Department of Orthopaedics, Elmhurst Hospital Center, 7901 Broadway, Elmhurst, NY 11373, USA.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 May 18;93(10):942-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.I.00849.
The use of a Gotfried percutaneous compression plate provides a minimally invasive technique for the fixation of intertrochanteric proximal femoral fractures. The purpose of this study was to determine if the percutaneous compression plate provided advantages compared with the sliding hip screw for treatment of A1 and A2 AO/OTA intertrochanteric proximal femoral fractures.
An institutional review board-approved, prospective, randomized, single-blinded study was conducted at a level-I trauma center between July 2004 and September 2007. All patients who met the study criteria and provided informed consent were randomized to treatment with a sliding hip screw or percutaneous compression plate. Of the sixty-six patients who consented to participate, thirty-three were randomized to be treated with a sliding hip screw and thirty-three, with a percutaneous compression plate. Data evaluated included surgical time, incision length, blood loss, need for blood transfusion, and postoperative functional status. Follow-up included clinical findings, radiographs until healing was confirmed, functional and pain assessment scores, and the Short Form-36. The median follow-up period for surviving patients was thirty-six months.
Sixty-six patients, forty-seven women and nineteen men, with a mean age of seventy-seven years were entered into the study. The treatment groups were similar with respect to study variables (p > 0.05). Operative times (forty-eight vs. seventy-eight minutes), incision length (56 vs. 82 mm), and blood loss (41 vs. 101 mL) significantly favored the percutaneous compression plate group (p < 0.001). The groups were similar immediately postoperatively; however, by discharge, fewer patients with a percutaneous compression plate required walking aids (40% vs. 59%). This trend continued throughout the study but was not significant. Pain with activity was lower throughout the study for the percutaneous compression plate group, but the difference was significant only at the three-month interval.
Previously published reports showing shorter operative times and less blood loss with the percutaneous compression plate were reaffirmed. Compared with the sliding hip screw, the percutaneous compression plate resulted in a larger percentage of patients who were able to walk independently, consistently lower levels of pain with activity, and improved quality of life according to multiple scales of the Short Form-36, but the differences were not significant. Significant differences favoring the percutaneous compression plate were found with regard to operating times, incision length, and blood loss.
使用 Gotfried 经皮加压钢板为股骨转子间骨折的固定提供了一种微创技术。本研究的目的是确定经皮加压钢板是否在治疗 A1 和 A2 AO/OTA 股骨转子间骨折方面优于滑动髋螺钉。
这是在 2004 年 7 月至 2007 年 9 月在一级创伤中心进行的一项机构审查委员会批准的、前瞻性、随机、单盲研究。所有符合研究标准并提供知情同意的患者均被随机分为接受滑动髋螺钉或经皮加压钢板治疗的组。在同意参与的 66 名患者中,33 名被随机分为滑动髋螺钉组,33 名被随机分为经皮加压钢板组。评估的数据包括手术时间、切口长度、失血量、输血需求和术后功能状态。随访包括临床发现、直至愈合确认的影像学检查、功能和疼痛评估评分以及 SF-36。存活患者的中位随访期为 36 个月。
66 名患者,47 名女性和 19 名男性,平均年龄 77 岁,进入研究。治疗组在研究变量方面相似(p > 0.05)。手术时间(48 分钟对 78 分钟)、切口长度(56 毫米对 82 毫米)和失血量(41 毫升对 101 毫升)明显有利于经皮加压钢板组(p < 0.001)。两组术后即刻相似;然而,出院时,使用经皮加压钢板的患者需要助行器的比例较低(40%对 59%)。这一趋势贯穿整个研究,但没有统计学意义。在整个研究过程中,经皮加压钢板组的活动时疼痛较低,但仅在三个月时差异有统计学意义。
经皮加压钢板具有较短的手术时间和较少的失血,这与之前的报道一致。与滑动髋螺钉相比,经皮加压钢板使更多的患者能够独立行走,活动时疼痛水平持续较低,根据 SF-36 的多个量表改善了生活质量,但差异无统计学意义。在手术时间、切口长度和失血量方面,经皮加压钢板具有显著优势。