A Clinical comparison between One Plane Unilateral and One Plane bilateral Frame of External Fixation in the Treatment of Tibial Open Fractures
10.4055/jkoa.1990.25.4.1050
- Author:
Chang Mu YU
;
Taik Kun AHN
;
Jong Ho KIM
;
Taik Seon KIM
;
Jae Ik SHIM
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Fracture;
External fixation;
Unilateral;
Bilateral
- MeSH:
External Fixators;
Fractures, Open;
Hospitals, Veterans;
Humans;
Joints;
Korea;
Methods;
Wounds and Injuries
- From:The Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association
1990;25(4):1050-1056
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
External fixation was improved in its material, design and techniques as a specific method of open fracture treatment. Seventy-three, tibial open fracture, patients were treated with external fixator in Korea Veterans Hospital from January 1983 to April 1988. Each fixation method was divided into two types;one-plane unilateral frame and one-plane bilateral frame. 1. The duration of external fixation was 14.3 weeks in averge, 15.4 weeks in one plane unilateral frame and 13.2 weeks in one plane bilateral frame. 2. Secondary operation for bony union was performed 19 cases in one plane unilateral frame and 8 cases in one plane bilateral frame. 3. The union time was 23.6 weeks in average, 26.8 weeks in one plane unilateral frame and 21.4 weeks in one plane bilateral frame. 4. The common complications were delayed union and nonunion (7 cases) and pin tract infection (5 cases) in one plane unilateral frame, and pin tract infection ( 9 cases), joint stiffness (4 cases) and delayed union and nonunion (3 cases) in one plane bilateral frame. 5. External fixation gave rigid fixation and easy wound access, but did not give excellent bony union. 6. One plane bilateral frame showed more or less better result than one plane unilateral frame except some complications.
