Article

Reaming Does Not Add Significant Time to Intramedullary Nailing of Diaphyseal Fractures of the Tibia and Femur

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, Missouri 65212, USA.
The Journal of trauma (Impact Factor: 2.96). 10/2009; 67(4):727-34. DOI: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31819db55c
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Reamed intramedullary nailing is the current gold standard for the treatment of diaphyseal fractures of the femur and tibia. Current concepts of orthopedic damage control surgery for patients with multiple injuries have placed an emphasis on appropriate surgical timing, limiting blood loss, and the duration of the initial operative procedure(s). Proponents of unreamed nailing have stated that reaming places polytraumatized patients "at risk," in part because it adds to the length of the surgical procedure and may exacerbate the severity of a patient's pulmonary injury. The purpose of this study was to determine how many minutes reaming actually takes and what percentage of operative time reaming comprises during intramedullary nailing of femoral and tibial shaft fractures.
Intraoperative timing data were collected prospectively on a total of 52 patients with 54 fractures (21 femoral and 33 tibial) who underwent reamed intramedullary nailing of acute closed or open femoral or tibial shaft fractures over a 10-month period. Total operating room, surgical, and reaming times were collected.
The average reaming time for femur and tibia fractures was 6.9 minutes and 7 minutes, respectively. On average, reaming accounted for 4.9% of the surgical time and 3.2% of the total operating room time for femur fractures and 4.9% of the surgical time and 3.4% of the total operating room for tibia fractures.
Our results show that reaming comprises a small percentage of the operative time and the total time a patient spends in the operating room.

0 Followers
 · 
89 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fractures of femoral fracture are among the most common fractures encountered in orthopedic practice. Intramedullary nailing is the treatment choice for femoral shaft fractures in adults. The objective of this article is to determine the effects of reamed intramedullary nailing versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for fracture of femoral shaft in adults. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (October 2010), PubMed (October 2010) and EMBASE (October 2010) were searched. Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled clinical trials were included. After independent study selection by two authors, data were collected and extracted independently. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed. Pooling of data was undertaken where appropriate. Seven trials with 952 patients (965 fractures) were included. Compared with unreamed nailing, reamed nailing was significantly lower reoperation rate (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.11-0.59, P = 0.002), lower non-union rate (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05-0.77, P = 0.02) and lower delay union rate(RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14-0.64, P = 0.002). There was no significant difference when comparing reamed nailing with unreamed nailing for implant failure (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16-1.61, P = 0.25), mortality(RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.19-4.58, P = 0.94) and acute respiratory distress syndrome(RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.37-6.29, P = 0.55). Unreamed nailing was significantly less blood loss (SMD 119.23, 95% CI 59.04-180.43, P = 0.0001). Reamed intramedullary nailing has better treatment effects than unreamed intramedullary nailing for shaft fracture of femur in adults.
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 05/2011; 131(10):1445-52. DOI:10.1007/s00402-011-1311-8 · 1.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: This level II prospective study investigates patient and fracture-related factors likely to affect closed reduction time in the surgical treatment of femur fractures, and the effect these factors have on closed reduction time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-nine diaphyseal femur fractures of 75 patients were included in the present study. All fractures were treated with indirect closed reduction by manual traction using antegrade nailing and static, locked, reamed intramedullary nails. The three variables considered to influence the duration of closed reduction, that is, the type of fracture, BMI, and the preoperative period (time from injury to surgery), were evaluated either separately or in a combination of two or three of the variables. Their influence on the closed reduction time was analyzed and evaluated. RESULTS: In this study according to the outcomes, a preoperative period ≤24 h had a significant effect in shortening the reduction time. The reduction time was not significantly affected by the type of fracture. The reduction time was prolonged in overweight patients, but the difference was not significant. When the three variables BMI, preoperative period, and fracture types were evaluated together, the common effect of these three variables was not significant. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, based on these results, we think that closed reduction should certainly be aimed for in femur fractures in which intramedullary nailing is planned. Also, early surgical intervention appears to have a beneficial effect on the success of closed reduction.
    European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology 10/2012; DOI:10.1007/s00590-012-1107-8 · 0.18 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stabilization of fractures with an intramedullary nail is a widespread technique in the treatment of femoral shaft fractures in adults; however, to ream or not to ream is still being debated. The primary objective of this study was to determine clinical results following unreamed versus ream intramedullary nailing of femoral fractures. Between January 2008 and August 2009, 50 patients with femoral shaft fractures were treated with unreamed or reamed femoral nails in our clinic. From this prospective single centre study, 16 patients were excluded due to insufficient follow-up data. According to the AO classification, fractures in this study were either type A or B. Dynamic proximal locking was performed in all cases. The remaining 34 patients were divided into two groups of 17 with ream or unream nailing. During and after the operation, we evaluated some variables in whole series. After statistical analyzes, we found that there were no differences in radiologic union time (P = 1) or full weight bearing time (P = 0.73) between ream and unream nailing. Nail breakage or iatrogenic fractures during nail insertion did not occur and we did not have any fat emboli in both groups but one secondary loss of reduction occurred in the unream group. Superficial infection after the operation was seen in one case which was treated successfully with antibiotics. In the ream group surgical time was about thirty minutes longer and differences were significant (P = 0.000). Patients had to pay more for ream nailing but the difference was not significant. We found no statistical difference between union time with or without reaming; on the other hand, there was significant increased operation length, blood loss and systemic changes in BP or So2 in the ream group versus the unream group. We advocate that unream nailing in traumatic femoral shaft fractures is a simple, safe and effective procedure with significant advantages, especially in multitrauma patients.
    05/2013; 15(5):432-435. DOI:10.5812/ircmj.4631
Show more