Search

Purpose: To describe our clinical experience with a system named SureShot™ Distal Targeting (Smith & Nephew, Memphis, USA) based on magnetic field presence and discuss our suggestions on this technique. Methods: We analysed prospectively 47 patients affected by humeral, tibial or femoral fractures, treated in our institution during a 3-year period of time (August 2010 to September 2013). We considered the following parameters: the time to set up, the time to position a single screw, the effectiveness of the system (drilling ad screwing), the irradiation exposure time during distal locking procedure and surgical complications. Results: A total number of 96 screws were inserted. The mean preparation time of the device was 5.1 min ± 2 min (range 3–10 min). The mean time for single screw targeting was 5.8 min ± 2.3 min (range 4–18 min). No major complications occurred. Only a few locking procedures were needed to be practiced in order to obtain the required expertise with this targeting device. Conclusion: According to our results, this device is reliable and valid whenever the correct technique is followed. It is also user friendly, exposes to lower radiation and needs less surgical time compared to relative data from the literature. However, the surgeon should always be aware of how to use the free hand technique in case of malfunctioning of the system.

Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the use of the electromagnetic distal targeting system in treating humeral shaft fracture. Methods: Patients were divided in: Group 1) patients that received a distal locking screw placement following the free-hand technique; Group 2) patients in which the distal locking screw was performed using the SURESHOT device. Results: No differences were noted comparing Group 1 (freehand) [71,9 range 40-135 min] to Group 2 (SURESHOT)[ 70, range 25-125 min]. Conclusion: The use of the EM distal targeting system doesn't reduce the overall operative time of the humeral shaft fracture fixation using IMN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To describe our clinical experience with a system named SureShot? Distal Targeting (Smith & Nephew, Memphis, USA) based on magnetic field presence and discuss our suggestions on this technique.Methods: We analysed prospectively 47 patients affected by humeral, tibial or femoral fractures, treated in our institution during a 3-year period of time (August 2010 to September 2013). We considered the following parameters: the time to set up, the time to position a single screw, the effectiveness of the system (drilling ad screwing), the irradiation exposure time during distal locking procedure and surgical complications.Results: A total number of 96 screws were inserted. The mean preparation time of the device was 5.1 min ± 2 min (range 3-10 min). The mean time for single screw targeting was 5.8 min ± 2.3 min (range 4-18 min). No major complications occurred. Only a few locking procedures were needed to be practiced in order to obtain the required expertise with this targeting device.Conclusion: According to our results, this device is reliable and valid whenever the correct technique is followed. It is also user friendly, exposes to lower radiation and needs less surgical time compared to relative data from the literature. However, the surgeon should always be aware of how to use the free hand technique in case of malfunctioning of the system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this study is to show whether a new magnetic-guided locking technique is superior to a standard freehand technique in terms of operation time and radiation exposure. This treatment will be used for distal locking of the tibia during intramedullary nailing. Methods: This randomized trial is done through 80 patients having tibial fractures with a mean age of 25 years (range 16-67 years). In the magnetic locking group, there were 20 fractures of the distal third, 16 of the shaft, and 4 of the proximal tibia; in the freehand group, these numbers were 15, 20, and 5, respectively. The parameters like operation time, distal locking time, radiation exposure duration, and dose were compared. Results: We placed 100 distal locking screws in the magnetic locking group and 95 in the freehand group. Fluoroscopy was necessary only in the freehand group. All screws were correctly positioned the first time in both groups. The magnetic locking group had a shorter mean surgical time (52 ± 6.2 vs 70 ± 10.9 min; P < 0.01), a shorter mean distal locking time (5 ± 1.1 vs 16 ± 2.0 min; P < 0.01), and a shorter mean placement time for each screw (2 ± 0.5 vs 7 ± 1.2 min; P < 0.01). The magnetic locking group had lower mean radiation exposures (8 ± 4.5 vs 40 ± 7.6 s; P < 0.01) and mean radiation exposure (5.4 ± 2.5 vs 25 ± 6.8 mGy range; P < 0.01). Conclusions: For distal locking during tibial intramedullary nailing, the magnetic locking system is as accurate as the standard freehand technique, but it has lower operative times and radiation exposures compared to the standard freehand technique. Therefore, the magnetic locking system should be preferred to current standard freehand techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Osteosynthesis of humeral diaphyseal fractures by long intramedullary nailing is a widespread practice. Distal interlocking is a delicate and uncertain step in the procedure, and the free-hand method is adopted by most surgeons. We evaluated the accuracy of a magnetic field-guided system for distal interlocking of long intramedullary nailed humeral diaphyseal fractures., Hypothesis: The field magnetic method to interlock distal screws procured satisfying success rates at first attempt in each hole., Study Design: Single center, retrospective, descriptive and continuous., Material and Methods: We used the Sureshot® Distal Targeting System (DTS) and the Trigen® (Smith & Nephew) nail. All patients who presented to our center for osteosynthesis of a fracture of the humeral diaphysis by long intramedullary nailing between April 1, 2016 and June 30, 2018 were retrospectively included., Results: The analyses included 32 of the 34 patients who presented during this period (mean age, 64 years). There were 51 attempts to install distal interlocking screws. The screws were interlocked successfully in 40 cases (78.4%), and there were 11 failures (21.6%). There was an average of 29 fluoroscopic views and an average cumulative dose area product of 36.90 cGcm 2 ., Discussion: We found a lower success rate than that found in the literature for the accuracy of Sureshot® DTS in long humeral nailing. We found also a lower success rate than for tibial and femoral centromedullary nailing with this system. Our study showed a success rate of only 78.4% at the first attempt for distal interlocking of Trigen® humeral long nails., Level of Evidence: IV; retrospective study without control group., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)