Authors: Yueju Liu Han Li Yingze Zhang
Publish Date: 2014/05/28
Volume: 38, Issue: 7, Pages: 1543-1543
Abstract
Hanschen et al 1 have done an excellent study on monoversus polyaxial locking plates in distal femur fractures which found the polyaxial treatment tended to result in better functional and radiological outcome However we have some concerns regarding the paper and wish to share themFirstly in figure 2 of this article nine screws were fixed in the proximal part of the fracture site—could they make the plate too rigid In our early experience using the LISS fatigue fracture of the plate occurred in three patients because of this reason And Smith et al 2 also suggest that the plate should not be made too rigid because this can compromise both callus formation and secondary bone healing If nonunion occurs eventually the plate will fatigue fractureSecondly the authors said their purpose was to investigates the outcome of LISS® vs NCB®DF treatment following complex fractures of the distal femur However during the study there were 11 type 33A of AO classification which accounted for 407 of all the patients 11/27 After searching all the English literature we have not found a clear definition of complex distal femoral fractures But the complex distal femoral fracture itself belongs to type 33C of AO classification in most literature which involves the articular surface of the distal femur 3 4 5 Therefore could the author give us an explanation for this
Keywords: