两种不同双钢板内固定方法治疗关节内肱骨远端骨折的临床比较
A clinical comparison of two different double plating methods for intraarticular distal humerus fractures.
机构信息
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
出版信息
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Jan;19(1):2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.05.003.
BACKGROUND
This study compared clinical outcomes in patients with intraarticular distal humerus fractures treated using 2 different double plating methods.
METHOD
Seventeen patients were treated by perpendicular plating (group I) and 18 by parallel plating (group II) methods. Arc of flexion averaged 106 degrees +/-23 degrees in group I and 112 degrees +/-19 degrees in group II.
RESULTS
Eleven patients in group I recovered full arc of flexion and 13 patients in group II achieved full arc of flexion. All patients obtained bone union, except 2 patients in group I. Nonunion in these patients developed in the supracondylar area. Complications developed in 6 patients in group I and in 8 in group II. No significant differences were found between the clinical outcomes of the 2o plating methods.
CONCLUSION
Although more patients failed to achieve bony union in the perpendicular plating group, both parallel and orthogonal plates positioning can provide adequate stability and anatomic reconstruction of the distal humerus fractures.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
背景
本研究比较了两种不同的双钢板固定方法治疗关节内肱骨远端骨折的临床疗效。
方法
17 例患者采用垂直钢板固定（I 组），18 例患者采用平行钢板固定（II 组）。I 组的平均屈曲弧为 106 度±23 度，II 组为 112 度±19 度。
结果
I 组 11 例患者恢复了全关节活动度，II 组 13 例患者达到了全关节活动度。所有患者均获得骨性愈合，除 I 组的 2 例患者外。这 2 例患者的骨不连发生在髁上区域。I 组有 6 例患者和 II 组有 8 例患者发生并发症。两种钢板固定方法的临床疗效无显著差异。
结论
尽管垂直钢板固定组有更多的患者未能达到骨性愈合，但平行和正交钢板定位都能为肱骨远端骨折提供足够的稳定性和解剖重建。
证据水平
2 级。
Zotero 插件