![]() Lucas SE, Seligson D, Henry SL (1993) Intramedullary supracondylar nailing of femoral fractures. Bone Joint Surg Am 73(3):332–340ĭomínguez I, Moro Rodriguez E, De Pedro Moro JA, Cebrian Parra JL, López-Durán Stern L (1998) Antegrade nailing for fractures of the distal femur. Leung KS, Shen WY, So WS, Mui LT, Grosse A (1991) Interlocking intramedullary nailing for supracondylar and intercondylar fractures of the distal part of the femur. Sprinfield, ILīutler MS, Brumback RJ, Ellison TS, Poka A, Bathon GH, Burgess AR (1991) Interlocking intramedullary nailing for ipsilateral fractures of the femoral shaft and distal part of the femur. Practice of Intramedulllary Nailing (1967) Translated by Rinne. Sanders R, Regazzoni P, Ruedi TP (1989) Treatment of supracondylar-intracondylar fractures of the femur using the dynamic condylar screw. ![]() Schatzker J, Mahomed N, Schiffman K, Kellam J (1989) Dynamic condylar screw: a new device. Yang RS, Liu HC, Liu TK (1990) Supracondylar fractures of the femur. Imam MA, Torieh A, Matthana A (2018) Double plating of intra-articular multifragmentary C3-type distal femoral fractures through the anterior approach. Sain A, Sharma V, Farooque K, Muthukumaran V, Pattabiraman K (2019) Dual plating of the distal femur: indications and surgical techniques. Prayson MJ, Datta DK, Marshall MP (2001) Mechanical comparison of endosteal substitution and lateral plate fixation in supracondylar fractures of the femur. Mast J, Jakob R, Ganz R (1989) Planning and reduction technique in fracture surgery. Sanders R, Swiontkowski M, Rosen H, Helfet D (1991) Double-plating of comminuted, unstable fractures of the distal part of the femur. Martinet O, Cordey J, Harder Y, Maier A, Bühler M, Barraud GE (2000) The epidemiology of fractures of the distal femur. Gwathmey FW Jr, Jones-Quaidoo SM, Kahler D, Hurwitz S, Cui Q (2010) Distal femoral fractures: current concepts. Through this dynamic process, the desired results of complete fracture healing and maximization of functional outcomes have emerged. Techniques slowly evolved to minimize soft tissue disruption, allow more ease of implant placement at the fracture site, and attend to the systemic health of the patient, while simultaneously ensuring appropriate fracture fixation. ConclusionĮmphasis for the surgical treatment of distal femur fractures has incrementally progressed over time, with initial focus on complete stabilization of the fracture while the biological environment surrounding the fracture was ignored. Despite this advancement, the rare but significant incidence of nonunion has not been eliminated, leading to the recognition of the biomechanical environment as important for prevention and the development of active plating techniques. Treatment failure led to the development of locking compression plates with the advantage of accommodating either locking or nonlocking screws. Meanwhile, intramedullary nails, and later, in the 1990s, locking screws, were introduced to minimize soft tissue disruption. ![]() Angle blade plates and dynamic condylar screws emerged out of this scaffolding to prevent post-treatment varus collapse. As principles of surgical intervention for fractures emerged in the 1950s, surgeons developed conventional straight plates to better stabilize distal femur fractures. Prior to the 1950s, distal femur fractures were treated nonoperatively, resulting in considerable morbidity, limb deformity, and limited function. Scientific literature was searched for descriptions of treatment for distal femur fractures to provide an in-depth overview of the topic, with emphasis on the evolution of surgical constructs used to treat these fractures. The purpose of this historical review is to illustrate the progression and evolution of treatment for distal femur fractures.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |