TY - JOUR
T1 - Primary Closure or Secondary Wound Healing of Pin Sites After External Fixator Removal
T2 - A Single-Center Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial
AU - Tillmann, Franz
AU - Hoepelman, Ruben J.
AU - Cagienard, Flavio
AU - Link, Björn Christian
AU - Babst, Reto
AU - Van De Wall, Bryan J.M.
AU - Beeres, Frank J.P.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/2/1
Y1 - 2023/2/1
N2 - Background:The aim of this single-center randomized controlled trial was to compare primary wound closure using a suture with secondary wound healing of pin sites after removal of temporary external fixation.Methods:This noninferiority trial included all patients who were treated with a temporary external fixator on an upper or lower extremity at 1 institution. The primary outcome was pin-site infection. Secondary outcomes were measured at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks and included all other complications, time to pin-site wound healing (in weeks), the most satisfactory pin site as rated by the patient, the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The most proximal pin site was randomly allocated (1:1) to either primary closure or secondary wound healing, and the other pin sites were treated alternately.Results:Seventy patients, providing 241 pin sites, were included between January 1, 2019, and March 1, 2020. A total of 123 pin sites were treated with primary closure and 118, with secondary wound healing. The median age was 55 years (interquartile range, 46 to 67 years), 44% were male, and the median duration of the external fixation was 6 days (interquartile range, 4 to 8 days). There were no pin-site infections in either group. Wound healing was significantly faster in the primary closure group (median of 2 versus 6 weeks, p = 0.013). The VSS and patient satisfaction showed no differences between groups. There was 1 case of fracture-related infection not related to any pin site.Conclusions:Primary closure of temporary external fixator pin sites did not result in higher infection rates compared with secondary wound healing, and pin sites healed significantly faster after primary closure. Primary closure should therefore be considered in patients treated with a temporary external fixator.Level of Evidence:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
AB - Background:The aim of this single-center randomized controlled trial was to compare primary wound closure using a suture with secondary wound healing of pin sites after removal of temporary external fixation.Methods:This noninferiority trial included all patients who were treated with a temporary external fixator on an upper or lower extremity at 1 institution. The primary outcome was pin-site infection. Secondary outcomes were measured at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks and included all other complications, time to pin-site wound healing (in weeks), the most satisfactory pin site as rated by the patient, the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The most proximal pin site was randomly allocated (1:1) to either primary closure or secondary wound healing, and the other pin sites were treated alternately.Results:Seventy patients, providing 241 pin sites, were included between January 1, 2019, and March 1, 2020. A total of 123 pin sites were treated with primary closure and 118, with secondary wound healing. The median age was 55 years (interquartile range, 46 to 67 years), 44% were male, and the median duration of the external fixation was 6 days (interquartile range, 4 to 8 days). There were no pin-site infections in either group. Wound healing was significantly faster in the primary closure group (median of 2 versus 6 weeks, p = 0.013). The VSS and patient satisfaction showed no differences between groups. There was 1 case of fracture-related infection not related to any pin site.Conclusions:Primary closure of temporary external fixator pin sites did not result in higher infection rates compared with secondary wound healing, and pin sites healed significantly faster after primary closure. Primary closure should therefore be considered in patients treated with a temporary external fixator.Level of Evidence:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85147318133&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2106/JBJS.22.00234
DO - 10.2106/JBJS.22.00234
M3 - Article
C2 - 36622896
AN - SCOPUS:85147318133
SN - 0021-9355
VL - 105
SP - 207
EP - 213
JO - Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
JF - Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
IS - 3
ER -