Percutaneous versus open bone grafting in the treatment of tibial fractures: a randomized prospective trial.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To compare the results between percutaneous bone grafting and open bone grafting of tibial shaft fractures.

METHOD:

Thirty tibial fractured shafts with a delayed union or a high-energy tibial fractures which required early prophylaxis bone grafts were randomized to either percutaneous bone graft (n= 15) or open bone graft (n=15). One patient from the open bone graft group was lost to follow-up. Characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups.

RESULTS:

The mean length of follow-up was 2.5 years. Percutaneous bone graft technique was associated with significantly less blood loss (p<0.01) and shorter operative time (p<0.01). One patient in the percutaneous group had posterior tibial nerve palsy postoperatively, which recovered completely after 6 weeks. There were no differences in rate of union, healing time of the successful cases, postoperative pain and hospital stay.

CONCLUSION:

The percutaneous technique has effective results similar to the open technique in promoting union of tibial fractures. It should be considered as a useful alternative to the open bone graft technique.

• Authors: Jakravoot Maneerit, Surapoj Meknavin, Sukit Hanpanitkitkan
• Journal: Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet (J Med Assoc Thai) Vol. 87 Issue 9 Pg. 1034-40 (Sep 2004) ISSN: 0125-2208 [Print] Thailand
• PMID: 15516003 (Publication Type: Clinical Trial, Comparative Study, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial)

Topics

• Adolescent
• Adult
• Aged
• Bone Transplantation (methods)
• Female
• Fracture Healing
• Fractures, Ununited (diagnostic imaging, surgery)
• Humans
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Prospective Studies
• Radiography
• Statistics, Nonparametric
• Tibial Fractures (diagnostic imaging, surgery)
• Treatment Outcome