Suppr超能文献

老年桡骨远端骨折采用掌侧锁定钢板与epibloc系统的比较

Volar locking plate vs epibloc system for distal radius fractures in the elderly.

作者信息

Solarino Giuseppe, Vicenti Giovanni, Abate Antonella, Carrozzo Massimiliano, Picca Girolamo, Colella Antonio, Moretti Biagio

机构信息

Department of Neuroscience and Organs of Sense, Orthopaedics Section, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.

Department of Neuroscience and Organs of Sense, Orthopaedics Section, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.

出版信息

Injury. 2016 Oct;47 Suppl 4:S84-S90. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.07.056. Epub 2016 Aug 5.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes of ORIF with volar locking plates and the Epibloc system (ES) in the treatment of distal radius fractures (DRFs) in patients aged over 65 years.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined a consecutive series of 100 patients with intra-articular or extra-articular DRF who were admitted to our Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology between January 2007 and January 2013. Fifty patients were treated using the Epibloc System; and the other 50 patients using ORIF with volar locking plates. In all patients, functional evaluation (wrist range of motion [ROM], grip strength and Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] Score) and radiographic assessment (radial inclination, volar tilt, ulnar variance and articular congruity) were performed at 2 and 6 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively; then every 12 months thereafter.

RESULTS

ORIF with volar locking plates was associated with better outcome than ES in the intra-articular and extra-articular DRF groups, generating higher average ROM, DASH and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Grip strength mean values, however, were quantified over the minimum level for a functional wrist (>60%) in both groups. There were no differences between the two techniques in X-ray parameters, and no further correlation was found with functional outcome and ROM.

CONCLUSIONS

In a low-functioning patient with multiple medical comorbidities, minimally-invasive surgery with the ES is a safe option, enables early mobilisation of the wrist and is likely to produce acceptable clinical outcomes.

摘要

目的

比较掌侧锁定钢板切开复位内固定术(ORIF)与Epibloc系统(ES)治疗65岁以上患者桡骨远端骨折(DRF)的临床疗效。

方法

我们回顾性研究了2007年1月至2013年1月期间连续收治于我院骨伤科的100例关节内或关节外DRF患者。其中50例患者采用Epibloc系统治疗;另外50例患者采用掌侧锁定钢板切开复位内固定术治疗。所有患者在术后2周和6周、3个月、6个月及12个月时进行功能评估(腕关节活动范围[ROM]、握力及上肢、肩部和手部功能障碍[DASH]评分)和影像学评估(桡骨倾斜度、掌倾角、尺骨变异及关节面平整度);此后每12个月进行一次评估。

结果

在关节内和关节外DRF组中,掌侧锁定钢板切开复位内固定术的疗效优于Epibloc系统,其平均ROM、DASH及视觉模拟评分(VAS)更高。然而,两组的握力平均值均超过了功能正常腕关节的最低水平(>60%)。两种技术在X线参数方面无差异,且未发现与功能结果及ROM有进一步相关性。

结论

对于合并多种内科疾病的低功能患者,采用Epibloc系统的微创手术是一种安全的选择,可使腕关节早期活动,并可能产生可接受的临床疗效。

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