首页> 外文期刊>BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders >Comparison of the outcomes of cannulated screws vs. modified tension band wiring fixation techniques in the management of mildly displaced patellar fractures
【24h】

Comparison of the outcomes of cannulated screws vs. modified tension band wiring fixation techniques in the management of mildly displaced patellar fractures

机译:空心螺钉与改良张力带导线固定技术治疗轻度displaced骨骨折的疗效比较

获取原文
           

摘要

K wire fixation with tension band wiring has conventionally been used for the open reduction and internal fixation of the patella. However, it suffers from distinct disadvantages such as implant irritation, need for open reduction, incidence of palpable implants, and need for subsequent implant removal. A smaller incision with percutaneous fixation may be an alternative to this established conventional technique. Thus, the purpose of this trial was to compare the treatment outcomes of patients with mildly displaced patellar fractures treated with closed reduction and percutaneous cannulated screw fixation (CRCF) as compared to open reduction and tension band wiring fixation (ORTF). Specifically, we aimed to determine whether cannulated screw fixation was associated with improved clinical outcomes at 12?months as measured using the Lysholm score, pain scores, degree of flexion, range of motion, time to radiographic union, radiographic outcomes, and complication rates. Sixty-three patients with transverse patellar fractures displaced less than 8?mm were included in this prospective, randomized, controlled trial, with 52 patients in the final data analysis. Thirty-two patients were operatively treated by CRCF with either two or three cannulated screws. Thirty-one patients were operatively treated by conventional ORTF using the modified tension band technique. At postoperative intervals of 3, 6, and 12?months, knee function was evaluated using the Lysholm score, pain was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) score, and active knee extensions and flexion were measured in degrees by goniometry. The CRCF group had average Lysholm scores of 84.4?±?5.8, 86.7?±?6.4, and 93.2?±?5.3 after 3, 6, and 12?months, respectively, which were significantly greater than those of the ORTF group (79.0?±?5.3, p?=?0.001; 81.5?±?4.6, p?=?0.002; and 89.8?±?6.2, p?=?0.039, respectively). Lower pain and squatting scores were the main reasons for the poorer Lysholm scores in the ORTF group. The VAS scores showed that the CRCF group had lower pain scores and better flexion and total range of motion (ROM) compared with the ORTF group after 3 and 6?months, although both groups had similar outcomes after 12?months. The mean fracture healing time of 2.65?months was similar in the CRCF groups (2.77?months; p?=?0.440). Complication rates were 3/26 (11.5?%) in the CRCF group and 14/26 (53.4?%) in the ORTF group. Two patients in the CRCF group and eight patients in the ORTF group experienced skin irritation. In addition, two (7.7?%) patients in the CRCF group and 11 (42.3?%) patients in the ORTF group required implant removal because of symptoms due to the presence of the implants. Surgical treatment of mild displaced (less than 8?mm) transverse patellar fractures by the CRCF technique provides satisfactory clinical results and excellent knee function, with little pain and a low incidence of complications at early follow-up (up to 6?months). These results suggest that the CRCF technique may be a superior alternative to conventional ORTF. Registration Trial (Chinese Clinical Trial Register): Current Controlled Trials ChiCTR-PRCH-14005017, registration dates 2014-06-14.
机译:常规地,将具有张力带布线的K线固定用于for骨的切开复位和内部固定。然而,它具有明显的缺点,例如植入物发炎,需要减少切开,可触及的植入物发生以及需要随后的植入物去除。经皮固定的较小切口可能是此既定常规技术的替代方法。因此,该试验的目的是比较经闭合复位和经皮空心钉固定(CRCF)与经复位复位和张力带导线固定(ORTF)相比的轻度displaced骨骨折患者的治疗结果。具体而言,我们的目的是确定使用Lysholm评分,疼痛评分,屈曲程度,运动范围,X线摄影联合时间,X线摄影结果和并发症发生率来衡量,空心螺钉固定在12个月时是否改善了临床疗效。这项前瞻性,随机,对照试验纳入了63例移位小于8?mm的transverse骨横突骨折患者,最终数据分析中有52例患者。 32例接受CRCF的2或3个空心螺钉手术治疗。常规ORTF使用改良张力带技术对31例患者进行手术治疗。在术后3、6和12个月的时间间隔,使用Lysholm评分评估膝关节功能,使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分评估疼痛,​​并通过测角术以度数测量活动性膝关节伸展和屈曲。 CRCF组在3、6和12个月后的平均Lysholm评分分别为84.4?±?5.8、86.7?±?6.4和93.2?±?5.3,显着高于ORTF组(79.0)。 α±5.3,p = 0.001,81.5±4.6,p = 0.002,89.8±6.2,p = 0.039。较低的疼痛和下蹲评分是ORTF组Lysholm评分较差的主要原因。 VAS评分显示,与3个月和6个月后的ORTF组相比,CRCF组疼痛评分更低,屈曲和运动范围(ROM)更好,尽管两组在12个月后都有相似的结果。 CRCF组的平均骨折愈合时间为2.65个月(2.77个月); p≤0.440。 CRCF组的并发症发生率为3/26(11.5%),ORTF组的并发症发生率为14/26(53.4%)。 CRCF组中有2例患者,ORTF组中有8例患者出现皮肤刺激。此外,由于存在植入物,因此CRCF组中的2名(7.7%)患者和ORTF组中的11名(42.3%)患者需要去除植入物。 CRCF技术对轻度移位(小于8?mm)的横pa骨骨折进行手术治疗,可提供令人满意的临床效果和出色的膝关节功能,几乎没有疼痛感,并且在早期随访(长达6个月)中并发症发生率低。这些结果表明,CRCF技术可能是传统ORTF的替代方案。登记试验(中国临床试验登记册):当前对照试验ChiCTR-PRCH-14005017,注册日期2014年6月14日。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号