Additional table for easier access to ankle fracture: A retrospective study of traditional positioning versus modified positioning.

Citation metadata

Date: Nov. 6, 2020
From: Medicine(Vol. 99, Issue 45)
Publisher: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, WK Health
Document Type: Article
Length: 445 words

Document controls

Main content

Abstract :

Byline: Bo Liu, Department of Orthopaedics, Chongqing High-tech Zone People's Hospital, Chongqing; Rui Jin, Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China; Saroj Rai, Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, National Trauma Center, National Academy of Medical Sciences, Mahankal, Kathmandu, Nepal; Ruikang Liu, First School of Clinical Medicine, Tongji Medical College; Pan Hong, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. Abstract An interest in the fixation of posterior malleolus via the posterolateral approach has gained popularity recently. Most surgeons choose prone or lateral position during the surgery, and this study proposes an additional radiolucent table for easier access to the posterolateral anatomic structure of ankle joint, and compares it with traditional positioning.From September 2014 to September 2018, 21 patients with trimalleolar fractures and 28 patients with posterior malleolus and fibular fractures receiving open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using the posterolateral approach with the utilization of an additional radiolucent table were included in Additional Table group. Patients of matched sex, age, and injury type using the same surgical approach with the traditional positioning were selected from the hospital database and included in the Traditional group. Baseline information and clinical parameters were recorded.No significant differences existed concerning age, sex, or operative side between the 2 groups in patients with trimalleolar fractures. The time for positioning was significantly longer in the Traditional group (20.5 ± 6.45 minutes) than the Additional Table group (12 ± 3.5 minutes) (P

Source Citation

Source Citation   

Gale Document Number: GALE|A640772492