This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Objective: We compared the fixation endurance, bone union time, lower limb joint function and complications associated with external fixation, internal fixation and non-contact locking plate during the treatment of bone defects caused by post-traumatic osteomyelitis debridement. Methods: This retrospective study involved the clinical data for 55 cases with post-traumatic-infected bone defects of the lower extremities, who had undergone radical debridement between January 2017 and September 2020. Moreover, demographics, the time of union, bacterial culture results, complications and the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale scores were statistically compared among the three groups.Results: Differences in bone union time and recurrence rates of osteomyelitis among the three groups were not significant. In contrast, relative to the other two groups, functions after surgery were significantly high in the non-contact locking plate group. Eight patients (8/22 36.4%) in the EX group, four patients (4/13 30.8%) in the IX group and four patients (4/20 20%) in the LP group had shortened limb and deformed tibia. SAS assessment showed that patients in the LP group had the lowest moderate anxiety and severe anxiety rates.Conclusions: The non-contact locking plate technique can achieve a stable fixation with non-contact between the implant and bone tissues. Therefore, it is a viable alternative for second-stage treatment of post-traumatic tibial osteomyelitis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
He et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: