ACE Report Cover
Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound improves bone healing in delayed unions of the tibia
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Langue
Download Download Download
Télécharger
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citer
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoris
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Langue
Download Download Download
Télécharger
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citer
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoris
TRAUMA
Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound improves bone healing in delayed unions of the tibia .
Verified
This report has been verified by one or more authors of the original publication.

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2014;2(9):23 BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010 Oct 8;11:229. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-229.
Auteurs contributeurs

MD Schofer JE Block J Aigner A Schmelz

101 patients who had suffered a fracture to the tibial shaft, and for whom delayed union was confirmed were randomized to undergo 16 weeks of active low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) or a sham device, to determine whether LIPUS is effective in promoting bone healing in this population. Results indicated that improvements in bone mineral density (BMD) and gap area at the fracture site were significantly higher in patients treated with LIPUS compared to those treated with a sham device, with a medium degree of effectiveness in patients who completed the protocol. Furthermore, regardless of group allocations, patients whose time since fracture was 48 weeks or more experienced significantly poorer radiological outcomes, compared to fractures experienced <48 weeks prior.


Détails du financement de la publication +
Financement:
Industry funded
Sponsor:
Smith & Nephew (Memphis, TN)
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Risque de partialité

8/10

Critères de déclaration

17/20

Indice de fragilité

N/A

Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?

Was allocation adequately concealed?

Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?

Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?

Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?

Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?

Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?

Oui = 1

Incertain = 0,5

Non pertinent = 0

Non = 0

L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.

4/4

Randomization

4/4

Outcome Measurements

2/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

3/4

Statistics

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.

Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?

Previous studies have found low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) to be safe and effective in promoting bone healing in numerous long-bone fracture types. This conservative treatment works by promoting osteoblastic activity, leading to subsequent increases in osteoid thickness, mineral apposition rate, as well as bone volume at the edge of new bone formation in these patients. Only a paucity of studies, the majority of which single-arm, have examined its effectiveness in patients with delayed union as opposed to fresh fractures. This study was therefore needed to contribute to the limited body of evidence in this population.

Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?

Is treatment with low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) for 16 weeks effective in promoting bone healing in patients with a delayed union of a tibial shaft fracture, relative to sham treatment?

Caractéristiques de l'étude +
Population:
101 patients who had suffered a fracture to the tibial shaft, and for whom delayed union was confirmed. Delayed union was defined as a lack of clinical and radiological evidence of union, bone reaction, or bone continuity at least 16 weeks post-injury or post-treatment (n=84 completed study protocol)
Intervention:
LIPUS device group: Patients (n=51) received low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) using the Exogen 2000/2000+ (Smith & Nephew GmbH, Schenefeld, Germany) device, 20 minutes/day for 16 weeks. The ultrasound device was set at a frequency of 1.5 MHz, a repetition rate of 1 kHz, a pulse duration of 200 us, and a spatial intensity of 30 mW/cm^2. (Mean age: 42.6 +/- 14.6 years; 29% female)
Comparison:
Sham device group: Patients (n=50) received a sham treatment using an identical device - without emitting acoustic pressure waves - 20 minutes/day for 16 weeks. (Mean age: 45.1 +/- 11.9 years; 18% female)
Outcomes:
The primary outcomes were bone mineral density (BMD) at the fracture site, 2-3 mm proximal and distal to the index site, as well as gap area (assessed by computed tomography [CT]). BMD was measured in Hounsfield units (HUs). Compliance was also measured by the devices.
Methods:
RCT; Multi-Centre (6 sites); Double-blinded (patients & assessors)
Time:
Assessments were performed at 1, 2 and 3 months.
Quels sont les résultats importants ?
  • Based on a descriptive 'completers' analysis (n=84), log BMD increased from baseline to 16 weeks by a mean of 0.87 HU (SD 0.67) in the treatment group and 0.57 HU (SD 0.38) in the control group. This between-group difference was statistically significant in favour of the treatment group (effect size 0.53; 95% CI 0.09, 0.97; p=0.014).
  • Also based on a descriptive 'completers' analysis (n=84), from baseline to 16 weeks, mean changes in log gap area were -0.131 mm^2 (SD 0.072) in the treatment group and -0.097 mm^2 (SD 0.070) in the control group; this between-group difference was statistically significant (effect size -0.47; 95% CI -0.91, -0.03; p=0.034).
  • Multiple imputation analysis revealed an adjusted difference between groups in the mean change in BMD of 122.4 HU (p=0.007). Based on log transformed data, the adjusted mean BMD improvement was also found to be significantly greater in the treatment group (p=0.002).
  • Using multiple imputation analysis, LIPUS was found to have a statistically significant positive effect on bone gap area (based on log transformed data) (p=0.014). A similar finding was observed for untransformed data (p=0.03).
  • Following multiple regression analysis (i.e. including pre-treatment BMD [ratio 0.64], time since fracture of <48 weeks [ratio 1.33], and use of intramedullary nail fixation [ratio 1.23]) the relative effectiveness of the treatment remained significant (p=0.004), with minimal change in magnitude.
  • Mean BMD was 1.33 times higher for patients with a time since fracture <48 weeks compared to 48 weeks or more when LIPUS status was controlled for. Despite these independent findings, a time since injury x study group interaction was not statistically significant (p=0.76), revealing that LIPUS had a significant effect on bone growth whether or not time since fracture was <48 weeks or >48 weeks. Mean BMD was 1.23 times higher for those who received intramedullary nail fixation.
  • At 16 weeks, there was a non-significant trend towards more patients in the treatment group considered "healed" (33/51 or 65%) compared to the control group (23/50 or 46%) (p=0.07).
  • No device-related adverse events were reported.
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?

Improvement in bone mineral density (BMD) and gap area at the fracture site were significantly higher in patients treated with low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) compared to those treated with a sham device, with a medium degree of effectiveness in 'completers'. Furthermore, regardless of group allocations, patients whose time since fracture was 48 weeks or more experienced significantly poorer radiological outcomes compared to patients treated within 48 weeks of fracture.

Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?

Results from this study support the use of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) in the treatment of delayed unions of tibial fractures. This study also emphasizes the need for early treatment when delayed unions are suspected. Additional studies with longer follow-ups are needed to confirm the longitudinal effect of this treatment approach.

AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ

Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.

0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
Vous avez atteint votre limite de 4 vues d'articles gratuits ce mois-ci

Accédez à OrthoEvidence pour seulement 1,99 $ par semaine.

Restez informé des dernières données. Annulez à tout moment.
  • Évaluations critiques des derniers essais contrôlés randomisés à fort impact et des revues systématiques en orthopédie.
  • Accès au contenu des podcasts OrthoEvidence, y compris les collaborations avec le Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, les entretiens avec des chirurgiens de renommée internationale et les tables rondes sur l'actualité et les sujets orthopédiques.
  • Abonnement à The Pulse, une lettre d'information bihebdomadaire fondée sur des données probantes, conçue pour vous aider à prendre de meilleures décisions cliniques.
Upgrade
Bienvenue à nouveau !
Vous avez oublié votre mot de passe ?
Commencez votre essai GRATUIT dès aujourd'hui !

Votre compte sera affilié à
et inclut un accès gratuit à OrthoEvidence.


OU
Vous avez oublié votre mot de passe ?

OU
Veuillez vérifier votre adresse électronique

Si un compte existe avec l'adresse e-mail fournie, un e-mail de réinitialisation du mot de passe vous sera envoyé. Si vous ne voyez pas d'e-mail, veuillez vérifier votre dossier de spam ou de courrier indésirable.

Pour plus d'assistance, contactez notre équipe d'assistance.

Veuillez vous connecter pour activer cette fonction

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte OrthoEvidence actif. Veuillez vous connecter ou créer un compte d'essai GRATUIT.

Traduire le rapport ACE

OrthoEvidence utilise un service de traduction tiers pour rendre le contenu accessible dans plusieurs langues. Veuillez noter que même si tous les efforts sont faits pour assurer l'exactitude, les traductions ne sont pas toujours parfaites.

Comment citer ce document ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound improves bone healing in delayed unions of the tibia. OE Journal. 2014;2(9):23. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/

Copier la citation
Veuillez vous connecter pour activer cette fonction

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte OrthoEvidence actif. Veuillez vous connecter ou créer un compte d'essai GRATUIT.

Fonctionnalité Membre Premium

Pour accéder à cette fonctionnalité, vous devez être connecté à un compte Premium OrthoEvidence.

Partager ACE Report