2012Journal of Orthopaedic TraumaRequires access

Do Fibula Nonunions Predict Later Tibia Nonunions?

Sangbong Ko, Sang-wook Lee

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of fibula nonunion as a method for predicting tibia nonunion in the tibiofibula shaft fracture. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: University hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 1998 to October 2008, 224 patients were enrolled. Among 224 patients, 153 patients were treated with intramedullary nail, 34 patients were treated with external fixator, 32 patients with plate and screws. The remaining 5 patients were treated nonsurgically with cast or brace. Patients followed up at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 18 months postoperatively. Multivariate analysis of the relationship between fibula and tibia union was conducted. RESULTS: Among the 224 patients, 169 patients were included in the fibula union group and 55 patients were in the fibula nonunion group. Mean age was 49 years (19-89 yrs); follow-up period was more than 18 months (18-109 mo). In the fibula union group, there were 21 patients (12.4%) with a tibia nonunion. In the fibula nonunion group, 21 patients (56.3%) had tibia nonunion. Fibula nonunion was significantly statistically associated with tibia nonunion (P = 0.002). Union time between the tibia and the fibula was statistically significant (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Fibula nonunion is a good predictor of tibia nonunion in patients with tibiofibula shaft fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of fibula nonunion as a method for predicting tibia nonunion in the tibiofibula shaft fracture. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: University hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 1998 to October 2008, 224 patients were enrolled. Among 224 patients, 153 patients were treated with intramedullary nail, 34 patients were treated with external fixator, 32 patients with plate and screws. The remaining 5 patients were treated nonsurgically with cast or brace. Patients followed up at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 18 months postoperatively. Multivariate analysis of the relationship between fibula and tibia union was conducted. RESULTS: Among the 224 patients, 169 patients were included in the fibula union group and 55 patients were in the fibula nonunion group. Mean age was 49 years (19-89 yrs); follow-up period was more than 18 months (18-109 mo). In the fibula union group, there were 21 patients (12.4%) with a tibia nonunion. In the fibula nonunion group, 21 patients (56.3%) had tibia nonunion. Fibula nonunion was significantly statistically associated with tibia nonunion (P = 0.002). Union time between the tibia and the fibula was statistically significant (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Fibula nonunion is a good predictor of tibia nonunion in patients with tibiofibula shaft fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of fibula nonunion as a method for predicting tibia nonunion in the tibiofibula shaft fracture. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: University hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 1998 to October 2008, 224 patients were enrolled. Among 224 patients, 153 patients were treated with intramedullary nail, 34 patients were treated with external fixator, 32 patients with plate and screws. The remaining 5 patients were treated nonsurgically with cast or brace. Patients followed up at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 18 months postoperatively. Multivariate analysis of the relationship between fibula and tibia union was conducted. RESULTS: Among the 224 patients, 169 patients were included in the fibula union group and 55 patients were in the fibula nonunion group. Mean age was 49 years (19-89 yrs); follow-up period was more than 18 months (18-109 mo). In the fibula union group, there were 21 patients (12.4%) with a tibia nonunion. In the fibula nonunion group, 21 patients (56.3%) had tibia nonunion. Fibula nonunion was significantly statistically associated with tibia nonunion (P = 0.002). Union time between the tibia and the fibula was statistically significant (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Fibula nonunion is a good predictor of tibia nonunion in patients with tibiofibula shaft fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Key concepts: Nonunion, Fibula, Medicine, Tibia, Intramedullary rod, Surgery, Retrospective cohort study

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Do Fibula Nonunions Predict Later Tibia Nonunions? — Research Paper | ScholarLens