Kirzner N, Zotov P, Goldbloom D, Curry H, Bedi H
Alfred Hospital, 55 Commercial Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, OrthoSports Victoria, Level 5, 89 Bridge Rd, Richmond, Victoria 312, Australia.
Bone Joint J. 2018 Apr 1;100-B(4):468-474. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B4.BJJ-2017-0899.R2.
The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of bridge plating, screw fixation, and a combination of both methods for the treatment of Lisfranc fracture dislocations.
A total of 108 patients were treated for a Lisfranc fracture dislocation over a period of nine years. Of these, 38 underwent transarticular screw fixation, 45 dorsal bridge plating, and 25 a combination technique. Injuries were assessed preoperatively according to the Myerson classification system. The outcome measures included the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, the validated Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) functional tool, and the radiological Wilppula classification of anatomical reduction.
Significantly better functional outcomes were seen in the bridge plate group. These patients had a mean AOFAS score of 82.5 points, compared with 71.0 for the screw group and 63.3 for the combination group (p < 0.001). Similarly, the mean Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire score was 25.6 points in the bridge plate group, 38.1 in the screw group, and 45.5 in the combination group (p < 0.001). Functional outcome was dependent on the quality of reduction (p < 0.001). A trend was noted which indicated that plate fixation is associated with a better anatomical reduction (p = 0.06). Myerson types A and C2 significantly predicted a poorer functional outcome, suggesting that total incongruity in either a homolateral or divergent pattern leads to worse outcomes. The greater the number of columns fixed the worse the outcome (p < 0.001).
Patients treated with dorsal bridge plating have better functional and radiological outcomes than those treated with transarticular screws or a combination technique. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:468-74.
本回顾性研究旨在比较桥接钢板固定、螺钉固定以及两种方法联合使用治疗Lisfranc骨折脱位的功能和影像学结果。
在九年的时间里,共有108例患者接受了Lisfranc骨折脱位的治疗。其中,38例行经关节螺钉固定,45例行背侧桥接钢板固定,25例行联合技术治疗。术前根据迈尔森分类系统对损伤进行评估。结果指标包括美国矫形足踝协会(AOFAS)评分、经过验证的曼彻斯特牛津足部问卷(MOXFQ)功能工具以及解剖复位的影像学威尔普拉分类。
桥接钢板组的功能结果明显更好。这些患者的平均AOFAS评分为82.5分,而螺钉固定组为71.0分,联合治疗组为63.3分(p<0.001)。同样,桥接钢板组的曼彻斯特牛津足部问卷平均评分为25.6分,螺钉固定组为38.1分,联合治疗组为45.5分(p<0.001)。功能结果取决于复位质量(p<0.001)。观察到一种趋势,表明钢板固定与更好的解剖复位相关(p=0.06)。迈尔森A型和C2型显著预示功能结果较差,这表明同侧或分离型的完全不匹配会导致更差的结果。固定的柱数越多,结果越差(p<0.001)。
与经关节螺钉固定或联合技术治疗的患者相比,接受背侧桥接钢板固定治疗的患者具有更好的功能和影像学结果。引用本文:《骨与关节杂志》2018年;100-B:468-74。