• Title/Summary/Keyword: Additional interfragmentary fixation

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.017 seconds

Additional fixation using a metal plate with bioresorbable screws and wires for robinson type 2B clavicle fracture

  • Shin, Woo Jin;Chung, Young Woo;Kim, Seon Do;An, Ki-Yong
    • Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
    • /
    • v.23 no.4
    • /
    • pp.198-202
    • /
    • 2020
  • Simple clavicle fractures can achieve satisfactory results through conservative treatment, and the less frequency of nonunion. Non-union or malunion can occur in displaced clavicle fractures or comminuted shaft fractures. Treatment of displaced comminuted clavicle shaft fractures is performed by holding together the free fragments with interfragmentary screws or wires and fixing them to the clavicle with a plate. Therefore, we performed interfragmentary fixation using open reduction and internal fixation with bioresorbable screws (Mg-Ca alloy, Resomet bioresorbable bone screw; U&I Corp.) and bioresorbable wires (Mg-Ca alloy, Resomet bioresorbable K-wire and pin, U&I Corp.) for displaced comminuted clavicle fractures (Robinson type 2B) and additionally used a metal plate. We expected decreased irritation and infection due to absorption after surgery. We report four cases that were treated in this way.

Reduction Loss after Extension Block Kirschner Wire Fixation for Treatment of Bony Mallet Finger (골성 추지 신전제한 K 강선 고정술 시행 후 정복소실)

  • Kim, Byungsung;Nho, Jae-Hwi;Jung, Ki Jin;Yun, Keonhee;Park, Eunseok;Park, Sungyong
    • Archives of Hand and Microsurgery
    • /
    • v.23 no.4
    • /
    • pp.239-247
    • /
    • 2018
  • Purpose: We investigated occurrence of reduction loss after extension block (EB) Kirschner wire fixation or additional interfragmentary fixation (AIF) and clinical results including extension lag of the distal interphalangeal joint for treating bony mallet finger. Methods: Forty-six patients were included with a mean follow-up of 28 months (range, 12-54 months). Twenty-seven patients were treated with EB K-wire fixation (Group A) while 19 patients were treated with AIF (Group B). We checked radiologic factors, such as amount of articular involvement, volar subluxation, mallet fragment angle, reduction loss, range of motion including extension lag, and functional outcomes using Crawford's criteria. Results: Reduction loss occurred in eight patients (17%). Differences in mean extension lag, age, preoperative volar subluxation and mallet fragment angle between patients with reduction loss and those with reduction maintaining were significant. However, there were no significant differences in gender, hand dominance, amount of articular involvement, AIF, or further flexion between reduction loss and reduction maintaining. As for patterns of displacement, there was a significant relationship between gap or step-off and extension lag. Using Crawford's evaluation criteria, functional outcomes were excellent in 31, good in 10, fair in 3, and poor in 2 patients. Conclusion: Reduction loss should be careful in older age, smaller mallet fragment angle and preoperative volar subluxation.