Bioabsorbable implants in foot trauma surgery. (August 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Daghino, Walter; Bistolfi, Alessandro; Aprato, Alessandro; Massè, Alessandro
• Is Part Of: Injury. Volume 50(2019)Supplement 4
• Page Start: S47
• Page End: S55
• Publication Date: 2019-08
• Subjects: Foot -- Trauma -- Surgery -- Bioabsorbable implants -- Calcanear fractures -- Talar fractures -- Lisfranc -- Chopart; Wounds and injuries -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Accidents -- Periodicals; Wounds and Injuries -- surgery -- Periodicals; Lésions et blessures -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 617.1
• DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.01.016
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-1383

Abstract

Highlights: This study explores the experiences and suggest guidelines concerning the use of the bioabsorbable devices in the surgery of the traumatic lesions of the foot. The literature review conducted identifies previous known indications for the use of absorbable devices in foot trauma treatments. This study produced indications concerning the use of the resorbable devices and their related complications in the foot traumatic lesions. Abstract: Background: Resorbable osteosynthesis has been used in orthopaedic surgery for many years. However, indications for the use of these implants in the surgery of traumatic lesions of the foot have not yet been clearly defined. The aim of this study is to analyse reported experiences with the bioabsorbable devices and to suggest guidelines for their use in foot trauma surgery Methods: We conducted a literature review to identify known indications for the use of absorbable devices in traumatic lesions of the foot. We also conducted a retrospective analysis of our registry, reviewing patients with traumatic lesions of the foot who were treated surgically with absorbable devices from November 2005 to January 2017. To this end, we analysed for each case the indication for the use of resorbable devices and the incidence of related complications. Results: Only 14 relevant studies were found. In the selected period, 76 patients were treated using bioabsorbable devices for a traumatic lesion of the foot. Nine patients were lost to follow-up or did not satisfy the inclusion criteria. Therefore, the final size of the registry was 67 patients. The average follow-up was 20.5 months (range 6–66). All the bioabsorbable devices used were screws and bars of poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA). The indications identified in the literature review and in our registry were osteosynthesis of small periarticular fragments in talus and calcaneus fractures, preliminary stabilisation of articular fragments in Sanders III calcaneal fractures and fracture-dislocations of the Lisfranc or Chopart joints. No foreign-body reactions occurred. However, in one case we registered a late mobilisation of a PLLA bar in a healed calcaneal fracture, probably as a consequence of surgical malpositioning of the device. All the operated lesions demonstrated a normal healing time, and the complication rate was comparable with those of other types of osteosynthesis. Conclusion: In foot trauma surgery the use of absorbable devices can give advantages. The most clearly defined indications are osteosynthesis of peri-articular or articular fragments in talus and calcaneus fractures, Sanders III calcaneal fractures and fracture-dislocations of Lisfranc's or Chopart's joints. Foreign-body reactions are rare and seem not to present a problem.