Carbon-Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Intramedullary Nails Perform Poorly in Long-Bone Surgery.
carbon fiber reinforced
deformity
intramedullary nailing
nonunion
polymer
Journal
HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery
ISSN: 1556-3316
Titre abrégé: HSS J
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101273938
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
22
04
2018
accepted:
09
09
2018
entrez:
23
7
2019
pubmed:
23
7
2019
medline:
23
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Carbon-fiber-reinforced (CFR) polymer has produced great excitement in the orthopedic community as a material that will reduce bone healing times and provide improved image quality. Osteotomy stabilized with an intramedullary (IM) nail has become a common technique to address post-traumatic malalignment of the lower extremity. The following questions were asked: (1) Did CFR polymer nails provide a rapid healing time after long bone osteotomy, shortening, or fracture? (2) Did the CFR polymer nails produce unexpected complications? A retrospective review was conducted in patients who received CFR polymer IM nails for various indications, from April 2016 to January 2017 in a deformity and trauma practice, using patient charts and radiographs. The primary outcomes were time to union and incidence of complications including nonunion, hardware failure, neurovascular injury, venous thromboembolism, and infection. Twelve patients who received CFR polymer IM nails in 16 limbs for various indications were included in our analysis. Patients were followed for an average of 16.9 months. Eleven limbs underwent realignment and were corrected an average of 23° through a diaphyseal osteotomy. Three limbs underwent limb-shortening surgery, an average of 25 mm, through an open, excisional osteotomy of the femoral diaphysis. Two diaphyseal, closed tibia fractures underwent routine IM nailing. The average time to union was 107.6 days, which included all limbs that united (11/16, 69%). Nonunion occurred in 5/16 (31%) of limbs. Complications recorded included nonunion and hardware failure, most of which resulted in unplanned surgery. The use of the CFR polymer IM nail was associated with loss of fixation and nonunion after surgeries that have traditionally healed uneventfully. The increased elasticity of the CFR polymer allows for more motion at the osteotomy/fracture interface than the stiffer titanium counterparts, exposing long-bone osteotomies to delayed union and nonunion, a finding seen with CFR polymer plates. The overwhelmingly poor early results of this device applied to a long-bone deformity practice have led these authors to abandon the use of this implant.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Carbon-fiber-reinforced (CFR) polymer has produced great excitement in the orthopedic community as a material that will reduce bone healing times and provide improved image quality. Osteotomy stabilized with an intramedullary (IM) nail has become a common technique to address post-traumatic malalignment of the lower extremity.
PURPOSES/QUESTIONS
OBJECTIVE
The following questions were asked: (1) Did CFR polymer nails provide a rapid healing time after long bone osteotomy, shortening, or fracture? (2) Did the CFR polymer nails produce unexpected complications?
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective review was conducted in patients who received CFR polymer IM nails for various indications, from April 2016 to January 2017 in a deformity and trauma practice, using patient charts and radiographs. The primary outcomes were time to union and incidence of complications including nonunion, hardware failure, neurovascular injury, venous thromboembolism, and infection.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twelve patients who received CFR polymer IM nails in 16 limbs for various indications were included in our analysis. Patients were followed for an average of 16.9 months. Eleven limbs underwent realignment and were corrected an average of 23° through a diaphyseal osteotomy. Three limbs underwent limb-shortening surgery, an average of 25 mm, through an open, excisional osteotomy of the femoral diaphysis. Two diaphyseal, closed tibia fractures underwent routine IM nailing. The average time to union was 107.6 days, which included all limbs that united (11/16, 69%). Nonunion occurred in 5/16 (31%) of limbs. Complications recorded included nonunion and hardware failure, most of which resulted in unplanned surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The use of the CFR polymer IM nail was associated with loss of fixation and nonunion after surgeries that have traditionally healed uneventfully. The increased elasticity of the CFR polymer allows for more motion at the osteotomy/fracture interface than the stiffer titanium counterparts, exposing long-bone osteotomies to delayed union and nonunion, a finding seen with CFR polymer plates. The overwhelmingly poor early results of this device applied to a long-bone deformity practice have led these authors to abandon the use of this implant.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31327940
doi: 10.1007/s11420-018-9634-4
pii: 9634
pmc: PMC6609670
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
109-114Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of InterestJason Teplensky, BS, declares that he has no conflicts of interest. Austin T. Fragomen, MD, reports being a paid consultant for Smith & Nephew, NuVasive, Synthes, and Globus. S. Robert Rozbruch, MD, reports being a paid consultant for Smith & Nephew, Stryker, and NuVasive.
Références
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Jul;85(7):1351-64
pubmed: 12851363
J Pediatr Orthop. 2004 Jul-Aug;24(4):392-6
pubmed: 15205621
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 Nov;86(8):1182-6
pubmed: 15568534
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992 Jan;74(1):88-92
pubmed: 1732273
Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2009 Dec;4(3):129-33
pubmed: 19941168
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan 18;1:CD008241
pubmed: 22258982
Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2014 Apr;9(1):5-12
pubmed: 24338661
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015 Jul;23(7):2032-40
pubmed: 24562634
Knee Surg Relat Res. 2014 Jun;26(2):88-96
pubmed: 24944974
Orthopedics. 2014 Dec;37(12):825-30
pubmed: 25437074
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Aug;24(8):1282-8
pubmed: 25704209
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989 Dec;71(10):1440-7
pubmed: 2592385
Injury. 2016 Mar;47(3):617-24
pubmed: 26804939
J Exp Orthop. 2015 Dec;2(1):14
pubmed: 26914882
HSS J. 2018 Oct;14(3):258-265
pubmed: 30258330
J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1993 Oct;38(5):302-6
pubmed: 7506784
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995 Feb;77(2):278-92
pubmed: 7844137
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993 Feb;75(2):196-201
pubmed: 8423180
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993 Feb;(287):245-51
pubmed: 8448951
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997 Jan;(334):207-14
pubmed: 9005915