These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Pin tract infection with contemporary external fixation: how much of a problem?
    Author: Parameswaran AD, Roberts CS, Seligson D, Voor M.
    Journal: J Orthop Trauma; 2003 Aug; 17(7):503-7. PubMed ID: 12902788.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of pin tract infection.DESIGN Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center in an urban community. PATIENTS: A total of 285 patients with 285 fractures over a 4-year period (1997-2001). INTERVENTION: External fixation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Incidence of pin tract infection. RESULTS: Of 285 fractures, 32 (11.2%) were complicated by infection. The incidence of infection according to montage was 3.9% (3/77) for ring fixators, which was significantly different (P < 0.04) from the 12.9% incidence (23/178) for unilateral fixators and the 20.0% incidence (6/30) for hybrid fixators (P = 0.004). The incidences of pin tract infection for the unilateral fixator group and the hybrid fixator group were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with hybrid external fixators had a similar risk of pin tract infection as patients who had unilateral fixators. The infection rate in the ring fixator group was significantly lower than the hybrid external and unilateral fixator groups.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]