People who died after LL

Edit Post

Precice?? Isnt precise the safest

Edit Post

Precice?? Isnt precise the safest

Edit Post

In tibias external rings are still the saffest for example because are more stable and very effective in preventing and correcting many complications, difficulties and obstacles.
In femurs is debatable because patient cooperation is more difficult  but there is also less risk for example of thrombosis.
Externals allways have more risk of infection but allmost always treatable.
This seems to be the general scientific currrent conclusion, but different surgeons, with different experiences, have sometimes different preferences because internal nails are simpler to be implanted and prefered by patients.

Edit Post

In tibias external rings are still the saffest for example because are more stable and very effective in preventing and correcting many complications, difficulties and obstacles.
In femurs is debatable because patient cooperation is more difficult  but there is also less risk for example of thrombosis.
Externals allways have more risk of infection but allmost always treatable.
This seems to be the general scientific currrent conclusion, but different surgeons, with different experiences, have sometimes different preferences because internal nails are simpler to be implanted and prefered by patients.

Edit Post

Quote from: zaozari on November 24, 2021, 11:45:54 AMSaffest method is still externals  classic or adapted Ilizarov, altough very difficult and painfully if done in femurs.
(Answer to apoplectic, 2019)

How are safest methods the externals? Less chance of embolism?

Edit Post

Quote from: mazr922 on May 02, 2023, 07:24:49 AMHow are safest methods the externals? Less chance of embolism?

Yes, much less chance

Edit Post

Do you have any evidence or source? Or is this just what you think?

Edit Post

Quote from: DanishViking on May 02, 2023, 03:56:37 PMDo you have any evidence or source? Or is this just what you think?

+1