Use of external fixator versus flexible intramedullary nailing in closed XXXX : comparing results using data from two cohort studies.

@entity1 @entity174
PURPOSE: Although external fixation and flexible intramedullary nailing have been extensively used in the management of @entity174 , there are very few studies, which have compared the results. The purpose of the study was to compare the results of external fixation and flexible intramedullary nailing in @entity174 . METHODS: Two groups of @entity1 were treated by external fixator (EF) and flexible intramedullary nailing (FIN) over two different but successive time periods and results compared. The first group (EF) consisted of 45 @entity1 , and the second group had 50 @entity1 . RESULTS: The age in EF group ranged from 6 to 14  years (average 9.93  years), and the age in FIN group ranged from 6 to 11  years (average 7.66  years). In the EF group, fixator was removed at an average of 12.23  weeks. In the FIN group, radiographic union was evident at an average time of 10.06  weeks. Pin-site infection was common in EF group. One @entity1 had a re-fracture in EF group, and one @entity1 had to be re-operated in FIN group after he developed anterior angulation of more than 30  . CONCLUSION: We believe that it is the discretion of the surgeon to operate on the femur fracture using either of the treatment modalities. Further randomized studies need to be conducted between these two treatment modalities.
