Lateral vs. Supine Positioning for Femoral Intramedullary Nailing: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies

Femoral shaft fractures are devastating injuries that usually result from high-energy mechanisms in victims of poly-trauma. Reamed and statically locked intramedullary nailing (IMN) is the definitive treatment modality for femoral shaft fractures. Patients are most commonly positioned either supine or lateral decubitus. There remains considerable concern regarding the safety of lateral positioning in the traumatized patient, particularly in the management of a potentially difficult airway or concomitant C-spine injuries. We therefore undertook a systematic review of intraoperative positioning among patients with femoral shaft fractures following PRISMA guidelines. Title and abstract screening, full text screening, and data abstraction were all completed in duplicate. Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) scores were used to evaluate methodological quality. Results: 3018 studies were included in initial screening, with three studies ultimately meeting all inclusion criteria. A total of 1,949 patients were analyzed, with 684 patients treated in lateral positioning and 1,215 patients in supine positioning. Level of agreement was strong across title (κ = 0.872; 95% CI 0.794 to 0.951), abstract (κ = 0.801; 95% CI 0.585 to 1.000), and full-text screening (κ = 1.000). The consensus mean MINORS score of included studies was 17.67 ± 0.58, indicating good to high quality of evidence. Neither patient positioning offered obvious benefits such as fewer complications or shorter operative time. Furthermore, length of admission, days in ICU or on ventilator, and overall morbidity were not found to be significantly different between positions. Lateral positioning for intramedullary nailing of mid-shaft femur fractures appears to be a safe alternative to the standard supine positioning. There is a lack of both prospective and retrospective comparative studies investigating functional clinical outcomes in the literature.

Download Full-text

A Comparative Study between Intramedullary Fixation and External Fixation of Femur Shaft Fracture in Polytrauma Patients in Jharkhand

Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare ◽

10.18410/jebmh/2021/536 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (32) ◽

pp. 2933-2937

Author(s):

Supantha Panja

Keyword(s):

Comparative Study ◽

External Fixation ◽

Intramedullary Nailing ◽

Complication Rate ◽

Gold Standard ◽

Femoral Shaft ◽

High Energy ◽

Definitive Treatment ◽

Femoral Shaft Fractures ◽

Shaft Fractures

BACKGROUND Femoral shaft fractures result from high energy trauma and maybe associated with life threatening conditions. Typical in younger people is associated with polytrauma. Though intramedullary nailing (IMN) is the gold standard option of treatment, external fixation (EF) can also be used temporarily or definitively, in such cases. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome of these two procedures. METHODS This prospective comparative study was conducted at our centre over a period of 6 years. Age, sex of the patients, laterality, type of fracture with mean follow up, union time, and complications such as delayed union, angular deformities, and limb length discrepancies were tabulated and compared. RESULTS There were more cases of open fractures in the EF group compared to IMN group. In the IMN group the average surgery duration was 95.76 minutes and it was 69.4 minutes in the EF group. The average time for bone union was 25.66 weeks in IMF group and 28.22 weeks in EF group. Complication rate was higher in EF group with 11 complications (7 major & 4 minor) compared to IMN group with only 6 cases presenting with complications (3 each of major & minor). CONCLUSIONS Though IMN is the gold standard in treatment of femoral shaft fractures, EF in polytrauma is an alternative method for definitive fracture stabilization, with minimal additional operative trauma and an acceptable complication rate. KEYWORDS Femoral Shaft Fractures, Intramedullary Nailing, External Fixation, Polytrauma, Definitive Treatment

Download Full-text

Definitive Treatment of Femoral Shaft Fractures: Comparison between Anterograde Intramedullary Nailing and Monoaxial External Fixation

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm8081119 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (8) ◽

pp. 1119 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Gianluca Testa ◽

Andrea Vescio ◽

Domenico Costantino Aloj ◽

Giacomo Papotto ◽

Luigi Ferrarotto ◽

...

Keyword(s):

External Fixation ◽

Intramedullary Nailing ◽

Gold Standard ◽

Femoral Shaft ◽

Bone Union ◽

Definitive Treatment ◽

Ao Classification ◽

Femoral Shaft Fractures ◽

Shaft Fractures

Background: Femoral shaft fractures result from high-energy trauma. Despite intramedullary nailing (IMN) representing the gold standard option of treatment, external fixation (EF) can be used temporarily for damage control or definitively. The purpose of this study is to compare two different options, anterograde IMN and monoaxial EF, for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures. Methods: Between January 2005 and December 2014, patients with femoral shaft fractures operated on in two centers were retrospectively evaluated and divided into two groups: the IMN group (n = 74), and the EF group (n = 73). For each group, sex; laterality; age; and AO classification type mean follow-up, mean union time, and complications were reported. Results: Both groups were found to have no statistical differences (p > 0.05) in sex, laterality, age, and AO classification types. In the IMN group the average surgery duration was 79.7 minutes (range 45–130). The average time for bone union was 26.9 weeks. Major complications occurred in 4 (5.4%) patients. In the EF group the average follow-up duration was 59.8 months (range 28–160). The average time for bone union was 24.0 weeks. Major complications occurred in 16 (21.9%) patients. Conclusions: IMN is the gold standard for definitive treatment of femoral shaft fractures. In patients with severe associated injuries, EF should be a good alternative.

Download Full-text