First Author (Year) | Study Participants, n | Mean Operating Time, hours | Patient Position, n(%) | Fracture Fixation Method | Fracture Table Details | Countertraction Post Details | Perineal Post Dimensions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aprato et al. (2021) | 95 | 1.22, SD not reported | Supine = 95(100%) | Femoral shaft fractures treated with Trigen femoral nail (Smith&Nephew); Subtrochanteric fractues fixed proximally with 2 cephalic screws | – | – | – |
Brumback et al. (1992) | 106 | *2.8 ± 0.6 | Supine = 106(100%) | 1st generation static interlocking fixation for 97 patients (92%); 2nd generation (reconstruction) static interlocking nailing for 9 patients (8%) | – | Maquet Orthostar (Simens Medical Systems, Iseline, NJ, USA) | Perineal post diameter = 4.1 cm; perineal post with rubber cylinder padding diamter = 6.8 cm |
Coelho et al. (2008) | 6 | 5.6 ± 2.1 | – | Locked intramedullary antegrade nail fixation = 6 patients (100%) | – | – | – |
Hofmann et al. (1982) | 4 | 3.6 ± 1.1 | Prone = 2(50%); Supine = 2(50%) | Muscle-pedicle graft and modified Hagie-pin fixation of the hip = 2(50%); Intramedullary nailing = 1(25%); In situ pinning of fracture = 1(25%) | – | – | – |
Kao et al. (1993) | 63 | 3.45 ± 1.19 | Supine = 51(81%), lateral decubitus = 12(19%) | 6 types of intramedullary nails used depending on availability/surgeon preference: (1) Brooker-Wills IM nail (Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA); (2) Russell-Taylor femoral nail (Richards, Memphis, TN, USA); (3) Russell-Taylor Recon nail (Richards, Memphis, TN,USA); (4) Pathfinder nail (Biomet, Warsaw, In, USA); (5) Grosse-Kempf nail (Howmedica, Rutherford, NJ, USA); (6) Kuntscher nail (Howmedica, Rutherford, NJ, USA) | Amsco Orthographics 2 fracture table (American Sterilizer, Erie, PA, USA) for 44 patients (70%); Chick fracture table (Chick Medical Products, Greenwood, SC, USA) for 19 patients (30%) | Information found in “Fracture Table Details” column | Amsco Orthographics 2 fracture table = 3.5 cm diameter; (supine position)wrapped with cotton-cast padding/silicone roll = 6 cm diameter; (lateral decubitus position) wrapped with 3 layers of cotton-cast padding = 8 cm diameter Chick fracture table = 5.0 cm diameter; (supine position) wrapped with cotton-cast padding/silicone roll = 6 cm diameter |
Mallet et al. (2005) | 37 | – | Supine = 37(100%) | Intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures for 37 patients (100%) | Alphamaquet 1150 orthopedic table (Maquet, Getinge Surgical Systems, Getinge, Sweden) | Information found in “Fracture Table Details” column | – |
Parulekar et al. (2021) | 3 | – | Unknown position = 3(100%) | Intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures for 2 patients (67%); Sliding hip screw fixation for intertrochanteric fracture for 1 patient (33%) | – | – | – |
Peterson et al. (1985) | 4 | 3.80 ± 2.84 | Supine = 2(50%), lateral decubitus = 2(50%) | Intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft fractures for 4 patients (100%) | – | – | – |
Rajbabu et al. (2007) | 4 | **4.67 ± 1.15 | Supine = 2(50%), unknown position = 2(50%) | Orthofix intramedullary nail for 3 patients (75%); Unknown treatment for 1 patient (25%) | – | – | – |
Rose et al. (2007) | 29 | – | Supine = 29(100%) | Static Intramedullary nailing = 29(100%) | – | – | perineal post diameter = 3.8 cm; wrapped with cast padding diameter = 8 cm |
Descriptive Statistics | Total = 351 | Mean Range = 1.22–5.6 | Supine = 324(92.3%) Lateral decubitus = 14(4.0%) Prone = 2(0.6%) Unknown = 11(3.1%) | Intramedullary nail = 347 (98.9%) Muscle-pedicle graft and modified Hagie-pin fixation of hip = 2 (0.6%) In-situ pinning of fracture = 1 (0.25%) Sliding hip screw = 1(0.25%) |