Background: Open fractures of the lower limb long bones continue to be challenging for orthopaedic surgeons and the treatment option ranges from external xators, nailing, ring xators, bone grafting, soft tissue reconstruction. Limb reconstruction system (LRS) provides rigid xation for fracture fragment and it's easy to treat soft tissue injury and it provides early mobilisation to achieve pre-injury status & activities. To assess the functional and radiological outcome of lim Aim: b reconstruction system in lower limb compound fractures. A prospective study of 20 cases with open fractures of lower limb long bones wi Materials And Methods: th age group between 20 to 60 years of both the sexes. Closed fractures and fractures treated conservatively were excluded from the study. Clinical and radiological evaluations were done at specic interval and patients were asked to weight bear to achieve early union. Function outcome was assessed by Association for the study and application of methods of Illizarov (ASAMI) criteria. The Results: mean age of the patients in this study was 36.85 years with male predominance. Majority of the patients were injured by Road trafc accident and the mean union time of fracture was 29.2 weeks (Ranges 20- 32 weeks). Bone results as per ASAMI scoring were Excellent in 90% (18 /20), good in 5% (1 /20) and poor in 5% (1/20). Functional results as per ASAMI scoring were excellent in 80% (16/20), good in 15% (3/20) and fair in 5% (1/20). The most common complication encountered was pin tract infection which occurred in 3 cases and treated with dressing and antibiotics. n Conclusio : LRS found to be simple and effective mode of treatment in case of open fractures of long bone. It is denitive single stage procedure with advantage of early union with early mobilisation, simple surgical technique, easy wound management which avoids multiple surgeries and has high patient compliance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Agrawal et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: