The difficulties of radiological diagnosis phenomen of dysregeneration long bones fractures based on clinical cases
https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0763-810
Abstract
Research objectives data analysis of the radiological methods different types of dysregenerations, based on the clinical cases.
Material and methods. Literature review about radiation semiotics regeneration and dysregeneration phenomena, applicability of different types of radiological methods has been done. A review of 2 cases of delayed union and 5 cases of fracture nonunion is presented.
Conclusion. Despite the improvement and technical simplicity of visualizing the phenomena of dysregeneration, it is difficult to differentiate delayed union from nonunion using only by radiological methods, respectively, a consensus of an orthopedic surgeon and a radiologist is required in each individual case. The clinician chooses the treatment tactics based on the complex data set, including radiological methods.
About the Authors
M. S. Peksheva
St. Petersburg State Health Care Institution “Elizabethan Hospital”
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
radiologist, X-ray department,
14 A, Vavilov str., 195257 St. Petersburg
M. M. Rankov
St. Petersburg State Health Care Institution “Elizabethan Hospital”
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
orthopedic surgeon, PhD, Head of the 1st Traumatology Department,
14 A, Vavilov str., 195257 St. Petersburg
I. V. Petrova
St. Petersburg State Health Care Institution “Elizabethan Hospital”
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
orthopedic surgeon, 1st Traumatology Department,
14 A, Vavilov str., 195257 St. Petersburg
References
1. Schetinin S.A., Schetinin S.A. Analysis of the frequency and consequences of traumatism in Russia. Modern problems of science and education. 2015; 2 (1). (In Russian). URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=17871 (дата обращения: 10.05.2020)
2. Baindurashvili A.G., Shapiro K.I., Drozhzhina L.A., Vishnyakov A.N. Indicators and dynamics of injuries of the musculoskeletal system among children in St. Petersburg in modern conditions. Pediatrician (St. Petersburg). 2016; 7 (2): 113–120. (In Russian)
3. Guidelines for trauma quality improvement programmes. WHO. Доступно по адресу http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/44061/1/9789241597746_eng.pdf
4. Somford M.P., van den Bekerom M.P.J., Kloen P. Operative treatment for femoral shaft nonunions, a systematic review of the literature. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2013; 8 (2): 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11751-013-0168-5
5. Ru J.Y., Niu Y.F., Cong Y., Kang W.B., Cang H.B., Zhao J.N. Exchanging reamed nailing versus augmentative compression plating with autogenous bone grafting for aseptic femoral shaft nonunion: a retrospective cohort study. Acta Orthop. Traumatol. Turc. 2015; 49 (6): 668–675. https://doi.org/10.3944/aott.2015.14.0404
6. Heppenstall RB. Fracture Treatment and Healing. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1980. 1087 p.
7. Gaiko G.V., Kalashnikov A.V., Nikitin P.V. Intramedullary blocking osteosynthesis in the treatment of patients with closed fractures of the long bones of the extremities. Bulletin of Orthopedics and Traumatology. 2007; 1: 26–33. (In Russian)
8. Kutsenko S.N., Mityunin D.A., Nikiforov R.R. Complex treatment of tibial fractures using Bliskunov's blockable fixators in patients with disorders of reparative regeneration. Trauma. 2013; 1 (14): 5–7. (In Russian)
9. Semizorov A.N. X-ray in the diagnosis and treatment of bone fractures. Moscow, 2007. 176 p (In Russian)
10. Brinker M.R. Nonunions: Evaluation and Treatment. In B.D. Browner, A.M. Levine, J.B. Jupiter, P.G. Trafton (Ed.). Skeletal Trauma: Basic Science, Management, and Reconstruction. 4th Ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 2009; Chapter 22: 615–707.
11. Weber B.G., Cech O. Pseudarthrosis: Pathophysiology, Biomechanics, Therapy and Results. Grune & Stratton, 1980. 323 p.
12. Ebnezar J. Clinical Examination Methods in Orthopedics. Boydell & Brewer Ltd, 2010. 912 p.
13. Bhattacharyya T., Bouchard K.A., Phadke A., Meigs J.B., Kassarjian A., Salamipour H. The accuracy of computed tomography for the diagnosis of tibial nonunion. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2006; 88 (4): 692–697. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200604000-00002
14. Corrales LA, Morshed S, Bhandari M, Miclau T. Variability in the assessment of fracture-healing in orthopaedic trauma studies. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2008; 90 (9): 1862–1868. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.g.01580
15. Morshed S. Current Options for Determining Fracture Union. Adv. Med. 2014; 2014: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/708574
16. Brinker M.R., O’Connor D.P. Ilizarov compression over a nail for aseptic femoral nonunions that have failed exchange nailing: a report of 5 cases. J. Orthop. Trauma. 2003; 17: 668–676. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-200311000-00002
17. Bhandari M., Tornetta P. 3rd, Sprague S., Najibi S., Petrisor B., Griffith L., Guyatt G.H. Predictors of reoperation following operative management of fractures of the tibial shaft. J. Orthop. Trauma. 2003; 17: 353–361. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-200305000-00006
18. Schnarkowski P., Redei J., Peterly C.G., Weidenmaier W., Mutschler W., Arand M., Reiser M.F. Tibial shaft fractures: assessment of fracture healing with computed tomography. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 1995: 19 (5): 777–781 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004728-199509000-00015
19. Bhandari M., Chiavaras M.M., Parasu N., Choudur H., Ayeni O., Chakravertty R., Bains S., Hak A., Sprague S., Petrisor B. Radiographic union score for hip substantially improves agreement between surgeons and radiologists. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2013; 14, 70. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-70
20. Whelan D.B., Bhandari M., Stephen D., Kreder H., McKee M.D., Zdero R., Schemitsch E.H. Development of the radiographic union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation. J. Trauma. 2010; 68 (3): 629–632. https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0b013e3181a7c16d
21. Chiavaras M.M., Bains S., Choudur H., Parasu N., Jacobson J., Ayeni O., Petrisor B., Chakravertty R., Sprague S., Bhandari M. The Radiographic Union Score for Hip (RUSH): the use of a checklist to evaluate hip fracture healing improves agreement between radiologists and orthopedic surgeons. Skeletal Radiol. 2013; 42 (8): 1079–1088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-013-1605-8
22. Einhorn T.A. Breakout session 1: definitions of fracture repair. Clin. Orthop. 1998; 355 (Suppl.): 353. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199810001-00035
23. Somford M.P., van den Bekerom M., Kloen P. Operative treatment for femoral shaft nonunions, a systematic review of the literature. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2013; 8 (2): 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11751-013-0168-5
Review
For citations:
Peksheva M.S., Rankov M.M., Petrova I.V. The difficulties of radiological diagnosis phenomen of dysregeneration long bones fractures based on clinical cases. Medical Visualization. 2021;25(1):164-176. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0763-810
Views:
961
Email this article 