McKee Michael D, Veillette Christian J H, Hall Jeremy A, Schemitsch Emil H, Wild Lisa M, McCormack Robert, Perey Bertrand, Goetz Thomas, Zomar Mauri, Moon Karyn, Mandel Scott, Petit Shirlet, Guy Pierre, Leung Irene
Division of Orthopaedics, St Michael's Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009 Jan-Feb;18(1):3-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2008.06.005. Epub 2008 Sep 26.
We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial to compare functional outcomes, complications, and reoperation rates in elderly patients with displaced intra-articular, distal humeral fractures treated with open reduction-internal fixation (ORIF) or primary semiconstrained total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Forty-two patients were randomized by sealed envelope. Inclusion criteria were age greater than 65 years; displaced, comminuted, intra-articular fractures of the distal humerus (Orthopaedic Trauma Association type 13C); and closed or Gustilo grade I open fractures treated within 12 hours of injury. Both ORIF and TEA were performed following a standardized protocol. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score were determined at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 2 years. Complication type, duration, management, and treatment requiring reoperation were recorded. An intention-to-treat analysis and an on-treatment analysis were conducted to address patients randomized to ORIF but converted to TEA intraoperatively. Twenty-one patients were randomized to each treatment group. Two died before follow-up and were excluded from the study. Five patients randomized to ORIF were converted to TEA intraoperatively because of extensive comminution and inability to obtain fixation stable enough to allow early range of motion. This resulted in 15 patients (3 men and 12 women) with a mean age of 77 years in the ORIF group and 25 patients (2 men and 23 women) with a mean age of 78 years in the TEA group. Baseline demographics for mechanism, classification, comorbidities, fracture type, activity level, and ipsilateral injuries were similar between the 2 groups. Operative time averaged 32 minutes less in the TEA group (P = .001). Patients who underwent TEA had significantly better MEPSs at 3 months (83 vs 65, P = .01), 6 months (86 vs 68, P = .003), 12 months (88 vs 72, P = .007), and 2 years (86 vs 73, P = .015) compared with the ORIF group. Patients who underwent TEA had significantly better DASH scores at 6 weeks (43 vs 77, P = .02) and 6 months (31 vs 50, P = .01) but not at 12 months (32 vs 47, P = .1) or 2 years (34 vs 38, P = .6). The mean flexion-extension arc was 107 degrees (range, 42 degrees -145 degrees) in the TEA group and 95 degrees (range, 30 degrees -140 degrees) in the ORIF group (P = .19). Reoperation rates for TEA (3/25 [12%]) and ORIF (4/15 [27%]) were not statistically different (P = .2). TEA for the treatment of comminuted intra-articular distal humeral fractures resulted in more predictable and improved 2-year functional outcomes compared with ORIF, based on the MEPS. DASH scores were better in the TEA group in the short term but were not statistically different at 2 years' follow-up. TEA may result in decreased reoperation rates, considering that 25% of fractures randomized to ORIF were not amenable to internal fixation. TEA is a preferred alternative for ORIF in elderly patients with complex distal humeral fractures that are not amenable to stable fixation. Elderly patients have an increased baseline DASH score and appear to accommodate to objective limitations in function with time.
我们进行了一项前瞻性、随机、对照试验,以比较采用切开复位内固定术(ORIF)或一期半限制性全肘关节置换术(TEA)治疗的老年移位性肱骨远端关节内骨折患者的功能结局、并发症及再次手术率。42例患者通过密封信封随机分组。纳入标准为年龄大于65岁;肱骨远端移位、粉碎性关节内骨折(骨科创伤协会13C型);以及在受伤后12小时内接受治疗的闭合性或Gustilo I级开放性骨折。ORIF和TEA均按照标准化方案进行。在术后6周、3个月、6个月、12个月和2年时测定梅奥肘关节功能评分(MEPS)和上肢、肩部和手部功能障碍评分(DASH)。记录并发症类型、持续时间、处理方式以及需要再次手术的治疗情况。对随机分组接受ORIF但术中转为TEA的患者进行意向性分析和实际治疗分析。每个治疗组随机分配21例患者。2例在随访前死亡,被排除在研究之外。5例随机分组接受ORIF的患者术中因粉碎严重且无法获得足够稳定的固定以允许早期活动范围而转为TEA。这导致ORIF组有15例患者(3例男性和12例女性),平均年龄77岁;TEA组有25例患者(2例男性和23例女性),平均年龄78岁。两组在损伤机制、分类、合并症、骨折类型、活动水平和同侧损伤等基线人口统计学特征方面相似。TEA组手术时间平均少32分钟(P = 0.001)。与ORIF组相比,接受TEA的患者在3个月(83对65,P = 0.01)、6个月(86对68,P = 0.003)、12个月(88对72,P = 0.007)和2年(86对73,P = 0.015)时MEPS显著更好。接受TEA的患者在6周(43对77,P = 0.02)和6个月(31对50,P = 0.01)时DASH评分显著更好,但在12个月(32对47,P = 0.1)和2年(34对38,P = 0.6)时无显著差异。TEA组平均屈伸弧为107度(范围42度 - 145度),ORIF组为95度(范围30度 - 140度)(P = 0.19)。TEA组(3/25 [12%])和ORIF组(4/15 [27%])的再次手术率无统计学差异(P = 0.2)。基于MEPS,与ORIF相比,TEA治疗粉碎性肱骨远端关节内骨折在2年时功能结局更可预测且改善更好。TEA组短期DASH评分更好,但在2年随访时无统计学差异。考虑到随机分组接受ORIF的骨折中有25%不适合内固定,TEA可能会降低再次手术率。对于无法进行稳定固定的复杂肱骨远端骨折老年患者,TEA是ORIF的首选替代方法。老年患者基线DASH评分较高,且似乎会随着时间适应功能上的客观限制。