Ruan Hong-Jiang, Fan Cun-Yi, Liu Jun-Jian, Zeng Bing-Fang
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shanghai 6th People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Yishan Road No. 600, 200233, Shanghai, China.
Int Orthop. 2009 Feb;33(1):249-53. doi: 10.1007/s00264-007-0453-3. Epub 2007 Oct 16.
Although several treatment options for radial head fractures are available, no clear solutions exist. In this study we therefore compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with bipolar radial head prosthesis replacement in treatment of radial head fractures of Mason type III. Cement stem and bipolar radial prosthesis were used to treat 12 fresh cases and two old cases of Mason type III radial head fracture. As a control group, another eight cases of radial head type III fracture were treated with ORIF with cannulated screws and Kirschner (K) wires. The 14 patients who received radial head prosthesis replacement were followed-up for 15.9 months (range 10-27 months). According to elbow functional evaluation criteria by Broberg and Morrey, we found excellent results in nine cases, good in four, and fair in one. Mean follow-up of the eight cases in the ORIF group was 14 months (range 10-21 months), with good results in one case, fair in four, and poor in three. The result was good or excellent in 92.9% of prosthesis replacement patients and in 12.5% of ORIF patients. This difference is statistically significant (P = 0.0004; Fisher's exact test). We concluded that bipolar radial head prosthesis replacement is better than ORIF in treatment of Mason type III radial head fracture.
虽然桡骨头骨折有多种治疗选择,但尚无明确的解决方案。因此,在本研究中,我们比较了切开复位内固定术(ORIF)与双极桡骨头假体置换术治疗梅森III型桡骨头骨折的效果。采用骨水泥柄和双极桡骨头假体治疗12例新鲜骨折及2例陈旧性梅森III型桡骨头骨折患者。作为对照组,另外8例桡骨头III型骨折患者采用空心螺钉和克氏(K)针行切开复位内固定术治疗。接受桡骨头假体置换的14例患者随访15.9个月(范围10 - 27个月)。根据Broberg和Morrey的肘关节功能评估标准,我们发现9例结果为优,4例为良,1例为可。切开复位内固定术组8例患者的平均随访时间为14个月(范围10 - 21个月),其中1例结果为良,4例为可,3例为差。假体置换患者中92.9%的结果为良好或优秀,切开复位内固定术患者中这一比例为12.5%。这种差异具有统计学意义(P = 0.0004;Fisher精确检验)。我们得出结论,双极桡骨头假体置换术在治疗梅森III型桡骨头骨折方面优于切开复位内固定术。