Suppr超能文献

治疗严重胫骨平台骨折的手术选择:三种技术的研究

Surgical options for the treatment of severe tibial pilon fractures: a study of three techniques.

作者信息

Blauth M, Bastian L, Krettek C, Knop C, Evans S

机构信息

Unfallchirurgische Klinik, Medizinische Hochschule, Hanover, Germany.

出版信息

J Orthop Trauma. 2001 Mar-Apr;15(3):153-60. doi: 10.1097/00005131-200103000-00002.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether long-term results of one of three different management protocols for severe tibial pilon fractures offer advantages over the other two.

DESIGN

In a retrospective study, patients were examined clinically and radiologically after internal fixation of severe tibial plafond fractures (i.e., 92 percent Type C fractures according to the AO-ASIF classification).

SETTING

Department of Traumatology, Hanover Medical School. Level I trauma center.

PATIENTS

Fifty-one of seventy-seven patients treated between 1982 and 1992 were examined clinically and radiologically at an average of sixty-eight months (range 13 to 130 months) after injury.

INTERVENTIONS

The patients were treated in three different ways: primary internal fixation with a plate following the AO-ASIF principles (n = 15), which was reserved for patients with closed fractures without severe soft tissue trauma; one-stage minimally invasive osteosynthesis for reconstruction of the articular surface with long-term transarticular external fixation of the ankle for at least four weeks (n = 28); and a two-stage procedure entailing primary reduction and reconstruction of the articular surface with minimally invasive osteosynthesis and short-term transarticular external fixation of the ankle joint followed by secondary medial stabilization with a plate using a technique requiring only limited skin incisions (a reduced invasive technique) (n = 8).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Objective evaluation criteria were infection rate, amount of posttraumatic arthritis, range of ankle movement, and number of arthrodeses. Subjective criteria were pain, swelling, and restriction of work or leisure activities.

RESULTS

Because only closed fractures were treated by primary internal fixation with a plate, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.005) in the distribution of open fractures between the three treatment groups. Fracture classification in these groups were not significantly different. All but four fractures were classified as Type C lesions according to the AO-ASIF system. The soft tissue was closed in 63 percent (n = 32) and open in 37 percent (n = 19). No significant relationship could be found between the soft tissue damage and degree of arthritis or between the type of surgical treatment and extent of posttraumatic arthritis. However, none of the patients who required secondary arthrodesis (23 percent of all cases) were in the group who had undergone two-step surgery (p < 0.05). The range of ankle movement was much greater in the two-step group than in the others; these patients also had less pain, more frequently continued working in their previous profession, and had fewer limitations in their leisure activities. These differences did not reach statistical significance. The incidence of wound infection did not differ significantly among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our results, we now prefer a two-step procedure for the treatment of severe tibial pilon fractures with extensive soft tissue damage. In the first stage, primary reduction and internal fixation of the articular surface is performed using stab incisions, screws, and K-wires. Temporary external fixation is applied across the ankle joint. After recovery of the soft tissues, the second stage entails internal fixation with a medial plate using a reduced invasive technique.

摘要

目的

确定三种不同治疗方案中某一种用于治疗严重胫骨 Pilon 骨折的长期疗效是否优于其他两种。

设计

在一项回顾性研究中,对严重胫骨平台骨折(即根据 AO-ASIF 分类,92%为 C 型骨折)内固定术后的患者进行临床和影像学检查。

地点

汉诺威医学院创伤科。一级创伤中心。

患者

1982 年至 1992 年间接受治疗的 77 例患者中,51 例在受伤后平均 68 个月(范围 13 至 130 个月)接受了临床和影像学检查。

干预措施

患者接受三种不同治疗方式:按照 AO-ASIF 原则采用钢板进行一期内固定(n = 15),该方法仅用于无严重软组织损伤的闭合性骨折患者;采用一期微创接骨术重建关节面,并对踝关节进行至少四周的长期跨关节外固定(n = 28);以及两期手术,即首先采用微创接骨术对关节面进行一期复位和重建,并对踝关节进行短期跨关节外固定,然后采用仅需有限皮肤切口的技术(一种微创技术)用钢板进行二期内侧稳定固定(n = 8)。

主要观察指标

客观评估标准为感染率、创伤后关节炎的程度、踝关节活动范围和关节融合术的数量。主观标准为疼痛、肿胀以及工作或休闲活动受限情况。

结果

由于仅对闭合性骨折采用钢板进行一期内固定治疗,因此三个治疗组之间开放性骨折的分布存在统计学显著差异(p < 0.005)。这些组中的骨折分类无显著差异。根据 AO-ASIF 系统,除 4 例骨折外,所有骨折均分类为 C 型损伤。软组织闭合的占 63%(n = 32),开放的占 37%(n = 19)。在软组织损伤与关节炎程度之间,或手术治疗类型与创伤后关节炎程度之间,均未发现显著相关性。然而,所有需要二期关节融合术的患者(占所有病例的 23%)均不在接受两步手术的组中(p < 0.05)。两步手术组的踝关节活动范围比其他组大得多;这些患者疼痛也较少,更常能继续从事之前的职业,并且休闲活动受限较少。这些差异未达到统计学显著意义。三组之间伤口感染发生率无显著差异。

结论

根据我们的结果,我们现在更倾向于采用两步手术治疗伴有广泛软组织损伤的严重胫骨 Pilon 骨折。在第一阶段,通过小切口、螺钉和克氏针进行关节面的一期复位和内固定。在踝关节处应用临时外固定。软组织恢复后,第二阶段采用微创技术用内侧钢板进行内固定。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验