الفهرس 
Randomized Comparative study of External Fixation versus ORIF in Pilon fractures
ContentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 166 |  |  |
| | | from | 166 | | |
Abstract
The underlying study showed no statistical differences in outcome between both methods of fixation regarding union, functional scores, operative time, hospital stay and complication rate. Both methods necessitate precise preoperative planning and advanced surgical experience to reduce the risk of revision surgery and complications. Clinical outcome may largely depend on surgical technique rather than on the choice of implant.
Therefore, we recommend ORIF of pilon fractures, when the soft‑tissue condition is favorable, to obtain accurate anatomical joint reduction, rigid fixation of the articular surface, and restoration of distal tibia alignment. Concerns of soft‑tissue complications can be addressed by meticulous protocol of ORIF in order to select proper timing.preoperative assessment and planning, whether with an early or staged
.