Suppr超能文献

钢板固定与髓内钉固定治疗完全移位的锁骨中段骨折:一项前瞻性随机对照试验

Plate fixation intramedullary nailing of completely displaced midshaft fractures of the clavicle: a prospective randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Fuglesang H F S, Flugsrud G B, Randsborg P H, Oord P, Benth J Š, Utvåg S E

机构信息

University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Bone Joint J. 2017 Aug;99-B(8):1095-1101. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B8.BJJ-2016-1318.R1.

Abstract

AIMS

This is a prospective randomised controlled trial comparing the functional outcomes of plate fixation and elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) of completely displaced mid-shaft fractures of the clavicle in the active adult population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We prospectively recruited 123 patients and randomised them to either plate fixation or ESIN. Patients completed the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at one to six weeks post-operatively. They were followed up at six weeks, three and six months and one year with radiographs, and their clinical outcome was assessed using both the DASH and the Constant Score.

RESULTS

Plate fixation provided a faster functional recovery during the first six months compared with ESIN, but there was no difference after one year. The duration of surgery was shorter for ESIN (mean 53.4 minutes, 22 to 120) than for plate fixation (mean 69.7 minutes, 35 to 106, p < 0.001). The recovery after ESIN was slower with increasing fracture comminution and with open reduction (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both methods return the patients to their pre-injury functional levels, but plate fixation has a faster recovery period in comminuted fractures than ESIN. ESIN has a shorter operative time and lower infection and implant rates of failure when using 2.5 mm nails or wider, suggesting that this is the preferred method in mid-shaft fractures with no comminution, whereas plate fixation is the superior method in comminuted fractures. Cite this article: 2017;99-B:1095-1101.

摘要

目的

这是一项前瞻性随机对照试验,比较钢板固定和弹性稳定髓内钉固定(ESIN)治疗活跃成年人群完全移位的锁骨中段骨折的功能结局。

患者与方法

我们前瞻性招募了123例患者,并将他们随机分为钢板固定组或ESIN组。患者在术后1至6周完成手臂、肩部和手部快速伤残(DASH)评分。在术后6周、3个月、6个月和1年对患者进行X线片随访,并使用DASH评分和Constant评分评估其临床结局。

结果

与ESIN相比,钢板固定在前6个月功能恢复更快,但1年后无差异。ESIN的手术时间(平均53.4分钟,22至120分钟)比钢板固定(平均69.7分钟,35至106分钟,p<0.001)短。随着骨折粉碎程度增加和切开复位,ESIN后的恢复较慢(p<0.05)。

结论

两种方法均能使患者恢复到受伤前的功能水平,但在粉碎性骨折中,钢板固定的恢复期比ESIN更快。使用2.5毫米或更宽的髓内钉时,ESIN的手术时间较短,感染率和植入物失败率较低,这表明这是无粉碎的中段骨折的首选方法,而钢板固定是粉碎性骨折的更佳方法。引用本文:2017;99-B:1095-1101。

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