首页> 外文期刊>Journal of orthopaedic trauma >Intramedullary nailing versus percutaneous locked plating of extra-articular proximal tibial fractures: comparison of 56 cases.
【24h】

Intramedullary nailing versus percutaneous locked plating of extra-articular proximal tibial fractures: comparison of 56 cases.

机译:胫骨近端骨折的髓内钉与经皮锁定钢板比较:56例比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare extra-articular proximal tibial fractures treated with intramedullary nailing (IMN) or percutaneous locked plating (PLP) and assess the ability of each technique to obtain and maintain fracture reduction. DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. SETTING:: Level 1 Trauma Center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Beginning with the first use of PLP of the proximal tibia at our institution, all skeletally mature patients with surgically treated proximal extra-articular tibial fractures were reviewed. Between August 1999 and June 2004, 29 patients treated with intramedullary nails and 43 patients treated with percutaneous locked plates were identified. Patients with at least 1-year follow-up included 22 IMN and 34 PLP cases, which formed the final study group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Final outcomes were assessed for the IMN and the PLP groups by comparing rates of union, malunion, malreduction (defined as >5 degrees angulation in any plane), infection, and removal of implants. RESULTS: The IMN and PLP groups showed similar age and gender demographics. Average length of follow-up was 3.4 years in the IMN group (15-67 months) and 2.7 years in the PLP group (12-66 months). Open fractures made up 55% of the IMN group and 35% of the PLP group. Final union rates (after additional procedures for nonunions after the index procedure) were similar between groups (IMN = 96% and PLP = 97%). Implant removal in the PLP group was 3 times greater than in the IMN group, (P = 0.390), whereas an apex anterior (procurvatum) malreduction deformity occurred twice as frequently in the IMN group (P = 0.103). Additional surgical techniques (eg, blocking screws) were frequently used during reduction within the IMN group and infrequently used within the PLP group (P = 0.0002). Neither technique resulted in a statistically significant loss of final reduction confirming the stability of each construct. CONCLUSIONS: Neither IMN or PLP showed a distinct advantage in the treatment of proximal extra-articular tibial fractures. Apex anterior malreduction however was the most prevalent form of malreduction in both groups. Additional surgical reduction techniques were frequently needed with IMN, whereas removal of implants seems to be more commonly needed with PLP.
机译:目的:比较经髓内钉(IMN)或经皮锁定钢板(PLP)治疗的胫骨近端胫骨外骨折,并评估每种技术获得和维持骨折复位的能力。设计:回顾性临床研究。地点:一级创伤中心。患者/受试者:从我们机构首次使用胫骨近端的PLP开始,对所有经手术治疗的胫骨近端关节外骨折的骨骼成熟患者进行了回顾。在1999年8月至2004年6月之间,确定了29例接受髓内钉治疗的患者和43例经皮锁定钢板治疗的患者。至少随访1年的患者包括22例IMN和34例PLP病例,这构成了最终研究组。主要观察指标:通过比较联合,畸形畸形,畸形复位(定义为在任何平面上> 5度),感染和去除植入物的比率,对IMN和PLP组的最终结果进行评估。结果:IMN和PLP组的年龄和性别人口统计数据相似。 IMN组平均随访时间为3.4年(15-67个月),PLP组平均随访时间为2.7年(12-66个月)。开放性骨折占IMN组的55%,占PLP组的35%。各组之间的最终工会率(在为索引手术后的不工会进行额外手术后)相似(IMN = 96%,PLP = 97%)。 PLP组的植入物去除是IMN组的3倍(P = 0.390),而IMN组的前牙(弯曲)畸形畸形的发生率是IMN组的两倍(P = 0.103)。在IMN组复位期间,经常使用其他外科技术(例如,止动螺钉),而在PLP组中则很少使用其他外科技术(P = 0.0002)。两种技术都没有导致统计上的最终还原损失,这证实了每种构建物的稳定性。结论:IMN或PLP均未显示出治疗胫骨近端关节外骨折的明显优势。顶点前部畸形减少是两组中最普遍的畸形减少形式。 IMN经常需要其他外科手术复位技术,而PLP似乎更需要去除植入物。

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