الفهرس 
Anterior external fixator versus subcutaneous internal fixator in management of unstable pelvic ring injures
List of ContentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 161 |  |  |
| | | from | 161 | | |
Abstract
Pelvic ring fracture can be divided into: unstable type and stable type. Depending on the direction of the acting force, either predominantly ligamentous or osseous lesions result, which affect the integrity of the pelvic ring
Objectives:
- Are INFIX and APEF having the same functional and radiological outcomes, or there are one superior to the other?
- Is APEF have a higher incidence of complications than INFIX?
- Is APEF more effective in emergency situations than INFIX?
Patients and methods:
from October2018 to October 2021, a prospective case control trial was carried out including 54 patients with diagnosis of unstable pelvic ring fracture at El-Kasr Al-Aini hospital. The aim was to compare the use of INFIX (30 cases), and APEF (24 cases).
1- Functional outcome (Majeed score);
The functional outcome according to Majeed score was superior in INFIX group than APEF group but with no statistically significance (P- value: 0.513). Mean result of Majeed score in APEF group was 90.99 (between 75-100). While in INFIX group, it was 92.35 (between 71-100).
Discussion:
Accounting for only 6% of all fractures, the high-energy pelvic ring fractures often lead to serious consequences with high mortality and morbidity. While a variety of treating methods have been employed, successful management of unstable pelvic fractures remains a challenge to orthopedic surgeons.