Severe Open Fractures of the Tibia (Shin) Bone Clinical Trial
Official title:
A Prospective Randomized Trial to Assess Fixation Strategies for Severe Open Tibia Fractures:Modern Ring External Fixators Versus Internal Fixation
The purpose of this study is to compare the use of modern ring external fixation versus internal fixation for fracture stabilization of severe open tibia fractures.
Severe open fractures of the tibia (shin) bone are difficult to treat and are associated with
high rates of infection and other complications. There is controversy regarding the best
treatment, particularly in fractures with large wounds from trauma. The two current standard
treatment options are to place an internal fixation device (a nail or plates with screws) or
to use a device with pins that stick out of the skin and attach to rings outside the body
(modern ring external fixator). It is unknown which of these standard of care treatment
options will result in lower complication rates and better function of the leg.
Our goal is to perform a multi-center randomized controlled trial of the use of modern ring
external fixation versus internal fixation for fracture stabilization of severe open tibia
fractures. Patients who refuse randomization have the option of participating in a
prospective observational study and the treatment is decided by the surgeon and patient.
Primary Aim: To compare the outcomes associated with modern ring external fixators versus
standard internal fixation techniques in treating "severe" open tibia shaft or metaphyseal
fractures with or without a bone defect of any size.
Primary Hypothesis: Among patients with open tibia shaft or metaphyseal fractures (with or
without a bone defect of any size), the rate of re-hospitalization for major limb
complications will be lower for patients treated with ring fixators than those treated with
standard internal fixation.
Secondary Hypotheses: Among patients with open tibia shaft or metaphyseal fractures (with or
without a bone defect of any size), the overall rate of infections will be lower for patients
treated with ring fixators than those treated with standard internal fixation. Measures of
fracture healing, limb function, and patient reported outcomes (including pain) will be as
good or better among patients treated with ring fixators than those treated with standard
internal fixation.
Secondary Aim #1: To determine the percentage of Gustilo IIIB open tibia shaft fractures that
can be treated successfully (i.e. without amputation) without a soft tissue flap secondary to
the use of ring external fixators.
Secondary Aim #2: To determine the two-year treatment costs associated with fixation of
"severe" open tibia shaft or metaphyseal fractures (with or without a bone defect of any
size) using modern ring external fixators versus standard internal fixation techniques.
Secondary Aim #3: To determine patient reported levels of satisfaction with the fixation
method and overall treatment and to compare satisfaction between the two treatment groups.
;