Malunions of the Proximal Tibia and Tibial Plateau

Agarwal, Animesh

doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-1124-1_12

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 92 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Plate fixation of proximal tibia fracture and osteotomy has been found to be biomechanically superior, J. M. Hartford et al [21], made use of buttress plate to compare its superiority over use of staples for such fixations. However the use of 95° ABP confers more biomechanical advantage over the use of buttress plates particularly in the settings of fracture complications like nonunions and malunions [18,22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Salvage fixation of proximal tibia non-union and mal-union with 95° angled blade plates

Nuradeen Altine Aliyu,

Muhammad Abdulrahman Hassan,

Oboirien Muhammad

et al. 2024

Int. J. Sci. Res. Arch.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Proximal tibia non-unions and mal-unions can present particular challenges in their management because of a short proximal segment, excessive misalignment and soft tissue compromise. Available options in the management should consider the biomechanical demand of that anatomical location. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term functional outcomes of patients treated with open reduction and internal fixation with 95° angled blade plate (ABP). Materials and methods: Total of twenty nine patients with a proximal tibial non-union and mal-unions were retrospectively treated between September 2016 and March 2022. Eighteen (62%) were non-unions, and eleven (38%) were mal-unions. The male were 21 (72%) and female were 8 (18%); Right tibia in 16 patients, and left tibia in 13 patients. Among the non-unions twelve were originally closed fractures, and six were open fractures. While among the eleven mal-unions, Eight were varus deformity and three were valgus deformity. All cases were treated with a consistent approach of debridement, deformity correction, angled blade plate fixation, and with or without bone grafting. Only 5 patients who presented with non-union had bone graft. Results: All the twenty nine patients’ fixations healed within an average of 30 weeks, and alignment was within 5° of anatomic in all cases after follow up for a median 3.2 years (range 1.8 to 6.6). The average duration of union after surgery was 4.5 month (range 3 to 7.5 month). The outcome were 23 (79%) excellent; 4 (14%) good; 1 (3.5%) fair, and 1 (3.5%) poor result based clinical and radiological evaluations of pain, range of knee motion, limb length, fracture healing and overall satisfaction with daily living activities. Conclusions: For clinical and biomechanical consideration, 95° ABP could be a very suitable implant in the management of metaphyseal non-union and mal-unions of the proximal tibia with high success rate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%