Skip to main content

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Table 4 Patient and surgical characteristics of the patients that required bone stimulation and/or refixation for delayed union/nonunion

From: Outcomes of ulna shortening osteotomy: a cohort analysis of 106 patients

Characteristic

Pt. 1

Pt. 2

Pt. 3

Pt. 4

Pt. 5

Pt. 6

Pt. 7

Pt. 8

Age (years)

46

71

35

48

63

53

41

46

Sex

Female

Female

Male

Female

Male

Male

Female

Female

Duration of symptoms (months)

5

12

10

60

5

24

18

9

Type of work

Heavy

None

Heavy

Medium

None

Heavy

Medium

Medium

Side

Dominant

Nondominant

Dominant

Dominant

Dominant

Nondominant

Dominant

Dominant

Smoking status

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Etiology

DRF

DRF

DRF

Idiopathic

Idiopathic

Idiopathic

Idiopathic

Idiopathic

Plate

Acumed

AO

AO

Acumed

AO

Acumed

Acumed

Acumed

Shortening (mm)

3, 5

4

4, 5

3

4

3

3

a

Traumatic injury after USO

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Bone stimulator (IGEA) used

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Time to revisions surgery (days)

126

119

233 (patient was too busy with work)

143

173

221

NAb

NAb

Experience level of surgeonc

III

IV

III

III

III

III

IV

III

  1. USO ulna shortening osteotomy, DRF distal radius fracture
  2. aMissing
  3. bNA not applicable; union achieved with bone stimulation and refixation not needed
  4. cAccording to the classification by Tang and Giddins (I Non-specialist; II Specialist - less experienced; III Specialist - experienced; IV Specialist - highly experienced; V Expert)