The Impact of Early Axial Interfragmentary Motion on the Fracture Healing Environment: A Scoping Review

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.injury.2024.111917
{"title":"The Impact of Early Axial Interfragmentary Motion on the Fracture Healing Environment: A Scoping Review","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2024.111917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The initial interfragmentary motion (IFM) at a fracture site determines the mode of fracture healing. Understanding the impact of orthopaedic interventions on the fracture environment is essential to advancing our knowledge of fracture healing. The purpose of this scoping review is to analyze the orthopaedic literature to assess our understanding of the effects of early axial IFM on fracture healing outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>PubMed, OVID, and Scopus databases were queried to identify all studies from inception until June 2023 assessing axial IFM on fracture healing outcomes in animal and human subjects. We collected information regarding the amount of IFM, osteotomy/fracture location, experimental methodology, and outcomes (histologic, biomechanical, and radiographic evidence of fracture healing) for each study. Data synthesis is presented as a narrative review of our findings.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In total, 4,972 studies were identified. Fifteen studies were included, totaling 605 fractures/osteotomies. Of the included studies, 423 animal and 182 human subjects were examined. Nine studies investigated IFM at the tibia, four at the metatarsus, and two at the femur. The median time to analysis was nine weeks. The fracture gap size did not exceed 6 mm in any study. The range of IFM in tibias, metatarsi, and femurs was 0.3-2.0 mm, 0.1-2.4 mm, and 0.03-1.0 mm, respectively. No experiment using a femur model identified an association between early axial IFM and healing outcomes. All studies at the level of the tibia exhibited positive effects on callus formation with small-to-moderate axial IFM (mean 0.54, SD 0.30; range 0.2-0.9 mm). Most studies (9/13, 69.2%) found that early micromovement produced superior stiffness and biomechanical rigidity at the fracture site compared to absolute stability. While larger IFMs (mean 1.28, SD 0.70; range 0.25-2.4 mm) frequently led to a larger callus area, the callus quality and biomechanical strength of the callus was compromised.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The definitive range of axial IFM conducive to a favorable healing environment remains elusive. However, preliminary evidence suggests an association between small-to-moderate (mean 0.41, SD 0.32; range: 0.03- 1.0 mm) initial axial IFM for stimulating successful fracture healing. This review found that the cumulative evidence present in the literature is insufficient to determine a definite correlation between the early axial IFM and outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54978,"journal":{"name":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138324006466","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The initial interfragmentary motion (IFM) at a fracture site determines the mode of fracture healing. Understanding the impact of orthopaedic interventions on the fracture environment is essential to advancing our knowledge of fracture healing. The purpose of this scoping review is to analyze the orthopaedic literature to assess our understanding of the effects of early axial IFM on fracture healing outcomes.

Methods

PubMed, OVID, and Scopus databases were queried to identify all studies from inception until June 2023 assessing axial IFM on fracture healing outcomes in animal and human subjects. We collected information regarding the amount of IFM, osteotomy/fracture location, experimental methodology, and outcomes (histologic, biomechanical, and radiographic evidence of fracture healing) for each study. Data synthesis is presented as a narrative review of our findings.

Results

In total, 4,972 studies were identified. Fifteen studies were included, totaling 605 fractures/osteotomies. Of the included studies, 423 animal and 182 human subjects were examined. Nine studies investigated IFM at the tibia, four at the metatarsus, and two at the femur. The median time to analysis was nine weeks. The fracture gap size did not exceed 6 mm in any study. The range of IFM in tibias, metatarsi, and femurs was 0.3-2.0 mm, 0.1-2.4 mm, and 0.03-1.0 mm, respectively. No experiment using a femur model identified an association between early axial IFM and healing outcomes. All studies at the level of the tibia exhibited positive effects on callus formation with small-to-moderate axial IFM (mean 0.54, SD 0.30; range 0.2-0.9 mm). Most studies (9/13, 69.2%) found that early micromovement produced superior stiffness and biomechanical rigidity at the fracture site compared to absolute stability. While larger IFMs (mean 1.28, SD 0.70; range 0.25-2.4 mm) frequently led to a larger callus area, the callus quality and biomechanical strength of the callus was compromised.

Conclusion

The definitive range of axial IFM conducive to a favorable healing environment remains elusive. However, preliminary evidence suggests an association between small-to-moderate (mean 0.41, SD 0.32; range: 0.03- 1.0 mm) initial axial IFM for stimulating successful fracture healing. This review found that the cumulative evidence present in the literature is insufficient to determine a definite correlation between the early axial IFM and outcomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
早期轴向节间运动对骨折愈合环境的影响:范围综述
目的骨折部位最初的节间运动(IFM)决定了骨折愈合的模式。了解矫形干预对骨折环境的影响对于增进我们对骨折愈合的了解至关重要。本范围综述旨在分析骨科文献,以评估我们对早期轴向 IFM 对骨折愈合结果影响的理解。方法我们查询了 PubMed、OVID 和 Scopus 数据库,以确定从开始到 2023 年 6 月的所有研究,这些研究评估了轴向 IFM 对动物和人类受试者骨折愈合结果的影响。我们收集了每项研究的 IFM 量、截骨/骨折位置、实验方法和结果(骨折愈合的组织学、生物力学和放射学证据)等信息。我们以叙述性综述的形式对研究结果进行了数据综合。共纳入 15 项研究,涉及 605 例骨折/骨切开术。在纳入的研究中,有 423 项动物研究和 182 项人体研究。九项研究调查了胫骨、四项研究调查了跖骨和两项研究调查了股骨。分析时间的中位数为 9 周。所有研究的骨折间隙均未超过 6 毫米。胫骨、跖骨和股骨的IFM范围分别为0.3-2.0毫米、0.1-2.4毫米和0.03-1.0毫米。使用股骨模型进行的实验均未发现早期轴向 IFM 与愈合结果之间存在关联。所有针对胫骨水平的研究都显示,小到中等程度的轴向 IFM(平均 0.54,SD 0.30;范围 0.2-0.9 mm)对胼胝形成有积极影响。大多数研究(9/13,69.2%)发现,与绝对稳定相比,早期微动能在骨折部位产生更好的硬度和生物力学刚度。虽然较大的 IFM(平均 1.28,SD 0.70;范围 0.25-2.4 mm)经常会导致较大的胼胝面积,但胼胝的质量和生物力学强度会受到影响。然而,初步证据表明,小到中等(平均 0.41,标码 0.32;范围:0.03- 1.0 mm)的初始轴向 IFM 与刺激骨折成功愈合之间存在关联。本综述发现,文献中的累积证据不足以确定早期轴向 IFM 与预后之间的明确相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.00%
发文量
699
审稿时长
96 days
期刊介绍: Injury was founded in 1969 and is an international journal dealing with all aspects of trauma care and accident surgery. Our primary aim is to facilitate the exchange of ideas, techniques and information among all members of the trauma team.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Fracture-related infection blood-based biomarkers: Diagnostic strategies The value of current diagnostic techniques in the diagnosis of fracture-related infections: Serum markers, histology, and cultures Antimicrobial resistance: Biofilms, small colony variants, and intracellular bacteria In vivo models of infection: Large animals – Mini review on human-scale one-stage revision in a porcine osteomyelitis model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1