IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0141973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Ilizarov Methods in the Treatment of Infected Nonunion of Tibia and Femur

Author

Listed:
  • Peng Yin
  • Qiunan Ji
  • Tongtong Li
  • Jiantao Li
  • Zhirui Li
  • Jianheng Liu
  • Guoqi Wang
  • Song Wang
  • Lihai Zhang
  • Zhi Mao
  • Peifu Tang

Abstract

Background: Infected nonunion of tibia and femur are common in clinical practice, however, the treatment of these diseases has still been a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Ilizarov methods can eradicate infection, compensate bone defects and promote the bone union through progressive bone histogenesis. The objective of this systematic review was to review current available studies reporting on Ilizarov methods in the treatment of infected nonunion of tibia and femur, and to perform meta-analysis of bone and functional results and complications to evaluate the efficacy of Ilizarov methods. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed from the SCI, PubMed, Cochrane Library; and Embase between January 1995 and August 2015. Some major data were statistically analyzed using weighted means based on the sample size in each study by SPSS 13.0, including number of patients, mean age, mean previous surgical procedures, mean bone defects, mean length of follow-up, bone union, complications per patient, external fixation time, and external fixation index(EFI). Bone results (excellent, good, fair and poor rate), functional results (excellent, good, fair and poor rate) and complications were analyzed by Stata 9.0. Findings: A total of 590 patients from 24 studies were included in this systematic review. The average of bone union rate was 97.26% in all included studies. The poor rate in bone results and functional results was 8% (95%CI, 0.04–0.12; I2 = 44.1%, P = 0.065) and 10% (95%CI, 0.05–0.14; I2 = 34.7%, P = 0.121) in patients with infected nonunion of tibia and femur treated by Ilizarov methods. The rate of refracture, malunion, infectious recurrence, knee stiffness, amputation, limb edema and peroneal nerve palsy was respectively 4%, 7%, 5%, 12%, 4%, 13% and 13%. Conclusions: Our systematic review showed that the patients with infected nonunion of tibia and femur treated by Ilizarov methods had a low rate of poor bone and functional results. Therefore, Ilizarov methods may be a good choice for the treatment of infected nonunion of tibia and femur.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng Yin & Qiunan Ji & Tongtong Li & Jiantao Li & Zhirui Li & Jianheng Liu & Guoqi Wang & Song Wang & Lihai Zhang & Zhi Mao & Peifu Tang, 2015. "A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Ilizarov Methods in the Treatment of Infected Nonunion of Tibia and Femur," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0141973
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0141973
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141973
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141973&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0141973?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Łukasz Pawik & Felicja Fink-Lwow & Andżelika Pajchert Kozłowska & Łukasz Szelerski & Sławomir Żarek & Radosław Górski & Malwina Pawik & Wiktor Urbanski & Paweł Reichert & Piotr Morasiewicz, 2021. "Assessment of Gait after Treatment of Tibial Nonunion with the Ilizarov Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-12, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0141973. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.