...
首页> 外文期刊>Indian journal of orthopaedics >Comparision of Ilizarov Ring Fixator and Rail Fixator in Infected Nonunion of Long Bones: A Retrospective Followup Study
【24h】

Comparision of Ilizarov Ring Fixator and Rail Fixator in Infected Nonunion of Long Bones: A Retrospective Followup Study

机译:Ilizarov环固定器和导轨固定器在长骨感染性骨不连中的比较:回顾性随访研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: About 70 million trauma injuries that occur annually, around the world. More than 4.5 million open fractures occur per year in India. Long bone fractures nonunion (NU) rate varies from 2% to 7%. The management of open fracture is challenging for the orthopedic surgeon. The conventional protocol of management of compound fracture are debridement, temporary stabilization by external fixators, wound and definitive management. Very few prospective studies have been done comparing Illizarov and RF in infected nonunion. Thus we performed a retrospective study to compare the acceptance, complications, and functional outcome of Ilizarov ring fixator (IRF) and rail fixator (RF) in the treatment of infected NU. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study of fifty infected long bone NU patients, who consulted Orthopedics Department of a tertiary care hospital of North-India from 2010 to 2014 was undertaken. Patients were divided into two Groups (Gp) of 25 each: one group was treated with IRF, another with RF and both followed for one year. Results were analyzed as per the ASAMI criteria (Association for the Study and Application of Methods of Illizarov) and complications as per Paley's classification. Patient's satisfaction was assessed by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from 0 to 100 mm. Results: Majority of the patients were in age group of 31- 45 years males with right sided involvement with previously treated infected NU of tibia involving distal one-third. According to VAS score, patients had mild to moderate pain in 13 cases in Gp-IRF and in 16 cases in Gp-RF, whereas severe pain was present in 12 cases of Gp-IRF and 9 cases of Gp-RF. Pin tract infection and pain were the commonest complication. Mean bone gap was 7.76 cm and 5.78 cm; average total treatment time was 17.64 and 13.40 months in Gp-IRF and Gp-RF, respectively. Duration of IRF application was more than RF ( P 0.01). Both the limbs were equated in 20 cases (80%) in Gp-IRF and 18 cases (72%) in Gp-RF. Results were found to be excellent in 7 (28%) and 8 (32%), good in 8 (32%) and 13 (52%), and fair in 10 (40%) and 4 (16%) cases in Gp-IRF and Gp-RF, respectively. Bony union achieved in 100% cases. Treatment index was 68.45 days/cm and 64.29 days/cm in Gp-IRF and Gp-RF, respectively. Conclusion: In view of the patient acceptance, functional outcome and complications, rail fixator shows a better result than Ilizarov.
机译:背景:全球每年发生约7,000万例外伤。印度每年发生超过450万例开放性骨折。长骨骨折骨不连(NU)的发生率从2%到7%不等。对于骨科医生来说,开放性骨折的治疗具有挑战性。复合骨折的常规处理方法是清创术,外固定架暂时稳定,伤口和确定性处理。很少有前瞻性研究比较感染性骨不连的伊利扎洛夫和射频。因此,我们进行了一项回顾性研究,以比较Ilizarov环固定器(IRF)和钢轨固定器(RF)在感染NU的治疗中的接受度,并发症和功能结局。材料和方法:回顾性队列研究了50名受感染的长骨NU患者,该患者于2010年至2014年咨询了北印度三级医院的骨科。将患者分为两组(Gp),每组25个:一组接受IRF治疗,另一组接受RF治疗,均随访一年。根据ASAMI标准(伊利扎罗夫方法研究与应用协会)分析结果,并根据Paley分类对并发症进行分析。通过视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估范围从0到100 mm的患者满意度。结果:大多数患者为年龄在31-45岁之间的男性,右侧受累,先前接受过治疗,感染的胫骨NU占三分之一。根据VAS评分,患者中轻度至中度疼痛的Gp-IRF为13例,Gp-RF为16例,而Gp-IRF为12例,Gp-RF为9例。针道感染和疼痛是最常见的并发症。平均骨间隙为7.76 cm和5.78 cm; Gp-IRF和Gp-RF的平均总治疗时间分别为17.64和13.40个月。 IRF的应用持续时间大于RF(P <0.01)。 Gp-IRF的两肢相等(20%(80%),Gp-RF的18例(72%)。结果发现,在Gp中7例(28%)和8例(32%)优异,8例(32%)和13例(52%)良好,10例(40%)和4例(16%)良好。 -IRF和Gp-RF。在100%的案例中实现了Bony Union。 Gp-IRF和Gp-RF的治疗指数分别为68.45天/厘米和64.29天/厘米。结论:考虑到患者的接受程度,功能结果和并发症,钢轨固定器比Ilizarov效果更好。

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