Zhang Yuntong, Zhao Xue, Tang Yang, Zhang Chuncai, Xu Shuogui, Xie Yang
Department of Orthopaedics, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, No. 168, Changhai Street, Shanghai 200433, China.
Department of Orthopaedics, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, No. 168, Changhai Street, Shanghai 200433, China.
Injury. 2014 Apr;45(4):725-31. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.11.014. Epub 2013 Nov 20.
Posterior wall fractures are one of the most common acetabular fractures. However, only 30% of these fractures involve a single large fragment, and comminuted acetabular posterior wall fractures pose a particular surgical challenge. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between patients who received fixation for comminuted posterior wall fracture using the Acetabular Tridimensional Memory Fixation System (ATMFS) and patients who underwent fixation with conventional screws and buttress plates (Plates group).
Between April 2003 and May 2007, 196 consecutive patients who sustained a comminuted posterior wall fracture of acetabulum were treated with ATMFS or conventional screws and buttress plates. Operative time, fluoroscopy time, blood loss, and any intra-operative complications were recorded. Plain AP and lateral radiographs were obtained at all visits (Matta's criteria). Modified Merle d' Aubigne-Postel score, and Mos SF-36 score were compared between groups.
Fifty patients were included in the analysis with 26 in the ATMFS group and 24 in the Plates group. The mean follow-up time was 57.5 months, ranging from 31 to 69 months. All patients had fully healed fractures at the final follow-up. There was no difference in clinical outcomes or radiological evaluations between groups.
Patients with comminuted posterior wall fractures of the acetabulum treated with the ATMFS or conventional screws and buttress plate techniques achieve a good surgical result. Both techniques are safe, reliable, and practical. Use of the ATMFS technique may reduce blood loss and improve rigid support to marginal bone impaction. The use ATMFS may need additional support when fractures involve the superior roof.
后壁骨折是最常见的髋臼骨折之一。然而,这些骨折中只有30%涉及单个大骨折块,髋臼后壁粉碎性骨折带来了特殊的手术挑战。本研究的目的是比较使用髋臼三维记忆固定系统(ATMFS)治疗髋臼后壁粉碎性骨折的患者与采用传统螺钉和支撑钢板固定(钢板组)的患者的治疗效果。
2003年4月至2007年5月期间,196例髋臼后壁粉碎性骨折患者接受了ATMFS或传统螺钉和支撑钢板治疗。记录手术时间、透视时间、失血量和任何术中并发症。每次随访均拍摄骨盆前后位和侧位X线片(Matta标准)。比较两组间改良Merle d'Aubigne-Postel评分和Mos SF-36评分。
50例患者纳入分析,其中ATMFS组26例,钢板组24例。平均随访时间为57.5个月,范围为31至69个月。所有患者在末次随访时骨折均已完全愈合。两组间临床结果和影像学评估无差异。
髋臼后壁粉碎性骨折患者采用ATMFS或传统螺钉和支撑钢板技术治疗均能取得良好的手术效果。两种技术均安全、可靠且实用。使用ATMFS技术可能减少失血量并改善对边缘骨嵌插的牢固支撑。当骨折累及上壁时,使用ATMFS可能需要额外的支撑。