RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Treatment of lower limb post-traumatic osteomyelitis used to be a staged process, with radical debridement of bone and soft tissues at first stage, followed by a second-stage limb reconstruction operation to restore the limb integrity. Some studies recently reported that achieving infection eradication and limb reconstruction at single-stage seems to be an effective method for lower limb infection, but a comparative study remains lacking. This study aims to compare the results of radical debridement combined with a first/second-staged osteotomy and bone transport, for the management of lower limb post-traumatic osteomyelitis. METHODS: From January 2013 to June 2018, a total of 102 patients with lower limb post-traumatic osteomyelitis met the criteria were included for analysis, in which 70 patients received one-stage debridement, antibiotic-loaded implantation, metaphysis osteotomy and bone transport were named as one-stage group, while 32 patients with first-stage debridement and antibiotic-loaded calcium sulfate implantation, second-stage osteotomy and bone transport were devised as two-stage group. The outcomes of hospitalization (hospital stay, costs of treatment, surgical time, antibiotic usage) and follow-up (infection-free, treatment failure, infection recurrence, external fixation index (EFI) and docking site union) between the two groups were retrospectively compared. RESULTS: For outcomes of hospitalization, patients in the one-stage group had batter results on hospital stay (18.2 days versus 28.9 days, P â< â0.05), surgical time (164.8 âmin versus 257.4 âmin, P â< â0.05), cost of treatment (¥101726.1 versus ¥126718.8, P â< â0.05) and the course of antibiotic usage (10.3 days versus 12.0 days, P â< â0.05). During the follow-up, 87.1% (61/70) patients in the one-stage group compared to 93.8% (30/32) patients in the two-stage group achieved infection-free (P â> â0.05) without any additional debridement operation. 94.3% (66/70) patients in the one-stage group earned wound healing after the operation, comparing to 96.9% (31/32) patients healed in the two-stage group (P â> â0.05). Uncontrolled infection was observed on 4 (5.7%) patients in the one-stage group and 1 (3.1%) patients in the two-stage group (P â> â0.05), with a result of three achieved infection free in the one-stage group and one patient suffered from amputation in each group respectively. 5 (7.2%) patients in the one-stage group and 1 (3.2%) patient in the two-stage group encountered with infection recurrence (P â> â0.05) and were well-managed with re-debridement and antibiotics usage. Significance was not found between two groups on EFI (74.8 days/cm versus 69.0 days/cm, P â> â0.05) and docking site nonunion rate (14.5% versus 18.9%, P â> â0.05), indicating that bone transport in different stages played a less essential role on bone generation process. The other complications, such as prolonged aseptic drainage [24.3% (17/70) versus 21.9% (7/32)], re-fracture [5.8% (4/69) versus 3.2% (1/31)], pin-tract infection [23.2% (16/69) versus 19.4% (6/31)], joint stiffness and deformity [26.1% (18/69) versus 32.3% (10/31)], also showed less significance when comparing between two groups (P â> â0.05), suggesting that different transport stages play little role on complications formation. CONCLUSIONS: One-stage radical debridement and bone transport was proven to be a safe and effective method for treating static (or near static) lower limb osteomyelitis. TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL STATEMENT: Translational potential statement One-stage debridement and bone transport is sample, effective and time-saving, with similar complications compared to conventional two-stage protocol. This treatment protocol might provide an alternative for the treatment of static (or near static) lower limb osteomyelitis.
