ISSN 2398-2950      

Fracture fixation: external skeletal fixator

ffelis

Synonym(s): ESF, Splint External fixation


Introduction

  • To stabilize a fracture using an external skeletal fixator (ESF) until healing is complete.
  • ESF is a device which secures the fracture fragments with percutaneous transfixation pins fixed outside the body to a rigid frame.
  • Frames can be made up of a variety of materials including stainless steel, titanium, carbon fiber and acrylic.

Types/Constructs

  • Linear:
    • Percutaneous fixation pins are attached to one or more connecting bars with clamps:
      • Acrylic/epoxy putty columns do not require clamps.
    • Constructs can be:
      • Uniplanar (type Ia), biplanar (type Ib).
      • Bilateral frame (types IIa and IIb).
      • Bilateral biplanar (type III).
  • Circular:
    • Small diameter percutaneous wires fixed under tension to a connecting ring which in turn is connected to other rings with threaded rods.
  • Hybrid:
    • Combination of circular and linear fixation.
    • Hybrid of types I and II.

Uses

  • Primary or adjunctive stabilization of any fracture:
    • Most commonly used for fractures distal to the elbow and stifle Elbow: luxation (postoperative) 01 - radiograph mediolateral  Elbow: luxation (postoperative) 02 - radiograph CrCd  Tibia: comminuted diaphyseal fracture 02 - radiograph .
    • Can also be used in certain femoral and humeral fractures (particularly in cats) Femur: fracture repair (postoperative) - radiograph CrCd  Fracture femur 02: repair comminuted proximal fracture - 6wks post-op 01  Fracture femur 02: repair comminuted proximal fracture - 6wks post-op 02  Fracture femur 02: repair intramedullary pin Kerschner Ehmer fixation tied in - photograph     Humerus: fracture repair - external fixation 05 .
    • Acrylic and epoxy putty constructs are useful in some mandibular fractures Mandible: bilateral caudal fracture and split hard palate repair .
  • Less commonly used for spinal and pelvic fractures Pelvis: fracture 03 repair - radiograph VD .
  • Useful in infected/open fractures, so implants are not in contact with contaminated fracture site and where access to skin wounds is necessary:
    • ie Fractures where there is extensive tissue damage requiring continuing treatment, eg shearing injuries Carpus: shearing injury.
  • Circular and hybrid frames are useful for juxtarticular fractures.
  • Transarticular fractures, eg carpal fractures.
  • Composite fracture repairs - in conjunction with internal fixation Fracture: internal fixation, eg IM pin Fracture fixation: pin, to avoid rotation during healing, eg transverse mid-shaft femur fracture.
  • Distraction techniques: combined with corrective osteotomies in treatment of limb deformity (dynamic external fixator).

Advantages

  • Minimally invasive:
    • Allows for closed and "open but do not touch" fracture reduction techniques thereby minimize damage to soft tissues/vessels (biological osteosynthesis Biological fracture fixation).
  • Allows for open wound treatment while fracture is healing.
  • Usually well-tolerated by patient.
  • Adaptable:
    • The ESF construct is bespoke for each fracture.
    • Postoperative adjustment is possible - though this can be difficult:
      • Correct postoperative malalignment.
      • Gradual disassembly allows for controlled increases in loading of the healing fracture which may enhance osseous union.
      • ESF adjustment is obviously more difficult if an acrylic colulmn has been used.
    • Lightweight (acrylic system) and carbon fiber systems are available.
  • Economical:
    • A limited number of pins, connecting bars and clamps can be used for multiple different fracture configurations.
    • Use of acrylic columns as connecting bars can further reduce costs.
    • Connecting bars and clamps can be cleaned and reused on multiple patients.

Disadvantages

  • Staright connecting bars can restrict placing of pins and a compromise is inevitable - acrylic systems avoid this.
  • ESF placement is limited by the availability of safe corridors for percutaneous pin placement:
    • Greater soft tissue mass, eg the upper limb:
      • Reduces the size of the corridor for safe pin insertion.
      • Increases the risk of pin tract problems.
      • Limits frame type used - type II, III and circular frames are not feasible in the upper limb.
  • Adjustments may need to be made to ensure rigidity is maintained (especially in the growing animal).
  • Acrylic system - may preclude adjustment once acrylic is set.

Requirements

This article is available in full to registered subscribers

Sign up now to obtain ten tokens to view any ten Vetlexicon articles, images, sounds or videos, or Login

Preparation

This article is available in full to registered subscribers

Sign up now to obtain ten tokens to view any ten Vetlexicon articles, images, sounds or videos, or Login

Procedure

This article is available in full to registered subscribers

Sign up now to obtain ten tokens to view any ten Vetlexicon articles, images, sounds or videos, or Login

Aftercare

This article is available in full to registered subscribers

Sign up now to obtain ten tokens to view any ten Vetlexicon articles, images, sounds or videos, or Login

Outcomes

This article is available in full to registered subscribers

Sign up now to obtain ten tokens to view any ten Vetlexicon articles, images, sounds or videos, or Login

Prognosis

  • Good when correctly applied.

Further Reading

Publications

Refereed papers

  • Recent references from PubMed and VetMedResource.
  • Corr S (2005) Practical guide to linear external skeletal fixation in small animals. In Practice 27 (2), 76-85 VetMedResource.
  • Lewis D, Cross A R, Carmichael S et al (2001) Recent advances in external skeletal fixation. JSAP 42 (3), 103-112 PubMed.
  • Shahar R (2000) Relative stiffness and stress of type I and type II external fixators.: Acrylic versus Stainless Steel connecting Bars - A theoretical approach. Vet Surgery 29 (1), 59-69 PubMed.
  • Johnson A L, DeCamp C E (1999) External skeletal fixation. Linear fixators. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 29 (5), 1135-1152 PubMed.
  • Marcellin-Little D J (1999) Fracture treatment with circular external fixation. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 29 (5), 1153-1170 PubMed.
  • Guerin S R, Lewis D D, Lanz O I et al (1998) Comminuted supracondylar humeral fractures repaired with a modified type I external skeletal fixator construct. JSAP 39 (11), 525-532 PubMed.
  • McCartney W (1998) Use of the modified acrylic external fixator in 54 dogs and 28 cats. Vet Rec 143 (12), 330-334 PubMed.
  • Langley-Hobbs S J, Carmichael S, McCartney W (1996) Use of external skeletal fixators in the repair of femoral fractures in cats. JSAP 37 (3), 95-101 PubMed.
  • Bouvy B, Markel M D, Chelikani S et al (1993) Ex vivo biomechanics of Kirschner-Ehmer external skeletal fixation applied to canine tibiae. Veterinary Surgery 22 (3), 194-207 PubMed.

Other sources of information

  • Piermattei D L, Flo G L, DeCamp C E (2006) Handbook of Small Animal Orthopaedics and Fracture Repair: Fourth Edition. Saunders Elsevier, Missouri.
  • Johnson A L, Houlton J E F, Vannini R (2005) AO Principles of Fracture Management in the Dog and Cat. AP Publishing.

Related Images

RELATED FACTSHEETS

Fractures

Want more related items, why not
contact us

Can’t find what you’re looking for?

We have an ever growing content library on Vetlexicon so if you ever find we haven't covered something that you need please fill in the form below and let us know!

 
 
 
 

To show you are not a Bot please can you enter the number showing adjacent to this field

 Security code