• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

掌侧锁定钢板与关节外增强固定治疗关节内桡骨远端骨折:一项随机对照试验的功能结果。

Volar Locking Plates Versus Augmented External Fixation of Intra-Articular Distal Radial Fractures: Functional Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.

University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Feb 20;101(4):311-321. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.00014.

DOI:10.2106/JBJS.18.00014
PMID:30801370
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to compare the functional outcomes following fixation with a volar locking plate (VLP) with those outcomes after augmented external fixation (EF) of displaced, intra-articular distal radial fractures in patients 18 to 70 years of age.

METHODS

Following inclusion, randomization, and surgery, clinical examination and outcome assessments were conducted at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. The primary outcome was the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score, and secondary outcomes included wrist range of motion, grip strength, and pain assessed with a visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Over a span of 3 years, 166 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 55.0 years (standard deviation [SD] = 11.5 years), with the ages distributed evenly in each treatment group by block randomization (84 patients in the VLP group and 82 in the EF group). The patients in the VLP group had a significantly better mean QuickDASH score, range of motion, and grip strength at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. There were no significant differences between the groups at 2 years. On the basis of the minimal clinically important difference, the difference in the QuickDASH score was clinically relevant only at 6 weeks and arguably at 3 months (9.2 and 8.5 points, respectively). Therefore, the statistically significant improvement in the functional outcome of VLP compared with that of EF cannot be safely said to have clinical relevance beyond 12 weeks. The overall complication rate was comparable between the 2 groups. The rate of follow-up at 2 years was 97.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

VLP fixation resulted in faster recovery of function compared with EF, but no functional advantage was demonstrated at 2 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在比较 18 至 70 岁的患者中,关节内桡骨远端骨折的经掌侧锁定钢板(VLP)固定与增强型外固定(EF)后的功能结果。

方法

纳入、随机分组和手术后,分别在 6 周、12 周、6 个月、1 年和 2 年进行临床检查和结果评估。主要结局指标是快速残疾的手臂、肩和手(QuickDASH)评分,次要结局指标包括腕关节活动范围、握力和视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估的疼痛。

结果

在 3 年的时间跨度内,共有 166 名患者纳入研究。平均年龄为 55.0 岁(标准差[SD] = 11.5 岁),每组患者年龄分布均匀,采用分组随机分组(VLP 组 84 例,EF 组 82 例)。VLP 组患者在 6 周、12 周、6 个月和 1 年时的平均 QuickDASH 评分、活动范围和握力均显著更好。两组在 2 年时无显著差异。基于最小临床重要差异,QuickDASH 评分的差异仅在 6 周和 3 个月时具有临床意义(分别为 9.2 和 8.5 分)。因此,与 EF 相比,VLP 功能结果的统计学显著改善不能被安全地认为在 12 周后具有临床意义。两组总体并发症发生率相当。2 年的随访率为 97.0%。

结论

VLP 固定比 EF 固定更快地恢复功能,但在 2 年时没有表现出功能优势。

证据水平

治疗水平 I. 有关证据水平的完整说明,请参见作者说明。

相似文献

1
Volar Locking Plates Versus Augmented External Fixation of Intra-Articular Distal Radial Fractures: Functional Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial.掌侧锁定钢板与关节外增强固定治疗关节内桡骨远端骨折:一项随机对照试验的功能结果。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Feb 20;101(4):311-321. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.00014.
2
Surgical Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures with External Fixation Versus Volar Locking Plate: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.外固定与掌侧锁定钢板治疗桡骨远端骨折的手术治疗:一项多中心随机对照试验。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2021 Mar 3;103(5):405-414. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.20.00275.
3
External Fixation and Adjuvant Pins Versus Volar Locking Plate Fixation in Unstable Distal Radius Fractures: A Randomized, Controlled Study With a 5-Year Follow-Up.不稳定型桡骨远端骨折的外固定及辅助钢针与掌侧锁定钢板固定:一项为期5年随访的随机对照研究
J Hand Surg Am. 2015 Jul;40(7):1333-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2015.03.008. Epub 2015 Apr 23.
4
Surgical treatment of distal radial fractures with a volar locking plate versus conventional percutaneous methods: a randomized controlled trial.掌侧锁定钢板与传统经皮方法治疗桡骨远端骨折的随机对照试验。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Oct 2;95(19):1737-44. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00232.
5
Volar locking plates versus external fixation and adjuvant pin fixation in unstable distal radius fractures: a randomized, controlled study.不稳定型桡骨远端骨折中掌侧锁定钢板与外固定及辅助钢针固定的比较:一项随机对照研究
J Hand Surg Am. 2013 Aug;38(8):1469-76. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.04.039.
6
Comparison between Carbon-Peek volar locking plates and titanium volar locking plates in the treatment of distal radius fractures.碳-聚醚醚酮掌侧锁定钢板与钛掌侧锁定钢板治疗桡骨远端骨折的比较
Injury. 2017 Oct;48 Suppl 3:S24-S29. doi: 10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30653-8.
7
A randomized comparison of volar plate and external fixation for intra-articular distal radius fractures.掌侧板与外固定治疗桡骨远端关节内骨折的随机对照研究
J Hand Surg Am. 2015 Jan;40(1):34-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.09.025. Epub 2014 Oct 29.
8
External Fixation Versus Volar Locking Plate for Unstable Dorsally Displaced Distal Radius Fractures-A 3-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Study.外固定与掌侧锁定钢板治疗不稳定背侧移位桡骨远端骨折——一项随机对照研究的3年随访
J Hand Surg Am. 2019 Jan;44(1):18-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.09.015. Epub 2018 Nov 9.
9
Volar locking plate versus external fixation with optional additional K-wire for treatment of AO type C2/C3 fractures: a retrospective comparative study.掌侧锁定钢板与可选择附加克氏针的外固定治疗 AO 型 C2/C3 骨折:一项回顾性对比研究。
J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 Aug 27;14(1):271. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1309-4.
10
Cast immobilization versus volar locking plate fixation of AO type C distal radial fractures in patients aged 60 years and older.60岁及以上患者桡骨远端AO C型骨折的石膏固定与掌侧锁定钢板固定对比
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2019 Jan;53(1):15-18. doi: 10.1016/j.aott.2018.10.005. Epub 2018 Oct 28.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluation of the Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Fixed Angle versus Variable Angle Volar Locking Compression Plates in Managing Intra-articular Fractures of Distal End Radius.评估固定角度与可变角度掌侧锁定加压钢板治疗桡骨远端关节内骨折的功能和影像学结果。
Malays Orthop J. 2025 Jul;19(2):9-17. doi: 10.5704/MOJ.2507.002.
2
Comparing the clinical outcomes of an innovative bi-frame external fixation device compared to those of volar locking plate and external fixator device among patients with unstable distal radius fractures: a two-year retrospective comparative cohort study.比较创新双框架外固定装置与掌侧锁定钢板及外固定器装置在桡骨远端不稳定骨折患者中的临床疗效:一项为期两年的回顾性比较队列研究。
Ann Med. 2025 Dec;57(1):2524090. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2025.2524090. Epub 2025 Jun 26.
3
Comparative analysis of closed reduction with external fixation versus closed reduction with percutaneous pinning for distal radius fractures.桡骨远端骨折闭合复位外固定与闭合复位经皮穿针固定的对比分析
Sci Rep. 2025 May 31;15(1):19147. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-04001-8.
4
Is Immobilization Necessary After Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Distal Radius Fractures? A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.桡骨远端骨折切开复位内固定术后是否需要制动?一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Hand (N Y). 2025 Mar 27:15589447251325825. doi: 10.1177/15589447251325825.
5
COMBINED PLATE VERSUS EXTERNAL FIXATION FOR DISTAL RADIUS FRACTURES.联合钢板与外固定治疗桡骨远端骨折
Acta Ortop Bras. 2023 Apr 17;31(spe1):e252977. doi: 10.1590/1413-785220233101e252977. eCollection 2023.
6
Outcomes of the Management of Distal Radius Fractures in the Last 5 Years: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.过去5年桡骨远端骨折治疗的结果:随机对照试验的Meta分析
Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2022 Dec 16;57(6):899-910. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1754379. eCollection 2022 Dec.
7
The Effect of Ulnar Styloid Fractures on Patient-Reported Outcomes After Surgically Treated Distal Radial Fractures.尺骨茎突骨折对手术治疗桡骨远端骨折后患者报告结局的影响。
JB JS Open Access. 2022 Sep 22;7(3). doi: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.22.00021. eCollection 2022 Jul-Sep.
8
Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures with Bridging External Fixator with Optional Percutaneous K-Wires: What Are the Right Indications for Patient Age, Gender, Dominant Limb and Injury Pattern?采用带或不带经皮克氏针的桥接外固定器治疗桡骨远端骨折:患者年龄、性别、优势手及损伤类型的正确适应证是什么?
J Pers Med. 2022 Sep 18;12(9):1532. doi: 10.3390/jpm12091532.
9
Volar-locking plate versus external fixator in the management of distal radius fractures: An isokinetic study.掌侧锁定钢板与外固定架治疗桡骨远端骨折的对比:一项等速研究。
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2022 Aug;28(8):1156-1163. doi: 10.14744/tjtes.2021.72606.
10
Risk Factors for Infection After Distal Radius Fracture Fixation: Analysis of Impact on Cost of Care.桡骨远端骨折固定术后感染的危险因素:对医疗费用影响的分析
J Hand Surg Glob Online. 2022 Jan 31;4(3):123-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsg.2021.12.011. eCollection 2022 May.