Journal of Orthopedics and Joint Surgery

Register      Login

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 1 ( January-June, 2025 ) > List of Articles

CASE REPORT

A Case Series on Pilon Fractures Treated Using the Limb Reconstruction System

Vasanthkumar Chandrakumar, Suriya Kulothungan Karikalan, Sasikumar Kumar, Venkata Kiran Pillella

Keywords : Case report, Limb reconstruction system, Pilon fracture, Rüedi and Allgöwer classification

Citation Information : Chandrakumar V, Karikalan SK, Kumar S, Pillella VK. A Case Series on Pilon Fractures Treated Using the Limb Reconstruction System. J Orth Joint Surg 2025; 7 (1):116-118.

DOI: 10.5005/jojs-10079-1176

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 15-01-2025

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2025; The Author(s).


Abstract

Introduction: Amid the most challenging fractures to properly treat are tibia fractures. The degree of comminution, soft tissue status, and contamination level suffered during the injury influence the functional outcome. Surgical intervention aims to achieve a proper reduction of the tibia while maintaining sufficient stability to permit ankle movements. To reduce treatment problems, this should be done with methods that limit the devascularization of the soft and osseous tissues. Methods and results: A prospective study was conducted on 14 patients hospitalized with closed tibial pilon fractures managed using the limb reconstruction system (LRS) at Sree Balaji Medical College and Hospital. The range of ankle motion on average is dorsiflexion ranges 5–14° and plantarflexion ranges 5–20°. Clinical outcomes were graded as excellent (90–100), good (80–89), satisfactory (70–79), sufficient (60–69), or low (<60) according to the Mazur ankle score. The average score was 88.8 (good). Type 3 fractures were found to have poor clinical outcomes when compared to type 1 and type 2 fractures. Conclusion: Due to LRS's cost-effectiveness, patient-friendliness, versatility, and safety, it is considered an excellent method for managing closed tibial pilon fractures as the primary and definitive mode.


PDF Share
  1. Topliss CJ, Jackson M, Atkins RM. Anatomy of pilon fractures of the distal tibia. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87(5):692–697. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B5.15982
  2. Saad BN, Yingling JM, Liporace FA, et al. Pilon fractures: challenges and solutions. Orthop Res Rev 2019;24:149–157. DOI: 10.2147/ORR.S170956
  3. Bocchi L, Maniscalco P, Bertone C, et al. Fractures of the tibial plafond: a comparison of treatment methods. J Orthop Trauma 2000;1:51–56. DOI: 10.1007/s101950070029
  4. Scolaro J, Ahn J. In brief: pilon fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469(2):621–623. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1509-z
  5. Rüedi TP, Allgöwer M. The operative treatment of intra-articular fractures of the lower end of the tibia. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1979;1(138):105–110. PMID: 376196.
  6. Meinberg EG, Agel J, Roberts CS, et al. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium—2018. J Orthop Trauma 2018;32:S1–S10. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001063
  7. Mahajan NP, Mangukiya HJ. Extended use of limb reconstruction system in management of compound tibia diaphyseal fracture as primary and definitive tool. Int J Res Orthop 2017;3(6):1157. DOI: 10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20174706
  8. Brumback RJ, McGarvey WC. Fractures of the tibial plafond: evolving treatment concepts for the pilon fracture. Orthop Clin North Am 1995;26(2):273–285. PMID: 7724193.
  9. Gaudinez RF, Mallik AR, Szporn M. Hybrid external fixation in tibial plafond fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996;329:223–232. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199608000-00028
  10. Saleh M, Yang L, Sims M. Limb reconstruction after high energy trauma. Br Med Bull 1999;55(4):870–884. DOI: 10.1258/0007142991902682
  11. Galante VN, Vicenti G, Corina G, et al. Hybrid external fixation in the treatment of tibial pilon fractures: a retrospective analysis of 162 fractures. Injury 2016;47:S131–S137. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.07.045
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.