Background: An open-book pelvic fracture is used to describe any fracture that significantly disrupts the pelvic ring of human body. Internal and external fixation in treating open book pelvic fractures are two broadly used treatment methods. But we have very few comparative data regarding this issue. The aim of this study was to compare both internal and external fixation methods in the treatment of open book pelvic fractures. Methods: This prospective comparative study was conducted at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery in Shaheed Mansur Ali Medical College, Sirajganj, Bangladesh and The National Institute of Traumatology & Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR) during the period from January 2016 to December 2018. In total 100 patients with open-book pelvic fracture were obeyed all the inclusion and exclusion criteria and completed the full tenure of the intervention were finalized as the study population. Total population were divided into two groups. In Group I there were 50 participants who were treated by internal fixation method and in Group II there were 50 participants who were treated by external fixation method. Data were analyzed by SPSS Version 20 and disseminated by MS Office programs. Result: In the final follow-up of this study among total participants, there were 34 excellent, 30 good, 16 fair and 20 poor results. But, In Group I, 56% got excellent and 38% got good result. Besides these, only 4% got fair and 2% got poor result. On the other hand, the highest 38% participants got poor result. Then 28%, 22% and 12% got fair, good and excellent results respectively. This difference was statistically highly significant, the p-value was 0.013. Conclusion: After completing this comparative study it was found that the internal regarding outcome and complications the internal fixation method is better than external fixation method in treating open-book pelvic fracture.
| Published in | Journal of Surgery (Volume 9, Issue 3) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.js.20210903.18 |
| Page(s) | 145-148 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Open Book, Pelvic Fractures, Internal Fixator, External Fixator
| [1] | Malgaigne JF. Double vertical fractures of the pelvis. 1859. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007; 458: 17-9. |
| [2] | Grotz MR, Allami MK, Harwood P, et al. Open pelvic frac- tures: epidemiology, current concepts of management and outcome. Injury. 2005; 36 (1): 1-13. |
| [3] | Bailey & Love: Short practice of surgery. 24th Edition international Edition Arnold publishers London 2004: 387-388. |
| [4] | Rittmeister M, Lindsey RW, Kohl HW: Pelvic fracture among polytrauma decedents. Trauma based mortality with pelvic fracture a case series of 74 patients. 3rd. The ben Taub general hospital, Baylor College of medicine, Houston, U S A. Arch Ortho trauma surg. 2001; 121 (1): 43-9. |
| [5] | Pereira SJ, O’Brien DP, Luchette FA, et al: Dynamic helical computed tomography scan accurately detects hemorrhage in patients with pelvic fracture. Surgery 2000; 128 (4): 678–85. |
| [6] | Tile M. Pelvic ring fractures: should they be fixed. J Bone Joint SurgBr 1988; 70: 1–12. |
| [7] | Tile M. Pelvic fractures: operative versus non-operative treatment. OrthopClin North Am. 1980; 11: 423-464. |
| [8] | Kellam JF. The role of external skeletal fixation in pelvic disruptions. Clinical Orthopedics’ and Related Research. 1989; 241: 66-80. |
| [9] | Craveiro LN, Escalda C, Tavares D, et al. Treatment of pelvic ring disruptions with the Ilizarov frame. Preliminary report. Journal of Bone and joint surgery - British volume 2006; 88-B: 160. |
| [10] | Riska EB, Bonsdroff HV, Hakkinen S, et al: External fixation of unstable pelvic fractures. IntOrthop 1979; 3: 183-188. |
| [11] | Kellam JF: The role of external fixation in pelvic disruption. Clin. Orth. 1989; 241: 66-82. |
| [12] | Cole JD, Blum DA, Ansel LJ. Outcome after fixation of unstable posterior pelvic ring injuries. ClinOrthop. Aug 1996; (329): 160-79. |
| [13] | Lindahl J, Hirvensalo E, Bostman O, Santavirta S. Failure of reduction with an external fixator in the management of injuries of the pelvic ring. Long-term evaluation of 110 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999; 81: 955-962. |
| [14] | Tornetta P, III, Dickson K, Matta JM. Outcome of rotationally unstable pelvic ring injuries treated operatively. ClinOrthop. 1996; 147-151 |
| [15] | Awais SM, Rizwan N: The Journal of Pakistan Orthopaedic Association 1996; 1 (12). |
| [16] | Maru M. The functional outcome of surgically treated unstable pelvic fractures. J. Orthopaedics 2005; 2 (2): 2. |
APA Style
Md. Zulfiqur Ali, Jibananda Halder, Nahid Sultana, Mohammad Rajib Mahmud. (2021). Treatment of Open Book Pelvic Fractures: Comparison Between Internal and External Fixation. Journal of Surgery, 9(3), 145-148. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.js.20210903.18
ACS Style
Md. Zulfiqur Ali; Jibananda Halder; Nahid Sultana; Mohammad Rajib Mahmud. Treatment of Open Book Pelvic Fractures: Comparison Between Internal and External Fixation. J. Surg. 2021, 9(3), 145-148. doi: 10.11648/j.js.20210903.18
AMA Style
Md. Zulfiqur Ali, Jibananda Halder, Nahid Sultana, Mohammad Rajib Mahmud. Treatment of Open Book Pelvic Fractures: Comparison Between Internal and External Fixation. J Surg. 2021;9(3):145-148. doi: 10.11648/j.js.20210903.18
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.js.20210903.18,
author = {Md. Zulfiqur Ali and Jibananda Halder and Nahid Sultana and Mohammad Rajib Mahmud},
title = {Treatment of Open Book Pelvic Fractures: Comparison Between Internal and External Fixation},
journal = {Journal of Surgery},
volume = {9},
number = {3},
pages = {145-148},
doi = {10.11648/j.js.20210903.18},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.js.20210903.18},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.js.20210903.18},
abstract = {Background: An open-book pelvic fracture is used to describe any fracture that significantly disrupts the pelvic ring of human body. Internal and external fixation in treating open book pelvic fractures are two broadly used treatment methods. But we have very few comparative data regarding this issue. The aim of this study was to compare both internal and external fixation methods in the treatment of open book pelvic fractures. Methods: This prospective comparative study was conducted at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery in Shaheed Mansur Ali Medical College, Sirajganj, Bangladesh and The National Institute of Traumatology & Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR) during the period from January 2016 to December 2018. In total 100 patients with open-book pelvic fracture were obeyed all the inclusion and exclusion criteria and completed the full tenure of the intervention were finalized as the study population. Total population were divided into two groups. In Group I there were 50 participants who were treated by internal fixation method and in Group II there were 50 participants who were treated by external fixation method. Data were analyzed by SPSS Version 20 and disseminated by MS Office programs. Result: In the final follow-up of this study among total participants, there were 34 excellent, 30 good, 16 fair and 20 poor results. But, In Group I, 56% got excellent and 38% got good result. Besides these, only 4% got fair and 2% got poor result. On the other hand, the highest 38% participants got poor result. Then 28%, 22% and 12% got fair, good and excellent results respectively. This difference was statistically highly significant, the p-value was 0.013. Conclusion: After completing this comparative study it was found that the internal regarding outcome and complications the internal fixation method is better than external fixation method in treating open-book pelvic fracture.},
year = {2021}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Treatment of Open Book Pelvic Fractures: Comparison Between Internal and External Fixation AU - Md. Zulfiqur Ali AU - Jibananda Halder AU - Nahid Sultana AU - Mohammad Rajib Mahmud Y1 - 2021/06/04 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.js.20210903.18 DO - 10.11648/j.js.20210903.18 T2 - Journal of Surgery JF - Journal of Surgery JO - Journal of Surgery SP - 145 EP - 148 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-0930 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.js.20210903.18 AB - Background: An open-book pelvic fracture is used to describe any fracture that significantly disrupts the pelvic ring of human body. Internal and external fixation in treating open book pelvic fractures are two broadly used treatment methods. But we have very few comparative data regarding this issue. The aim of this study was to compare both internal and external fixation methods in the treatment of open book pelvic fractures. Methods: This prospective comparative study was conducted at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery in Shaheed Mansur Ali Medical College, Sirajganj, Bangladesh and The National Institute of Traumatology & Orthopaedic Rehabilitation (NITOR) during the period from January 2016 to December 2018. In total 100 patients with open-book pelvic fracture were obeyed all the inclusion and exclusion criteria and completed the full tenure of the intervention were finalized as the study population. Total population were divided into two groups. In Group I there were 50 participants who were treated by internal fixation method and in Group II there were 50 participants who were treated by external fixation method. Data were analyzed by SPSS Version 20 and disseminated by MS Office programs. Result: In the final follow-up of this study among total participants, there were 34 excellent, 30 good, 16 fair and 20 poor results. But, In Group I, 56% got excellent and 38% got good result. Besides these, only 4% got fair and 2% got poor result. On the other hand, the highest 38% participants got poor result. Then 28%, 22% and 12% got fair, good and excellent results respectively. This difference was statistically highly significant, the p-value was 0.013. Conclusion: After completing this comparative study it was found that the internal regarding outcome and complications the internal fixation method is better than external fixation method in treating open-book pelvic fracture. VL - 9 IS - 3 ER -
Email: