What are the Risk Factors for Hardware Removal After Tibia or Fibula Fracture?
- PMID: 26852642
- DOI: 10.1615/jlongtermeffmedimplants.2015015672
What are the Risk Factors for Hardware Removal After Tibia or Fibula Fracture?
Abstract
Indications for open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of tibia and/or fibula fractures vary; however, some patients require removal of hardware (ROH) due to various complications. Currently, data evaluating the epidemiology of and risk factors for ROH of the tibia/fibula are limited. We examined the associations between tibia/fibula fractures and (1) characteristics of fractures requiring ORIF, (2) indications for ROH, (3) demographic risk factors for ROH; (4) length of stay, and (5) total hospital charges. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to identify patients admitted for tibia/fibula ORIF and ROH between 1998 and 2010 in the United States. We used ICD-9 codes to identify fracture locations, comorbidities, and indications for ROH. We identified 1,610,149 ORIF patients, and 56,864 of these patients (3.5%) underwent ROH. Logistic regression analyses and independent sample t-tests were used to assess risk factors and differences. Among fractures requiring ORIF, the most common were for closed fractures of both tibia and fibula. The most common indications for ROH were infection and osteomyelitis. Risk factors for ROH included men and Deyo comorbidity scores of 1 and 2 or more. Age and race were not risk factors for ROH. The length of stay and total charges were significantly higher for ROH compared to those with ORIF only. Hardware removal is a serious complication following ORIF for fractures of the tibia/fibula. The results of the current study suggest that gender, presence of comorbidities, and payer status were all significant factors in predicting hardware removal for the tibia/fibula following ORIF.
Similar articles
-
Complications and Risk Factors Influencing Hardware Removal after Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of the Radius or Ulna: A Nationwide Study.J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2020;30(1):49-55. doi: 10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.2020034958. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2020. PMID: 33389915
-
Incidence of hardware-related pain and its effect on functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fractures.J Orthop Trauma. 2001 May;15(4):271-4. doi: 10.1097/00005131-200105000-00006. J Orthop Trauma. 2001. PMID: 11371792
-
Open reduction and internal fixation for displaced Salter-Harris type II fractures of the distal tibia: a retrospective study of sixty-five cases in children.J Orthop Surg Res. 2021 Mar 27;16(1):224. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02359-9. J Orthop Surg Res. 2021. PMID: 33773575 Free PMC article.
-
Osteomyelitis after TightRope(®) fixation of the ankle syndesmosis: a case report and review of the literature.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015 Jan-Feb;54(1):130-4. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2014.09.041. Epub 2014 Oct 31. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015. PMID: 25451206 Review.
-
Resorbable Versus Titanium Hardware for Rigid Fixation of Pediatric Upper and Midfacial Fractures: Which Carries a Lower Risk Profile?J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Oct;79(10):2103-2114. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2021.05.027. Epub 2021 May 25. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021. PMID: 34171220
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical