Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps · 2005
Early failure of external fixation in the management of war injuries.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Clasper J C, Phillips S L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To review external fixation in the management of war injuries.
METHOD: We prospectively followed up 15 external fixators (14 patients) applied in the management of war injuries. All these patients were treated at 202 Field Hospital during the 2003 Gulf Conflict.
RESULTS: Of the 15 fixators, 13 (86.7%) required early revision or removal due to complications of the injury or the fixator. Instability was a problem with 10 fixators (67%), pin loosening was noted with 5 fixators (33%) involving twelve pins, and a significant pin track infection developed at 14 pin sites (3 fixators - 20%), which failed to resolve despite intravenous antibiotics.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a very high early complication rate of external fixation in the management of military injuries and cautions against its universal acceptance. If used, consideration must be given to the optimum time of frame application, whether at the time of initial debridement or at a later operation, and the optimal frame design, which will depend on the specific bone and fracture pattern. Pin site care must also be considered, particularly with the restrictions imposed by the military environment.
METHOD: We prospectively followed up 15 external fixators (14 patients) applied in the management of war injuries. All these patients were treated at 202 Field Hospital during the 2003 Gulf Conflict.
RESULTS: Of the 15 fixators, 13 (86.7%) required early revision or removal due to complications of the injury or the fixator. Instability was a problem with 10 fixators (67%), pin loosening was noted with 5 fixators (33%) involving twelve pins, and a significant pin track infection developed at 14 pin sites (3 fixators - 20%), which failed to resolve despite intravenous antibiotics.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a very high early complication rate of external fixation in the management of military injuries and cautions against its universal acceptance. If used, consideration must be given to the optimum time of frame application, whether at the time of initial debridement or at a later operation, and the optimal frame design, which will depend on the specific bone and fracture pattern. Pin site care must also be considered, particularly with the restrictions imposed by the military environment.