Dynamizations and Exchanges

Success Rates and Indications

Jody Litrenta, Paul Tornetta, Heather Vallier, Reza Firoozabadi, Ross Leighton, Kenneth Egol, Christiane Kruppa, Clifford B. Jones, Cory Collinge, Mohit Bhandari, Emil Schemitsch, David Sanders, Brian Mullis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To characterize the timing, indications, and "success rates of secondary interventions, dynamization and exchange nailing, in a large series of tibial nonunions" (dynamization and exchange nailing are types of secondary interventions). Setting: Retrospective multicenter analysis from level 1 trauma hospitals. Patients: A total of 194 tibia fractures that underwent dynamization or exchange nailing for delayed/nonunion. Intervention: Records and radiographs to characterize demographic data, fracture type, and cortical contact after tibial nailing were gathered. The radiographic union score for tibias (RUST) and the timing of intervention and time to union were calculated. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was success of either intervention, defined as achieving union, with the need for further intervention defining failure. Other outcomes included RUST scores at intervention and union, and timing to intervention and union for both techniques. Two-tailed t tests and Fisher exact with P set at

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)569-573
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Volume29
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2015

Fingerprint

Tibia
Demography
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Wounds and Injuries

Keywords

  • dynamization
  • exchange nail
  • tibial delayed union
  • tibial nonunion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Litrenta, J., Tornetta, P., Vallier, H., Firoozabadi, R., Leighton, R., Egol, K., ... Mullis, B. (2015). Dynamizations and Exchanges: Success Rates and Indications. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 29(12), 569-573. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000000311

Dynamizations and Exchanges : Success Rates and Indications. / Litrenta, Jody; Tornetta, Paul; Vallier, Heather; Firoozabadi, Reza; Leighton, Ross; Egol, Kenneth; Kruppa, Christiane; Jones, Clifford B.; Collinge, Cory; Bhandari, Mohit; Schemitsch, Emil; Sanders, David; Mullis, Brian.

In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, Vol. 29, No. 12, 01.12.2015, p. 569-573.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Litrenta, J, Tornetta, P, Vallier, H, Firoozabadi, R, Leighton, R, Egol, K, Kruppa, C, Jones, CB, Collinge, C, Bhandari, M, Schemitsch, E, Sanders, D & Mullis, B 2015, 'Dynamizations and Exchanges: Success Rates and Indications', Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 569-573. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000000311
Litrenta J, Tornetta P, Vallier H, Firoozabadi R, Leighton R, Egol K et al. Dynamizations and Exchanges: Success Rates and Indications. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2015 Dec 1;29(12):569-573. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000000311
Litrenta, Jody ; Tornetta, Paul ; Vallier, Heather ; Firoozabadi, Reza ; Leighton, Ross ; Egol, Kenneth ; Kruppa, Christiane ; Jones, Clifford B. ; Collinge, Cory ; Bhandari, Mohit ; Schemitsch, Emil ; Sanders, David ; Mullis, Brian. / Dynamizations and Exchanges : Success Rates and Indications. In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2015 ; Vol. 29, No. 12. pp. 569-573.
@article{ec5dfe98e87e49c28d0ef7a275b8998f,
title = "Dynamizations and Exchanges: Success Rates and Indications",
abstract = "Objective: To characterize the timing, indications, and {"}success rates of secondary interventions, dynamization and exchange nailing, in a large series of tibial nonunions{"} (dynamization and exchange nailing are types of secondary interventions). Setting: Retrospective multicenter analysis from level 1 trauma hospitals. Patients: A total of 194 tibia fractures that underwent dynamization or exchange nailing for delayed/nonunion. Intervention: Records and radiographs to characterize demographic data, fracture type, and cortical contact after tibial nailing were gathered. The radiographic union score for tibias (RUST) and the timing of intervention and time to union were calculated. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was success of either intervention, defined as achieving union, with the need for further intervention defining failure. Other outcomes included RUST scores at intervention and union, and timing to intervention and union for both techniques. Two-tailed t tests and Fisher exact with P set at",
keywords = "dynamization, exchange nail, tibial delayed union, tibial nonunion",
author = "Jody Litrenta and Paul Tornetta and Heather Vallier and Reza Firoozabadi and Ross Leighton and Kenneth Egol and Christiane Kruppa and Jones, {Clifford B.} and Cory Collinge and Mohit Bhandari and Emil Schemitsch and David Sanders and Brian Mullis",
year = "2015",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/BOT.0000000000000311",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "569--573",
journal = "Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma",
issn = "0890-5339",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dynamizations and Exchanges

T2 - Success Rates and Indications

AU - Litrenta, Jody

AU - Tornetta, Paul

AU - Vallier, Heather

AU - Firoozabadi, Reza

AU - Leighton, Ross

AU - Egol, Kenneth

AU - Kruppa, Christiane

AU - Jones, Clifford B.

AU - Collinge, Cory

AU - Bhandari, Mohit

AU - Schemitsch, Emil

AU - Sanders, David

AU - Mullis, Brian

PY - 2015/12/1

Y1 - 2015/12/1

N2 - Objective: To characterize the timing, indications, and "success rates of secondary interventions, dynamization and exchange nailing, in a large series of tibial nonunions" (dynamization and exchange nailing are types of secondary interventions). Setting: Retrospective multicenter analysis from level 1 trauma hospitals. Patients: A total of 194 tibia fractures that underwent dynamization or exchange nailing for delayed/nonunion. Intervention: Records and radiographs to characterize demographic data, fracture type, and cortical contact after tibial nailing were gathered. The radiographic union score for tibias (RUST) and the timing of intervention and time to union were calculated. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was success of either intervention, defined as achieving union, with the need for further intervention defining failure. Other outcomes included RUST scores at intervention and union, and timing to intervention and union for both techniques. Two-tailed t tests and Fisher exact with P set at

AB - Objective: To characterize the timing, indications, and "success rates of secondary interventions, dynamization and exchange nailing, in a large series of tibial nonunions" (dynamization and exchange nailing are types of secondary interventions). Setting: Retrospective multicenter analysis from level 1 trauma hospitals. Patients: A total of 194 tibia fractures that underwent dynamization or exchange nailing for delayed/nonunion. Intervention: Records and radiographs to characterize demographic data, fracture type, and cortical contact after tibial nailing were gathered. The radiographic union score for tibias (RUST) and the timing of intervention and time to union were calculated. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was success of either intervention, defined as achieving union, with the need for further intervention defining failure. Other outcomes included RUST scores at intervention and union, and timing to intervention and union for both techniques. Two-tailed t tests and Fisher exact with P set at

KW - dynamization

KW - exchange nail

KW - tibial delayed union

KW - tibial nonunion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84947783861&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84947783861&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000311

DO - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000311

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 569

EP - 573

JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

SN - 0890-5339

IS - 12

ER -