External fixator versus Ilizarov external fixator for pediatric tibial shaft fractures: A retrospective comparative study.

INTRODUCTION

External fixators (EF) are widely employed for pediatric tibial shaft fractures, being a prevalent choice in clinical practice. However, they are associated with numerous complications, such as loss of reduction, delayed union, and nonunion. An alternative approach involves the use of Ilizarov external fixators (IEF), which have been documented in the treatment of tibial shaft fractures in various studies. This study endeavors to retrospectively compare the clinical outcomes of EF and IEF in the treatment of pediatric tibial shaft fractures.

METHODS

The study retrospectively examined patients aged 5-14 years who underwent treatment for tibial shaft fractures at our institute between January 2017 and January 2023. These individuals were subsequently classified into EF and IEF groups. Exclusions comprised patients presenting with pathological fracture, neuromuscular disorder, metabolic disease, prior tibial fracture or instrumentation, and polytrauma. Additionally, individuals with a follow-up duration of more than 12 months or incomplete medical records were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients were divided into two groups: the EF group, comprising 24 patients (18 males, 6 females), and the IEF group, consisting of 21 patients (17 males, 4 females). The two groups exhibited no statistically significant differences in terms of sex, age, body weight, time from injury to surgery, AO classification, or concomitant injuries. There were two cases of nonunion in the EF group. Radiological union occurred more rapidly in the IEF group (7.8 ± 0.4 weeks) than in the EF group (9.3 ± 1.1 weeks) (P < 0.05). The mean hospitalization duration differed significantly between the EF group (6.7 ± 3.4 days) and the IEF group (7.5 ± 1.1 days) (P > 0.05). The mean duration of the operative procedure significantly differed between the IEF group (147.8 ± 24.5 min) and the EF group (77.2 ± 43.9 min) (P < 0.001). A significant difference (P < 0.001) in weight-bearing time was observed between the IEF group (2.6 ± 0.7 weeks) and the EF group (9.9 ± 1.4 weeks). According to the Johner-Wruhs criteria, no significant differences were found between the two groups. A significant difference (P < 0.001) in hospitalization costs was observed between the IEF group (7848.0 ± 262.4 $) and the EF group (5403.0 ± 233.3 $).

CONCLUSION

EF is cheaper, quicker and simpler and we need more randomized controlled studies and that this is a pilot study only. Both types of surgery are good choices for children. Nevertheless, the IEF group demonstrates advantages such as early weight-bearing capability and faster fracture healing.