Skip to main content
. 2022 May-Aug;17(2):88–91. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1558

Table 3.

Patients with trauma frame that develop deep infection

Patient No Sex Age Site of fracture AO classification of fracture Type of frame Open fracture Use of internal fixation Use of bone augment Duration of frame (days) Date of diagnosis of deep infection from removal of frame (days)
1 M 21 Ankle pilon 43 C3 Ilizarov No Yes No 96 259
2 F 65 Ankle pilon 43 C3 TrueLok Hexapod Yes Yes Yes 393 −286*
3 M 24 Tibial shaft 42 B2 TrueLok Hexapod Yes No No 138 232
4 F 63 Tibial plateau 41 C3 Ilizarov No Yes No 132 601
5 M 71 Tibial plateau 41 C3 Taylor Spatial Frame No Yes Yes 146 6
6 F 54 Tibial plateau 41 C3 Ilizarov No Yes Yes 118 63
7 M 45 Ankle pilon 43 C3 Ilizarov No Yes Yes 262 65
8 M 38 Tibial plateau 41 C3 Taylor Spatial Frame No Yes Yes 197 104
9 M 52 Tibial plateau 41 C3 TrueLok Hexapod No Yes Yes 157 −129*
10 M 61 Tibial plateau 41 C3 Taylor Spatial Frame Yes Yes No 119 208
11 F 53 Tibial plateau 41 C2 Ilizarov No Yes Yes 87 −3*
12 M 35 Ankle pilon 43 C2 Taylor Spatial Frame Yes Yes No 346 247
13 F 71 Tibial plateau 41 C3 TrueLok Hexapod No Yes Yes 195 −42*

*Infection occurred before the frame was removed; hence, negative