首页> 外文期刊>International Orthopaedics >Comparison of the use of the humerus intramedullary nail and dynamic compression plate for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. A randomised controlled study.
【24h】

Comparison of the use of the humerus intramedullary nail and dynamic compression plate for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. A randomised controlled study.

机译:使用肱骨髓内钉和动力加压板治疗肱骨干端骨折的比较。一项随机对照研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The aim of this study was to compare the results of the humerus intramedullary nail (IMN) and dynamic compression plate (DCP) for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. Forty-seven patients with diaphyseal fracture of the shaft of the humerus were randomised prospectively and treated by open reduction and internal fixation with IMN or DCP. The criteria for inclusion were grade 1 or 2a compound fractures, polytrauma, early failure of conservative treatment and unstable fractures. The patients with pathological fractures, grade 3 open fractures, refractures and old neglected fractures of the humerus were excluded from the study. Twenty-three patients underwent internal fixation by IMN and 24 by DCP. Reamed antegrade nailing was done in all cases. DCP was done through an anterolateral or posterior approach. The outcome was assessed in terms of the union time, union rate, functional outcome and the incidence of complications. Functional outcome was assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons' Score (ASES). On comparing the results by independent samples t test, there was no significant difference in ASES scores between the two groups (P>0.05). The average union time was found to be significantly lower for IMN as compared to DCP (P<0.05). The union rate was found to be similar in both groups. Complications such as infection were found to be higher with DCP as compared to IMN, while shortening of the arm (1.5-4 cm) and restriction of shoulder movements due to impingement by the nail were found to be higher with IMN as compared to DCP. However, this improved in all patients following the removal of the nail once the fracture had healed. This study proves that IMN can be considered a better surgical option for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus as it offers a short union time and lower incidence of serious complicatins like infection. However, there appears to be no difference between the two groups in terms of the rate of union and functional outcome.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较肱骨髓内钉(IMN)和动态加压钢板(DCP)治疗肱骨干端骨折的结果。 47例肱骨干端骨折患者被前瞻性随机分组,并采用开放复位和IMN或DCP内固定治疗。纳入标准为1或2a级复合骨折,多发伤,保守治疗的早期失败和不稳定骨折。本研究排除了具有病理性骨折,3级开放性骨折,肱骨骨折和陈旧性骨折的患者。 23例患者接受了IMN内固定,而24例接受了DCP内固定。在所有情况下均进行扩孔正向钉。 DCP通过前外侧或后方入路进行。根据合并时间,合并率,功能结局和并发症发生率评估结局。使用美国肩肘外科医师评分(ASES)评估功能结局。通过独立样本t检验比较结果,两组之间的ASES评分无显着差异(P> 0.05)。与DCP相比,IMN的平均联合时间显着降低(P <0.05)。发现两组的工会率相似。与IMN相比,DCP发现感染等并发症更高,而与DCP相比,IMN与DCP相比,臂缩短(1.5-4 cm)和由于钉子撞击而引起的肩部运动受限更高。但是,一旦骨折愈合,在移除指甲后,所有患者的情况都会改善。这项研究证明,IMN被认为是治疗肱骨干phy端骨折的更好的外科手术选择,因为它提供了较短的愈合时间并降低了诸如感染之类的严重并发症的发生率。但是,在合并率和功能结局方面,两组之间似乎没有差异。

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