Bisaccia Michele, Cappiello Andrea, Meccariello Luigi, Rinonapoli Giuseppe, Falzarano Gabriele, Medici Antonio, Vicente Cristina Ibáñez, Piscitelli Luigi, Stano Verdiana, Bisaccia Olga, Caraffa Auro
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, "S.M. Misericordia Hospital", University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Vito Fazzi Hospital, Lecce, Italy.
SICOT J. 2018;4:2. doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2017058. Epub 2018 Feb 21.
Distal tibial fractures are the most common long bone fractures. Several studies focusing on the methods of treatment of displaced distal tibial fractures have been published. To date, locked plates, intramedullary nails and external fixation are the three most used techniques. The aim of our study was to compare intramedullary nail (IMN) and locked plate (LP) for treatment of this kind of fracture.
We collected data on 81 patients with distal tibial fractures (distance from the joint between 40 and 100 mm) and we divided into two groups: IMN and LP. We compared in the 2 groups the mean operation time, the mean union time, the infection rate the rate of malunion and nonunion, the full weight bearing time.
No patient in the two groups developed a nonunion. None of the patients obtained a fair or poor outcome. Overall 52 patients obtained an excellent result (69.3%) and 23 obtained a good result (30.6%).
Our study results indicate a superiority of IMN over LP in terms of lower rates of infections and statistically significant shorter time to full weight bearing. Whereas LP appeared to be advantageous over IMN in terms of leading to a better anatomical and fixed reductions of the fracture and a lower rate of union complications. The two treatments achieved comparable results in terms of operation time, hospital stay, union time and functional outcomes.
胫骨干骺端骨折是最常见的长骨骨折。已经发表了几项关于移位型胫骨干骺端骨折治疗方法的研究。迄今为止,锁定钢板、髓内钉和外固定是三种最常用的技术。我们研究的目的是比较髓内钉(IMN)和锁定钢板(LP)治疗这类骨折的效果。
我们收集了81例胫骨干骺端骨折患者(骨折部位距关节40至100毫米)的数据,并将其分为两组:髓内钉组和锁定钢板组。我们比较了两组的平均手术时间、平均愈合时间、感染率、畸形愈合和不愈合率、完全负重时间。
两组均无患者出现不愈合。没有患者获得一般或较差的结果。总体而言,52例患者获得了优异的结果(69.3%),23例获得了良好的结果(30.6%)。
我们的研究结果表明,髓内钉在感染率较低和完全负重时间在统计学上显著较短方面优于锁定钢板。而锁定钢板在实现更好的骨折解剖复位和固定以及更低的愈合并发症发生率方面似乎比髓内钉更具优势。两种治疗方法在手术时间、住院时间、愈合时间和功能结果方面取得了相当的结果。