Article

Complications of anterior subcutaneous internal fixation for unstable pelvis fractures: a multicenter study.

Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University, 4D-4 University Health Center, Detroit Receiving Hospital, Detroit, MI 48201, USA.
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (Impact Factor: 2.79). 01/2012; 470(8):2124-31. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-2233-z
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Stabilization after a pelvic fracture can be accomplished with an anterior external fixator. These devices are uncomfortable for patients and are at risk for infection and loosening, especially in obese patients. As an alternative, we recently developed an anterior subcutaneous pelvic internal fixation technique (ASPIF).
We asked if the ASPIF (1) allows for definitive anterior pelvic stabilization of unstable pelvic injuries; (2) is well tolerated by patients for mobility and comfort; and (3) has an acceptable complication rate.
We retrospectively reviewed 91 patients who incurred an unstable pelvic injury treated with an anterior internal fixator and posterior fixation at four Level I trauma centers. We assessed (1) healing by callous formation on radiographs and the ability to weightbear comfortably; (2) patient function by their ability to sit, stand, lie on their sides, and how well they tolerated the implants; and (3) complications during the observation period. The minimum followup was 6 months (mean, 15 months; range, 6-40 months).
All 91 patients were able to sit, stand, and lie on their sides. Injuries healed without loss of reduction in 89 of 91 patients. Complications included six early revisions resulting from technical error and three infections. Irritation of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve was reported in 27 of 91 patients and resolved in all but one. Heterotopic ossification around the implants, which was asymptomatic in all cases, occurred in 32 of 91 patients.
The anterior internal fixator provided high rates of union for the anterior injury in unstable pelvic fractures. Patients were able to sit, stand and ambulate without difficulty. Infections and aseptic loosening were reduced but heterotopic ossification and irritation of the LFCN are common.
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

1 Bookmark
 · 
143 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fragility fractures of the pelvic ring (FFP) are increasing in frequency and require challenging treatment. A new comprehensive classification considers both fracture morphology and degree of instability. The classification system also provides recommendations for type and invasiveness of treatment. In this article, a literature review of treatment alternatives is presented and compared with our own experiences. Whereas FFP Type I lesions can be treated conservatively, FFP Types III and IV require surgical treatment. For FFP Type II lessions, percutaneous fixation techniques should be considered after a trial of conservative treatment. FFP Type III lesions need open reduction and internal fixation, whereas FFP Type IV lesions require bilateral fixation. The respective advantages and limitations of dorsal (sacroiliac screw fixation, sacroplasty, bridging plate fixation, transsacral positioning bar placement, angular stable plate) and anterior (external fixation, angular stable plate fixation, retrograde transpubic screw fixation) pelvic fixations are described.
    Journal of Orthopaedic Science 10/2014; · 1.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose. Comparison of monoaxial and polyaxial screws with the use of subcutaneous anterior pelvic fixation. Methods. Four different groups each having 5 constructs were tested in distraction within the elastic range. Once that was completed, 3 components were tested in torsion within the elastic range, 2 to torsional failure and 3 in distraction until failure. Results. The pedicle screw systems showed higher stiffness (4.008 ± 0.113 Nmm monoaxial, 3.638 ± 0.108 Nmm Click-x; 3.634 ± 0.147 Nmm Pangea) than the exfix system (2.882 ± 0.054 Nmm) in distraction. In failure testing, monoaxial pedicle screw system was stronger (360 N) than exfixes (160 N) and polyaxial devices which failed if distracted greater than 4 cm (157 N Click-x or 138 N Pangea). The exfix had higher peak torque and torsional stiffness than all pedicle systems. In torsion, the yield strengths were the same for all constructs. Conclusion. The infix device constructed with polyaxial or monoaxial pedicle screws is stiffer than the 2 pin external fixator in distraction testing. In extreme cases, the use of reinforcement or monoaxial systems which do not fail even at 360 N is a better option. In torsional testing, the 2 pin external fixator is stiffer than the pedicle screw systems.
    Advances in orthopedics. 01/2013; 2013:683120.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pelvic fractures in the geriatric population are increasing in incidence. Those resulting from high-energy trauma result in increased mortality rates and can be challenging to manage due to polypharmacy and multiple patient comorbidities. Low energy pelvic fractures can be difficult to diagnose and exceptionally painful for patients. Injury to the posterior pelvis guides management. All patients with fragility fractures should be evaluated for osteoporosis and managed according to established guidelines.
    Current Geriatrics Reports. 06/2014; 3(2):101-108.

Full-text

Download
43 Downloads
Available from
Jun 6, 2014