Suppr超能文献

不稳定单纯肘关节脱位:非手术及手术治疗的中期结果

Unstable simple elbow dislocations: medium-term results after non-surgical and surgical treatment.

作者信息

Schnetzke Marc, Aytac Sara, Keil Holger, Deuss Moritz, Studier-Fischer Stefan, Grützner Paul-Alfred, Guehring Thorsten

机构信息

Department of Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen at the University of Heidelberg, Ludwig-Guttmann-Strasse 13, 67071, Ludwigshafen on the Rhine, Germany.

出版信息

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017 Jul;25(7):2271-2279. doi: 10.1007/s00167-016-4100-7. Epub 2016 Apr 4.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Determination of the appropriate treatment of unstable simple elbow dislocations is difficult and a topic of ongoing discussion. The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome and complications after surgery and conservative treatment, with special focus on post-traumatic joint laxity.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 118 consecutive patients with simple elbow dislocations underwent stability testing by fluoroscopy after joint reduction and were assigned to groups 1 (slight), 2 (moderate) or 3 (gross) depending on post-traumatic joint laxity. All patients of group 1 underwent conservative treatment, and of group 3 primary ligament repair. In patients with moderate elbow laxity, the treatment was decided individually. All patients underwent a similar functional rehabilitation programme during treatment. Clinical outcome was determined after an average of 3.4 ± 1.5 years using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and treatment-associated complications and revisions were recorded.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients (41.5 %) were assigned to group 1, 41 patients (34.7 %) to group 2 and 28 patients (23.7 %) to group 3. In group 2, 22 patients underwent ligament repair, while 19 patients were treated conservatively. On average, an excellent MEPS was achieved in group 1 after conservative treatment (MEPS 95.8 ± 9.0), similar to results after ligament repair of grossly unstable elbows in group 3 (91.6 ± 11.7). Interestingly, in group 2 conservative treatment was associated with a slightly lower MEPS (90.0 vs. 95.7), and significantly fewer patients achieved an excellent MEPS (81.8 vs. 52.6 %, p = 0.045). Similarly, conservative treatment in group 2 was associated with a fivefold to sixfold risk of complications (p = 0.032) and revision surgery (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the notion that patients with slight elbow laxity can be treated non-operatively, while primary surgical treatment should be performed in patients with moderate and gross laxity to avoid post-traumatic sequelae and decrease revision rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study, Level III.

摘要

目的

确定不稳定单纯性肘关节脱位的合适治疗方法颇具难度,仍是一个持续讨论的话题。本研究旨在分析手术及保守治疗后的疗效和并发症,特别关注创伤后关节松弛情况。

方法

在这项回顾性研究中,118例连续的单纯性肘关节脱位患者在关节复位后接受了透视稳定性测试,并根据创伤后关节松弛程度分为1组(轻度)、2组(中度)或3组(重度)。1组所有患者接受保守治疗,3组进行一期韧带修复。对于肘关节中度松弛的患者,治疗方案个体化决定。所有患者在治疗期间都接受了类似的功能康复计划。平均3.4±1.5年后,使用梅奥肘关节功能评分(MEPS)确定临床疗效,并记录与治疗相关的并发症和翻修情况。

结果

49例患者(41.5%)被分配到1组,41例患者(34.7%)被分配到2组,28例患者(23.7%)被分配到3组。在2组中,22例患者接受了韧带修复,19例患者接受了保守治疗。保守治疗后,1组平均获得了优异的MEPS(MEPS 95.8±9.0),与3组严重不稳定肘关节韧带修复后的结果相似(91.6±11.7)。有趣的是,在2组中,保守治疗的MEPS略低(90.0对95.7),达到优异MEPS的患者明显较少(81.8%对52.6%,p=0.045)。同样,2组中的保守治疗与并发症(p=0.032)和翻修手术(p=0.023)的风险增加五至六倍相关。

结论

本研究支持这样的观点,即轻度肘关节松弛的患者可以接受非手术治疗,而中度和重度松弛的患者应进行一期手术治疗,以避免创伤后后遗症并降低翻修率。

证据水平

回顾性队列研究,III级。

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