Injury
-
A systematic review was performed to assess the relative merits of reamed and unreamed antegrade femoral nailing. To be included, a study had to be prospective, randomised or pseudorandomised, comparing reamed and unreamed antegrade femoral nailing in adults. Where more than one study from the same institution was available, only the study with longest follow-up was included. ⋯ Unreamed nailing was quicker and associated with significantly less blood loss (P < 0.00001). Reaming significantly reduced the time to union (P = 0.00001), non-union (P = 0.002), delayed union (P = 0.005), technical problems (P = 0.01) and reoperation rate (P = 0.001). The use of reamed femoral nails gives significant advantages over unreamed femoral nails.
-
A systematic review was performed to assess reamed and unreamed tibial nailing. Only prospective, randomised studies comparing reamed and unreamed tibial nailing in adults were included. A literature search found 1200 possible articles. ⋯ There was an increased non-union rate when the tibia was not reamed (p = 0.02). Screw breakage was more common in the unreamed group (p<0.0001). This study could find little difference in the incidence of other complications following reamed or unreamed tibial nailing.