Outcomes following treatment of complex tibial fractures with circular external fixation : comparison between the Taylor Spatial Frame and TrueLok-Hex

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Naude, Jaco
dc.contributor.author Manjra, Muhammad Ahmed
dc.contributor.author Birkholtz, Franz Friedrich
dc.contributor.author Barnard, Annette-Christi
dc.contributor.author Glatt, Vaida
dc.contributor.author Tetsworth, Kevin
dc.contributor.author Hohmann, Erik
dc.date.accessioned 2020-08-03T11:33:21Z
dc.date.available 2020-08-03T11:33:21Z
dc.date.issued 2019-09
dc.description.abstract AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of complex tibia fractures treated with two different hexapod fixators. MATERIAL AND METHODS : This is a retrospective comparative study of patients treated for complex tibial fractures between 2010 and 2015. Inclusion criteria was patients between 18 years and 60 years of age, who sustained a complex comminuted open or closed tibial fracture with or without bone loss, who had a minimum of 12 months’ follow-up, and who have been treated definitively using either Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) or TrueLok Hexapod System (TL-HEX). The outcome measures were Association for the Study and Application of the Method of Ilizarov (ASAMI) score, foot function index (FFI), EQ5-D, four-step square test (FSST), and timed up and go (TUG) test. Descriptive statistics were used to assess patient demographic information. Categorical variables (ASAMI and EQ5D-5L) were analyzed using the χ​2 test. Continuous variables (FFI, functional tests, and radiographic outcomes) were analyzed with two-tailed Student’s t tests. RESULTS : In all, 24 patients were treated with the TL-HEX and 21 with the TSF. The mean time for external fixation was 219 ± 107 days (TL-HEX) and 222 ± 98 days (TSF). Union occurred in 92% (TL-HEX) and 100% (TSF). The mean follow-up was 777 ± 278 days (TL-HEX) and 1211 ± 388 days (TSF). Using the ASAMI scores, there were 17 excellent and 6 good results for the TL-HEX and 10 excellent and 11 good results for the TSF (p = 0.33). The FFI was 30 ± 28.7 (TL-HEX) and 26.1+23.9 (TSF) (p = 0.55). The EQ5D was 0.67 ± 0.3 (TL-HEX) and 0.73 ± 0.2 (TSF) (p = 0.43). The mean TUG and FSST were 9.2 ± 3.2 and 10 ± 2.9 seconds (TL-HEX) and 8.4 ± 2.3 and 9.6 ± 3.1 seconds (TSF) (p = 0.34 and 0.69). CONCLUSION : The results of this study suggest that both hexapod external fixation devices have comparable clinical, functional, and radiographioutcomes. Either fixator can be used for the treatment of complex tibial fractures, anticipating good and excellent clinical outcomes iapproximately 80% patients. en_ZA
dc.description.department Orthopaedic Surgery en_ZA
dc.description.librarian hj2020 en_ZA
dc.identifier.citation Naude J, Manjra M, Birkholtz FF, et al. Outcomes Following Treatment of Complex Tibial Fractures with Circular External Fixation: A Comparison between the Taylor Spatial Frame and TrueLok-Hex. Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction 2019;14(3):142–147. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1443. en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn 1828-8936 (print)
dc.identifier.issn 1828-8928 (online)
dc.identifier.other 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1443
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/75545
dc.language.iso en en_ZA
dc.publisher Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers en_ZA
dc.rights © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. en_ZA
dc.subject Taylor Spatial frame (TSF) en_ZA
dc.subject TrueLok hexapod system (TL-HEX) en_ZA
dc.subject Circular external fixation en_ZA
dc.subject Complex tibial fractures en_ZA
dc.title Outcomes following treatment of complex tibial fractures with circular external fixation : comparison between the Taylor Spatial Frame and TrueLok-Hex en_ZA
dc.type Article en_ZA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record