Shen Qing-Feng, Wen Xin, Yang Sheng-Wu, Chen Xin, Fan Wei-Xing, Xu Guo-Zhu, Yu Fang-Zheng, Zhu Jun-Yi, Wang Jian
Department of Orthopaedics, the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325000, Zhejiang, China;
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2018 Feb 25;31(2):160-164. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-0034.2018.02.013.
To compare the clinical efficacy of minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis(MIPPO)and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in treating senile NEER IIproximal humerus fractures.
From March 2014 to March 2016, 46 elderly patients with Neer II proximal humerus fractures were retrospectively reviewed. Among them, 20 patients in MIPPO group included 9 males and 11 females with an average age of (70.4±4.4) years old; while 26 patients in ORIF group included 11 males and 15 females with an average age of (70.9±4.0) years old. The length of hospital stay, times of fluoroscopy, beginning time of function rehabilitation, healing time of fracture, Constant Murley score of the shoulder joint at 3, 6, 12 months after operation and complications were observed and compared.
All patients were followed up for 12 to 24 months with an average of 16.8±3.7. The healing time of fracture, beginning time of function rehabilitation in MIPPO group were(13.0±0.8) weeks, (3.0±0.9) days respectively and shorter than those in ORIF group which were (13.8±1.4) weeks and(6.8±1.3) days. The times of fluoroscopy in MIPPO group was 19.2±3.7 and more than that in ORIF group which was 12.1±3.4. At 3 and 6 months after operation, Constant Murley score in MIPPO group were 81.3±3.9, 86.6±5.4 and more than that in ORIF group which were 69.5±6.6, 80.5±6.7. There were no differences between two groups in the length of hospital stay, Constant Murley score at 12 months after operation and grading at the final follow-up. There was one fracture redisplacement in each group. And 1 case of axillary nerve injury in MIPPO group, 2 cases of delayed union in ORIF group. No incision infection, screw loosening or plate break was found.
MIPPO and ORIF are both effective in treating Neer II proximal humeral fractures. MIPPO technique has the advantages of faster recovery, earlier rehabilitative exercise and better shoulder function. The disadvantages are more exposure to radiationd and the possibility of axillary nerve injure.
比较微创经皮钢板接骨术(MIPPO)与切开复位内固定术(ORIF)治疗老年NEER II型肱骨近端骨折的临床疗效。
回顾性分析2014年3月至2016年3月收治的46例老年Neer II型肱骨近端骨折患者。其中,MIPPO组20例,男9例,女11例,平均年龄(70.4±4.4)岁;ORIF组26例,男11例,女15例,平均年龄(70.9±4.0)岁。观察比较两组患者的住院时间、透视次数、功能康复开始时间、骨折愈合时间、术后3、6、12个月肩关节Constant Murley评分及并发症情况。
所有患者均获随访12~24个月,平均16.8±3.7个月。MIPPO组骨折愈合时间、功能康复开始时间分别为(13.0±0.8)周、(3.0±0.9)天,均短于ORIF组的(13.8±1.4)周和(6.8±1.3)天。MIPPO组透视次数为19.2±3.7次,多于ORIF组的12.1±3.4次。术后3、个月,MIPPO组Constant Murley评分分别为81.3±3.9、86.6±5.4,高于ORIF组的69.5±6.6、80.5±6.7。两组患者住院时间、术后12个月Constant Murley评分及末次随访时的分级比较,差异无统计学意义。两组各有1例骨折再移位。MIPPO组发生1例腋神经损伤,ORIF组发生2例骨折延迟愈合。未发现切口感染、螺钉松动或钢板断裂等情况。
MIPPO与ORIF治疗Neer II型肱骨近端骨折均有效。MIPPO技术具有恢复快、康复锻炼早、肩关节功能好等优点,缺点是X线暴露较多及有腋神经损伤的可能。