Resch H, Hübner C, Schwaiger R
Landeskrankenhaus (General Hospital Salzburg), Austria.
Injury. 2001 May;32 Suppl 1:SA25-32. doi: 10.1016/s0020-1383(01)00058-4.
Percutaneous reduction and fixation of severe humeral head fractures would be the treatment of choice since it will not increase the risk of necrosis already inherent in these fractures. Nevertheless, the question arises of whether anatomical reduction is possible with the percutaneous technique and whether the reduced fracture can be adequately stabilized. It is important to study the fracture closely before the operation in order to determine the fracture type and identify the relationship of the individual fragments to each other. Radiographs taken in at least two planes are essential and a CT scan with 3D reconstruction would be desirable. Besides extraarticular fractures, surgical neck fractures with avulsion of the greater tuberosity (B1 and B2 fractures) and valgus impacted fractures (C1 and C2 fractures) are good indications for this method due to the fact that in these cases intact connections to rotator cuff tendons or remnants of intact periosteum between fragments still exist. Less good indications are fractures with severe lateral displacement of the articular segment and severely displaced fracture dislocations (C2 and C3 fractures). From 1990 to 1999, a total of 88 patients with 37 B1 and B2 fractures and 41 C1 and C2 fractures were operated on percutaneously. The initial 27 patients with 9 B1 and B2 and 18 C1 and C2 fractures were followed up. All B1 and B2 fractures showed good to very good functional results (Constant Score 91%). The Constant Score of the C1 and C2 fractures was 87%. The necrosis rate of the C1 and C2 fractures was 11%. In conclusion, it can be said that the presence of soft tissue bridging of the various fragments is crucial for the reduction to gain benefit from the ligamentotaxis effect. Thus, fractures such as valgus impacted or three-part fractures are very good indications for this technique. It can also be stated that the necrosis rate is low or at least not increased compared to cases treated by open reduction. Since the fracture is not exposed, adhesion within the surrounding gliding surfaces is reduced and the rehabilitation period is shorter.
对于严重的肱骨头骨折,经皮复位与固定应是首选治疗方法,因为这不会增加此类骨折本身固有的坏死风险。然而,问题在于经皮技术能否实现解剖复位以及复位后的骨折能否得到充分稳定。术前仔细研究骨折情况以确定骨折类型并明确各骨折块之间的相互关系至关重要。至少在两个平面拍摄的X线片必不可少,理想情况下还应进行三维重建的CT扫描。除关节外骨折外,伴有大结节撕脱的外科颈骨折(B1和B2型骨折)以及外翻嵌插骨折(C1和C2型骨折)是该方法的良好适应证,因为在这些病例中,骨折块之间仍存在与肩袖肌腱的完整连接或完整骨膜残余。关节面严重侧方移位的骨折以及严重移位的骨折脱位(C2和C3型骨折)则不太适合。1990年至1999年,共有88例患者接受了经皮手术,其中37例为B1和B2型骨折,41例为C1和C2型骨折。对最初的27例患者进行了随访,其中9例为B1和B2型骨折,18例为C1和C2型骨折。所有B1和B2型骨折均显示出良好至非常好的功能结果(Constant评分91%)。C1和C2型骨折的Constant评分为87%。C1和C2型骨折的坏死率为11%。总之,可以说各骨折块存在软组织桥接对于通过间接复位利用韧带整复效应至关重要。因此,外翻嵌插骨折或三部分骨折等非常适合该技术。还可以指出,与切开复位治疗的病例相比,坏死率较低或至少没有增加。由于骨折未暴露,周围滑动面内的粘连减少,康复期更短。