...
首页> 外文期刊>Medical science monitor : >Treatment of Unstable Posterior Pelvic Ring Fracture with Pedicle Screw-Rod Fixator Versus Locking Compression Plate: A Comparative Study
【24h】

Treatment of Unstable Posterior Pelvic Ring Fracture with Pedicle Screw-Rod Fixator Versus Locking Compression Plate: A Comparative Study

机译:椎弓根螺钉固定器与加压加压钢板治疗不稳定的后盆骨环骨折的比较研究

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to assess the clinical results of treatment for unstable posterior pelvic fractures using a pedicle screw-rod fixator compared to use of a locking compression plate. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective study was performed between June 2010 and May 2014 and the data were collected from 46 patients with unstable posterior pelvic ring fractures. All patients were treated using either a pedicle screw-rod fixator (study group, 24 patients) or locking compression plate (control group, 22 patients). In these patients, causes of injury included traffic accidents (n=27), fall from height (n=12), and crushing accidents (n=7). The quality of reduction and radiological grading were assessed. Clinical assessments included the operation time, times of X-ray exposures, bleeding volume during operation, incision length, and Majeed postoperative functional evaluation. RESULTS No iatrogenic neurovascular injuries occurred during the operations in these 2 groups. The average follow-up time was 24.5 months. All fractures were healed. The significant differences ([i]P[/i]<0.05) between the 2 groups were operation duration, size of incision, and intraoperative bleeding volume. Statistically significant differences in the Majeed postoperative functional evaluation and times of X-ray exposures were not found between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS Similar clinical effects were achieved in treating the posterior pelvic ring fractures using the pedicle screw-rod fixator and the locking compression plate. However, the pedicle screw-rod fixator has the advantages of smaller incision, shorter duration of the operation, and less bleeding volume compared to using the locking compression plate.
机译:背景技术本研究的目的是评估与使用锁定加压板相比,使用椎弓根螺钉杆固定器治疗不稳定的后路骨盆骨折的临床结果。材料与方法回顾性研究于2010年6月至2014年5月进行,数据来自46例不稳定的骨盆后环骨折患者。所有患者均使用椎弓根螺钉固定器(研究组24例)或锁定加压板(对照组22例)进行治疗。在这些患者中,受伤原因包括交通事故(n = 27),从高处跌落(n = 12)和压碎事故(n = 7)。评估减少的质量和放射学分级。临床评估包括手术时间,X射线暴露时间,手术中出血量,切口长度和Majeed术后功能评估。结果两组均未发生医源性神经血管损伤。平均随访时间为24.5个月。所有骨折均he愈。两组之间的显着差异([i] P [/ i] <0.05)是手术持续时间,切口大小和术中出血量。两组之间在Majeed术后功能评估和X线照射时间上没有统计学上的显着差异。结论使用椎弓根螺钉杆固定器和锁定加压钢板治疗骨盆后环骨折取得了相似的临床效果。然而,与使用锁定加压板相比,椎弓根螺钉杆固定器具有切口更小,操作时间更短以及出血量更少的优点。

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