• Yves P Acklin, Andreas Bircher, Mario Morgenstern, R Geoff Richards, and Christoph Sommer.
• Universitätsspital Basel, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Basel, Switzerland. Electronic address: yvespascal.acklin@gmail.com.
• Injury. 2018 Jun 1; 49 Suppl 1: S91-S95.

AbstractRoutine implant removal is frequently performed although evidence-based guidelines are lacking. But routinely planned implant removal has significant economic implications and shows considerable complication rates. In general, clinical outcome seems to improve but pain relief after operation is often unpredictable. Even in patients reporting implant-related pain, implant removal does not guarantee relief and may be associated with further complications. The intra- and postoperative complication rate remains very high. Implant removal demonstrates a significant learning curve and unsupervised junior surgeons tend to cause more complications. The need for implant removal may be questioned. Even with the implant in place, contact activities can be resumed. However, a new adequate trauma can create a new fracture independently if there is an implant in-situ or not. It is important to understand the complications and outcomes to be expected with hardware removal to carefully evaluate its indication.© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

20 keywords...

hide…