Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Häufige urologisch-sexualmedizinische Themen in der Praxis sind das Thema des MMW-Webinars am 5. Juni von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. Konkret geht es um die Frage, wann bei Harnwegsinfektionen auf Antibiotika verzichtet werden kann, und um ein Update zur Therapie von Libido- und Potenzstörungen des Mannes. Der dritte Vortrag behandelt sexuell übertragbare Krankheiten. Stellen Sie Ihre Fragen an die Experten und sammeln Sie 2 CME-Punkte. Jetzt gleich anmelden!
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery
Erschienen in: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 4/2013

01.08.2013 | Review Article

Indications for implant removal after fracture healing: a review of the literature

verfasst von: D. I. Vos, M. H. J. Verhofstad

Erschienen in: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery | Ausgabe 4/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this review was to collect and summarize published data on the indications for implant removal after fracture healing, since these are not well defined and guidelines hardly exist.

Methods

A literature search was performed.

Results

Though there are several presumed benefits of implant removal, such as functional improvement and pain relief, the surgical procedure can be very challenging and may lead to complications or even worsening of the complaints. Research has focused on the safety of metal implants (e.g., risk of corrosion, allergy, and carcinogenesis). For these reasons, implants have been removed routinely for decades. Along with the introduction of titanium alloy implants, the need for implant removal became a subject of debate in view of potential (dis)advantages since, in general, implants made of titanium alloys are more difficult to remove. Currently, the main indications for removal from both the upper and lower extremity are mostly ‘relative’ and patient-driven, such as pain, prominent material, or simply the request for removal. True medical indications like infection or intra-articular material are minor reasons.

Conclusion

This review illustrates the great variety of view points in the literature, with large differences in opinions and practices about the indications for implant removal after fracture healing. Since some studies have described asymptomatic patients developing complaints after removal, the general advice nowadays is to remove implants after fracture healing only in symptomatic patients and after a proper informed consent. Well-designed prospective studies on this subject are urgently needed in order to form guidelines based on scientific evidence.
Literatur
1.
Hanson B, van der Werken C, Stengel D. Surgeons’ beliefs and perceptions about removal of orthopaedic implants. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008;9:73.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Busam ML, Esther RJ, Obremskey WT. Hardware removal: indications and expectations. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006;14(2):113–20.PubMed
3.
Loder RT, Feinberg JR. Orthopaedic implants in children: survey results regarding routine removal by the pediatric and nonpediatric specialists. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006;26(4):510–9.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Böstman O, Pihlajamäki H. Routine implant removal after fracture surgery: a potentially reducible consumer of hospital resources in trauma units. J Trauma. 1996;41(5):846–9.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Mølster A, Behring J, Gjerdet NR, Ekeland A. Removal of osteosynthetic implants. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2002;122(23):2274–6.PubMed
6.
Jamil W, Allami M, Choudhury MZ, Mann C, Bagga T, Roberts A. Do orthopaedic surgeons need a policy on the removal of metalwork? A descriptive national survey of practicing surgeons in the United Kingdom. Injury. 2008;39(3):362–7.PubMedCrossRef
7.
8.
Black J. Does corrosion matter? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988;70(4):517–20.PubMed
9.
Levine DL, Staehle RW. Crevice corrosion in orthopedic implant metals. J Biomed Mater Res. 1977;11(4):553–61.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Thomas KA, Cook SD, Harding AF, Haddad RJ Jr. Tissue reaction to implant corrosion in 38 internal fixation devices. Orthopedics. 1988;11(3):441–51.PubMed
11.
Grogan CH. Experimental studies in metal cancerigenesis. VIII. On the etiological factor in chromate cancer. Cancer. 1957;10(3):625–38.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Hallab N, Merritt K, Jacobs JJ. Metal sensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A(3):428–36.PubMed
13.
Thomas P, Thomsen M. Allergy diagnostics in implant intolerance. Orthopade. 2008;37(2):131–5.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Müller A, Allgöwer M, Schneider R, Willenegger H, editors. Manual of internal fixation. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 1979.
15.
Kettunen J, Kröger H, Bowditch M, Joukainen J, Suomalainen O. Bone mineral density after removal of rigid plates from forearm fractures: preliminary report. J Orthop Sci. 2003;8(6):772–6.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Rosson JW, Petley GW, Shearer JR. Bone structure after removal of internal fixation plates. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991;73(1):65–7.PubMed
17.
Rosson J, Murphy W, Tonge C, Shearer J. Healing of residual screw holes after plate removal. Injury. 1991;22(5):383–4.PubMedCrossRef
18.
du Preez LA, Bütow KW, Swart TJ. Implant failure due to titanium hypersensitivity/allergy?—Report of a case. SADJ. 2007;62(1):22, 24–5.PubMed
19.
Krischak GD, Gebhard F, Mohr W, Krivan V, Ignatius A, Beck A, et al. Difference in metallic wear distribution released from commercially pure titanium compared with stainless steel plates. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004;124(2):104–13.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Serhan H, Slivka M, Albert T, Kwak SD. Is galvanic corrosion between titanium alloy and stainless steel spinal implants a clinical concern? Spine J. 2004;4(4):379–87.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Ehlinger M, Adam P, Simon P, Bonnomet F. Technical difficulties in hardware removal in titanium compression plates with locking screws. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009;95(5):373–6.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Richards RG. The effect of surface roughness on fibroblast adhesion in vitro. Injury. 1996;27(Suppl 3):SC38–43.PubMed
23.
Meredith DO, Riehle MO, Curtis AS, Richards RG. Is surface chemical composition important for orthopaedic implant materials? J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2007;18(2):405–13.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Hayes JS, Seidenglanz U, Pearce AI, Pearce SG, Archer CW, Richards RG. Surface polishing positively influences ease of plate and screw removal. Eur Cell Mater. 2010;19:117–26.PubMed
25.
Pearce AI, Pearce SG, Schwieger K, Milz S, Schneider E, Archer CW, et al. Effect of surface topography on removal of cortical bone screws in a novel sheep model. J Orthop Res. 2008;26(10):1377–83.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Hayes JS, Vos DI, Hahn J, Pearce SG, Richards RG. An in vivo evaluation of surface polishing of TAN intermedullary nails for ease of removal. Eur Cell Mater. 2009;18:15–26.PubMed
27.
Sanderson PL, Ryan W, Turner PG. Complications of metalwork removal. Injury. 1992;23(1):29–30.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Richards RH, Palmer JD, Clarke NM. Observations on removal of metal implants. Injury. 1992;23(1):25–8.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Minkowitz RB, Bhadsavle S, Walsh M, Egol KA. Removal of painful orthopaedic implants after fracture union. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(9):1906–12.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Müller-Färber J. Metal removal after osteosyntheses. Indications and risks. Orthopade. 2003;32(11):1039–57. quiz 58.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Krettek C, Müller C, Meller R, Jagodzinski M, Hildebrand F, Gaulke R. Is routine implant removal after trauma surgery sensible? Unfallchirurg. 2012;115(4):315–22.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Raney EM, Freccero DM, Dolan LA, Lighter DE, Fillman RR, Chambers HG. Evidence-based analysis of removal of orthopaedic implants in the pediatric population. J Pediatr Orthop. 2008;28(7):701–4.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Morshed S, Humphrey M, Corrales LA, Millett M, Hoffinger SA. Retention of flexible intramedullary nails following treatment of pediatric femur fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2007;127(7):509–14.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Gorter EA, Vos DI, Sier CF, Schipper IB. Implant removal associated complications in children with limb fractures due to trauma. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2011;37(6):623–7.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Berkes M, Obremskey WT, Scannell B, Ellington JK, Hymes RA, Bosse M; Southeast Fracture Consortium. Maintenance of hardware after early postoperative infection following fracture internal fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(4):823–8.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Rightmire E, Zurakowski D, Vrahas M. Acute infections after fracture repair: management with hardware in place. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(2):466–72.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Trampuz A, Widmer AF. Infections associated with orthopedic implants. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2006;19(4):349–56.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Trampuz A, Zimmerli W. Diagnosis and treatment of infections associated with fracture-fixation devices. Injury. 2006;37(Suppl 2):S59–66.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Vos D, Hanson B, Verhofstad M. Implant removal of osteosynthesis: the Dutch practice. Results of a survey. J Trauma Manag Outcomes. 2012;6(1):6.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Hidaka S, Gustilo RB. Refracture of bones of the forearm after plate removal. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66(8):1241–3.PubMed
41.
Deluca PA, Lindsey RW, Ruwe PA. Refracture of bones of the forearm after the removal of compression plates. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70(9):1372–6.PubMed
42.
Rumball K, Finnegan M. Refractures after forearm plate removal. J Orthop Trauma. 1990;4(2):124–9.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Labosky DA, Cermak MB, Waggy CA. Forearm fracture plates: to remove or not to remove. J Hand Surg Am. 1990;15(2):294–301.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Langkamer VG, Ackroyd CE. Removal of forearm plates. a review of the complications. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72(4):601–4.PubMed
45.
Rosson JW, Shearer JR. Refracture after the removal of plates from the forearm. an avoidable complication. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991;73(3):415–7.PubMed
46.
Chia J, Soh CR, Wong HP, Low YP. Complications following metal removal: a follow-up of surgically treated forearm fractures. Singapore Med J. 1996;37(3):268–9.PubMed
47.
Gyuricza C, Carlson MG, Weiland AJ, Wolfe SW, Hotchkiss RN, Daluiski A. Removal of locked volar plates after distal radius fractures. J Hand Surg Am. 2011;36(6):982–5.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Lovald S, Mercer D, Hanson J, Cowgill I, Erdman M, Robinson P, et al. Complications and hardware removal after open reduction and internal fixation of humeral fractures. J Trauma. 2011;70(5):1273–7. discussion 1227–8.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Boerger TO, Patel G, Murphy JP. Is routine removal of intramedullary nails justified. Injury. 1999;30(2):79–81.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Husain A, Pollak AN, Moehring HD, Olson SA, Chapman MW. Removal of intramedullary nails from the femur: a review of 45 cases. J Orthop Trauma. 1996;10(8):560–2.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Brumback RJ, Ellison TS, Poka A, Bathon GH, Burgess AR. Intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures. Part III: long-term effects of static interlocking fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74(1):106–12.PubMed
52.
Toms AD, Morgan-Jones RL, Spencer-Jones R. Intramedullary femoral nailing: removing the nail improves subjective outcome. Injury. 2002;33(3):247–9.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Dodenhoff RM, Dainton JN, Hutchins PM. Proximal thigh pain after femoral nailing. causes and treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(5):738–41.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Gösling T, Hufner T, Hankemeier S, Zelle BA, Muller-Heine A, Krettek C. Femoral nail removal should be restricted in asymptomatic patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;423:222–6.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Hui C, Jorgensen I, Buckley R, Fick G. Incidence of intramedullary nail removal after femoral shaft fracture healing. Can J Surg. 2007;50(1):13–8.PubMed
56.
Kukla C, Gaebler C, Mousavi M, Vécsei V, Heinz T. Indications for implant removal in healed proximal femoral fractures. Acta Chir Austriaca. 2000;32:196–8.
57.
Krettek C, Mommsen P. Implant removal after intramedullary osteosyntheses. Literature review, technical details, and tips and tricks. Unfallchirurg. 2012;115(4):299–314.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Keating JF, Orfaly R, O’Brien PJ. Knee pain after tibial nailing. J Orthop Trauma. 1997;11(1):10–3.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Karladani AH, Ericsson PA, Granhed H, Karlsson L, Nyberg P. Tibial intramedullary nails—should they be removed? A retrospective study of 71 patients. Acta Orthop. 2007;78(5):668–71.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Leliveld MS, Verhofstad MH. Injury to the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve, a possible cause for anterior knee pain after tibial nailing? Injury. 2012;43(6):779–83.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Sidky A, Buckley RE. Hardware removal after tibial fracture has healed. Can J Surg. 2008;51(4):263–8.PubMed
62.
Gösling T, Hüfner T, Hankemeier S, Müller U, Richter M, Krettek C. Indication for removal of tibial nails. Chirurg. 2005;76(8):789–94.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Im GI, Lee KB. Difficulties in removing ACE tibial intramedullary nail. Int Orthop. 2003;27(6):355–8.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Seligson D, Howard PA, Martin R. Difficulty in removal of certain intramedullary nails. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;340:202–6.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Brown OL, Dirschl DR, Obremskey WT. Incidence of hardware-related pain and its effect on functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2001;15(4):271–4.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Williams AA, Witten DM, Duester R, Chou LB. The benefits of implant removal from the foot and ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(14):1316–20.PubMedCrossRef
67.
Georgiadis GM. Percutaneous removal of buried antegrade femoral nails. J Orthop Trauma. 2008;22(1):52–5.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Metadaten
Titel
Indications for implant removal after fracture healing: a review of the literature
verfasst von
D. I. Vos
M. H. J. Verhofstad
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2013
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery / Ausgabe 4/2013
Print ISSN: 1863-9933
Elektronische ISSN: 1863-9941
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-013-0283-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2013

European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery 4/2013 Zur Ausgabe

Original Article

Influence of vagal injury on acute traumatic reaction after blast injury

Original Article

Impact of fluid therapy on apoptosis and organ injury during haemorrhagic shock in an oxygen-debt-controlled pig model

Letter

More on acetabular fractures: the Trojan War and the Roman Empire

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Elective spare parts free flap—calcaneal fillet of foot flap

Original Article

Epidemiology and management of trauma patients in a Greek multispecialty hospital in the absence of a dedicated trauma center

Editorial

Metal removal

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Knie-TEP: Kein Vorteil durch antibiotikahaltigen Knochenzement

29.05.2024 Periprothetische Infektionen Nachrichten

Zur Zementierung einer Knie-TEP wird in Deutschland zu über 98% Knochenzement verwendet, der mit einem Antibiotikum beladen ist. Ob er wirklich besser ist als Zement ohne Antibiotikum, kann laut Registerdaten bezweifelt werden.

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

28.05.2024 Häusliche Gewalt Nachrichten

In der Notaufnahme wird die Chance, Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt zu identifizieren, von Orthopäden und Orthopädinnen offenbar zu wenig genutzt. Darauf deuten die Ergebnisse einer Fragebogenstudie an der Sahlgrenska-Universität in Schweden hin.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

21.05.2024 Allgemeine Chirurgie Nachrichten

Ein Frauenanteil von mindestens einem Drittel im ärztlichen Op.-Team war in einer großen retrospektiven Studie aus Kanada mit einer signifikanten Reduktion der postoperativen Morbidität assoziiert.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise