Suppr超能文献

胫骨髁骨折内固定与混合外固定的比较研究

Comparative study of internal and hybrid external fixation in tibial condylar fractures.

作者信息

Malakasi A, Lallos S N, Chronopoulos E, Korres D S, Efstathopoulos N E

机构信息

Second Department of Orthopaedics, Athens University Medical School, 3-5, Agias Olgas Street, 142 33 Nea Ionia, Athens, Greece.

出版信息

Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2013 Jan;23(1):97-103. doi: 10.1007/s00590-011-0911-x. Epub 2011 Nov 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The spectrum of injuries to the tibial plateau is so great that no single method of treatment has been proven to be uniformly successful. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the clinical results, to identify the advantages and disadvantages and to take out useful conclusions of the application of the internal and hybrid external fixation in the treatment of these fractures.

METHOD

Sixty tibial condylar fractures, of all types, according to Schatzker's classification were treated with open reduction and internal fixation (30 patients) or with hybrid external fixation (30 patients). The following parameters were recorded: time of surgical procedure, time of postoperative hospitalization, time of starting of weight bearing on the affected extremity, complications, and postoperative functional (according to Knee Society Score) and radiological results (according to Rasmussen's Radiological Score). The average time of follow-up was 12 months.

RESULTS

Neither of the two methods showed superiority regarding the duration of the surgical procedure [mean difference 4.4 ± 5.4 (min), P = NS], the postoperative hospitalization time [0.6 ± 0.7 (days), P = NS], and the radiological and functional evaluation (χ(2), P = NS for all comparisons). However, the internal fixation method proved to be superior to the hybrid external fixation regarding the time of starting the weight bearing [3.1 ± 0.4 (weeks), P < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Internal fixation showed superiority to the time starting of weight bearing as it occurred at an earlier time than that of hybrid external by almost 3 weeks whereas no other differences were identified in the other parameters regarding patients' rehabilitation.

摘要

背景

胫骨平台损伤的范围非常广泛,以至于没有一种单一的治疗方法被证明能始终取得成功。本研究的目的是评估临床结果,确定应用内固定和混合外固定治疗这些骨折的优缺点,并得出有用的结论。

方法

根据Schatzker分类,对60例各种类型的胫骨髁骨折患者进行切开复位内固定(30例)或混合外固定(30例)治疗。记录以下参数:手术时间、术后住院时间、患侧肢体开始负重的时间、并发症以及术后功能(根据膝关节协会评分)和放射学结果(根据Rasmussen放射学评分)。平均随访时间为12个月。

结果

两种方法在手术时间[平均差异4.4±5.4(分钟),P=无统计学意义]、术后住院时间[0.6±0.7(天),P=无统计学意义]以及放射学和功能评估方面(所有比较的χ(2),P=无统计学意义)均未显示出优势。然而,在开始负重的时间方面,内固定方法被证明优于混合外固定[3.1±0.4(周),P<0.001]。

结论

内固定在开始负重的时间上显示出优势,因为其比混合外固定早近3周,而在患者康复的其他参数方面未发现其他差异。

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