Table 5.
Comparision of bone and functional result of various studies.
| Author and year of publication | Method of fixation (bones fixed) | No. of patients of tibial complex non union | Functional result as per ASAMI criteria (Excellent/good/fair/poor/failure) In percentage |
Bone results as per ASAMI criteria Excellent/good/fair/poor In percentage |
Percentage of patients who achieved bony union |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patil and Montgomery et al.13 2006 | IRF (tibia and femur) | 78 | 41/41/6/6/6 | 41/34/10/15 | 85 |
| Yin et al. 201414 | IRF (Tibia & femur) | 66 | 66/22/8/4 | 73/25/8/3 | 97 |
| Harshwal et al.15 2014 |
REF (Tibia & femur) | 37 | 73/16/3/8/0 | 65/24/3/8 | 92 |
| Ajmera et al.16 2015 |
REF (Tibia only) | 30 | 84/8/8/0/0 | 76/12/4/8 | 92 |
| Tetsworth et al.17 2017 |
IRF (Tibia only) | 21 | 67/28/5/0 | 71/24/5/0 | 100 |
| Zhang et al. 201818 | IRF (Tibia only) | 16 | 62.5/0/0/37.5 | 75/25/0/0 | 100 |
| Bhardwaj et al.19 2019 |
IRF (Tibia & femur) | 25 | 32/32/36/0/0 | 28/32/40/0 | 100 |
| Bhardwaj et al.19 2019 |
REF (Tibia & femur) | 25 | 32/52/16/0/0 | 32/52/16/0 | 100 |
| Present study | REF (Tibia only) | 22 | 50/23/18/9 | 54/23/14/9 | 91 |