and maintenance of reduction, facilitates weight-bearing and provides more opportunity as the definitive fixation. Circular fixation hardware proved to be less expensive and protected against further scheduled and unscheduled operations.
