yes thats right

This is a descriptive term of this severe injury pointing out that the knee has lost its stability. On the other hand it is an insufficient term becuase it does not give any idea of the lesions of the knee joint itself. Of course the knee joint and its structures may be concommitantly injured.

Yes I am agree that there are also associated injuries.

Associated injuries are not uncommon.

See: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1249181-overview

Dear Mohammad

Yes. Floating Knee is the term applied to the flail knee joint segment resulting from a fracture of the shaft or adjacent metaphysis of the ipsilateral femur and tibia with associated injuries in most cases

floating knee. Instabile knee due to Fx above (femur) and below (tibia).

means high energy trauma, possible associated with life threatening associations in young, more low energy trauma in elders. Check for fem. neck or acetabular fx.. Fragile neurovascular status. Needs stabilisation within 24h- than less thromboembolic and pulmonary events.

Absolutely correct. There is not necessarily a injury to the joint itself.

It is not "necessary a injury to the joint itself". But it is possible.

Yes its correct and widely accepted

Yes, it is correct terminology in orthopaedics and trauma

there may or might  not be an injury to knee. with the use of the classification by Fraser et al Type II injuries involve the knee joint.

That's right, Dr. Teyha.

there may or might  , Type 1: extraarticular floating knee,  Type II Floating Knee: Ipsilateral Femoral and Tibial Fractures with Intraarticular Extension into the Knee Joint