Suppr超能文献

桡骨远端骨折切开复位内固定术与经皮穿针外固定术的比较:一项前瞻性随机临床试验

Open reduction internal fixation versus percutaneous pinning with external fixation of distal radius fractures: a prospective, randomized clinical trial.

作者信息

Grewal Ruby, MacDermid Joy C, King Graham J W, Faber Kenneth J

机构信息

Division of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Western Ontario, Hand and Upper Limb Center, St Joseph's Health Care, London, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

J Hand Surg Am. 2011 Dec;36(12):1899-906. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2011.09.015. Epub 2011 Nov 3.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to investigate the functional outcomes of the surgical treatment of distal radius fractures, comparing treatment by external fixation and percutaneous pinning to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using a plate.

METHODS

We randomized 53 patients with distal radius fractures that failed closed reduction and casting to ORIF (n = 27) or external fixation (n = 26). For pragmatic reasons, the choice of ORIF was left to the surgeon's discretion (early recruitment, dorsal plates [n = 9]; later recruitment, volar locked plates [n = 18]). Outcomes were measured before surgery, at 6 weeks, and at 3, 6, and 12 months and included the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE); Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand; range of motion; grip strength; and serial radiographic analysis. Generalized linear modeling using repeated measures was used to identify differences in outcome scores between fixation types over time. Other continuous variables were analyzed using the Student t-test or one-way analysis of variance for multiple groups.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the demographic characteristics or fracture severity between groups. Based on generalized linear modeling, on average, the ORIF group scored 11 points lower on the PRWE across all time points compared to the external fixation group. The PRWE detected higher pain and disability with external fixation before surgery, at 6 weeks, and at 3 months. Using generalized linear modeling, a post hoc subgroup analysis identified significantly better (15-point advantage) PRWE scores averaged across all time points with volar locking plates compared to both external fixation and dorsal plating.

CONCLUSIONS

The PRWE scores were significantly lower for patients treated with ORIF compared to those with external fixation, with the best outcomes observed with volar locking plates. These advantages were observed in the early postoperative period, and overall scores equalized at 1 year. A higher mean initial preoperative PRWE score was seen with external fixation, perhaps indicating a more severe initial injury. Given this difference, the interpretation of these results is not clear.

摘要

目的

本随机临床试验的目的是研究桡骨远端骨折手术治疗的功能结果,比较外固定和经皮穿针治疗与使用钢板切开复位内固定(ORIF)的效果。

方法

我们将53例闭合复位和石膏固定失败的桡骨远端骨折患者随机分为ORIF组(n = 27)或外固定组(n = 26)。出于实际原因,ORIF的选择由外科医生自行决定(早期招募,使用背侧钢板[n = 9];后期招募,使用掌侧锁定钢板[n = 18])。在手术前、6周时以及3、6和12个月时测量结果,包括患者自评腕关节评估(PRWE);上肢、肩部和手部功能障碍;活动范围;握力;以及系列影像学分析。使用重复测量的广义线性模型来确定不同固定类型随时间的结果评分差异。其他连续变量使用Student t检验或多组单因素方差分析进行分析。

结果

两组之间的人口统计学特征或骨折严重程度没有差异。基于广义线性模型,平均而言,在所有时间点上,ORIF组的PRWE评分比外固定组低11分。在手术前、6周时和3个月时,PRWE检测出外固定组有更高的疼痛和功能障碍。使用广义线性模型,事后亚组分析发现,与外固定和背侧钢板相比,掌侧锁定钢板在所有时间点的平均PRWE评分显著更好(优势15分)。

结论

与外固定治疗的患者相比,ORIF治疗的患者PRWE评分显著更低,掌侧锁定钢板的效果最佳。这些优势在术后早期就已观察到,1年时总体评分趋于相等。外固定组术前PRWE平均初始评分更高,这可能表明初始损伤更严重。鉴于这种差异,这些结果的解释尚不清楚。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验