首页> 外文OA文献 >Treatment of Open Pediatric Tibial Fractures by External Fixation Versus Flexible Intramedullary Nailing: A Comparative Study
【2h】

Treatment of Open Pediatric Tibial Fractures by External Fixation Versus Flexible Intramedullary Nailing: A Comparative Study

机译:外固定架加柔性髓内钉治疗小儿胫骨开放性骨折的比较研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Tibial fractures are the third most common pediatric long-bone fracture after forearm and femoral fractures. Approximately 50% of pediatric tibial fractures occur in the distal third of the tibia. This is followed by midshaft tibial fractures (39%), and least commonly, the proximal third of the tibia is involved. Tibial fractures in the skeletally immature patient can usually be treated without surgery but tibial fractures resulting from high energy traumas are of special importance considering type of the selected treatment method affecting the children future. Manipulation and casting are regarded as definite treatments for children tibia fractures. They are used following compartment syndrome in poly-trauma, neurovascular damages, open fractures, and fasciotomy cases.ududObjectives: In children, most open fractures occur due to high energy traumas and inappropriate treatment of the fractures may result in several complications. Flexible intramedullary nailing is one of the popular options as an effective method of treating long-bone fractures in children. The external fixator is used in cases with severe injuries and open fractures. The present study aims at comparing results of these two treatment methods in the pediatric tibial open fractures.ududMaterials and Methods: In this descriptive analytical study, 32 patients with open tibial fractures were treated with either fixator (n = 18) or TEN nails (n=14) during 2006-2011. Some patients were treated with a combination method of TEN and pin. The results were evaluated considering infection, union, mal-union, and re-fracture and the patients were followed up for two years.ududResults: Mean time required for fracture union was 12.5 (11-14) and 11.8 (10-12) weeks for the external fixator and TEN groups, respectively. There was no statistical difference in time of union between the two methods. The main complications in external fixation were infection around the pin 4 (22.2%), leg-length discrepancy 2 (11.1%) and re-fracture 4 (22.2%). In the TEN group, 2 cases (14.2%) of painful bursitis were observed at the entry point of TEN and the pin was removed earlier. There was not any report of mal-union requiring correction in the groups. No complication was seen in 6 patients treated with a combined method of pin and flexible intramedullary nails.ududConclusions: Although external fixation in open pediatric fractures and severe injuries is recommended, intramedullary nailing is also an effective method with low complications. Combining pins and flexible intramedullary nails is effective in developing more stability and is not associated with more complications.
机译:背景:胫骨骨折是仅次于前臂和股骨骨折的第三大儿科长骨骨折。大约50%的小儿胫骨骨折发生在胫骨远端1/3。其次是胫骨中轴骨折(39%),最不常见的是胫骨近端三分之一。骨骼不成熟患者的胫骨骨折通常无需手术即可治疗,但考虑到影响儿童未来的所选治疗方法的类型,由高能量创伤导致的胫骨骨折尤为重要。操纵和铸造被认为是儿童胫骨骨折的明确治疗方法。它们在多发性创伤,神经血管损伤,开放性骨折和筋膜切开术病例中用于隔室综合征。 ud ud目标:儿童中,大多数开放性骨折是由于高能量创伤而发生的,对骨折的不适当治疗可能导致多种并发症。柔性髓内钉治疗是治疗儿童长骨骨折的有效方法,是一种流行的选择。外伤者可在重伤和开放性骨折的情况下使用。本研究旨在比较这两种治疗方法在小儿胫骨开放性骨折中的疗效。 ud ud材料和方法:在本描述性分析研究中,对32例胫骨开放性骨折患者采用了固定器(n = 18)或TEN治疗在2006-2011年期间指甲(n = 14)。一些患者接受了TEN和PIN的联合治疗。评估结果时考虑了感染,联合,畸形和再骨折,并对患者进行了两年的随访。 ud ud结果:骨折联合所需的平均时间为12.5(11-14)和11.8(10- 12)周分别用于外固定架和TEN组。两种方法的合并时间没有统计学差异。外固定的主要并发症是第4针周围的感染(22.2%),腿长差异2(11.1%)和再次骨折4(22.2%)。在TEN组中,在TEN的入口处观察到2例(占14.2%)疼痛滑囊炎,并且较早地拔出了针。各组中没有任何需要纠正的关于工会的报告。结论:尽管建议在开放性小儿骨折和重度损伤中采用外固定,但6例患者均未见并发症发生。 ud ud结论:尽管建议在小儿开放性骨折和严重损伤中进行外固定,但髓内钉也是一种并发症少的有效方法。结合使用别针和柔性髓内钉可以有效地提高稳定性,并且不会增加并发症。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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