Suppr超能文献

锁定钢板与逆行髓内钉治疗人工膝关节周围髁上骨折:回顾性多中心对照研究。

Locking plates versus retrograde intramedullary nails in the treatment of periprosthetic supracondylar knee fractures. A retrospective multicenter comparative study.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Erasme University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.

Academic Orthopaedic Department, Papageorgiou General Hospital, Aristotle University Medical School, Ring Road, Thessaloniki, 56403, Greece; Center of Orthopaedics and Regenerative Medicine (C.O.RE.) - Center of Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation (C.I.R.I.) - Aristotle University Thessaloniki, Balkan Center, Buildings A & B, Thessaloniki, 10th km Thessaloniki-Thermi Rd, P.O. Box 8318, GR 57001, Greece.

出版信息

Injury. 2019 Oct;50(10):1745-1749. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.04.019. Epub 2019 Apr 22.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Biomechanical studies demonstrated the superiority of retrograde supracondylar intramedullary nails (RIN) against locking plates (LP) for the treatment of periprosthetic supracondylar femoral fractures (PSFs); however, clinical results are still conflicting. This study aimed to compare LP and RIN, as well as, cemented and uncemented nails in the treatment of PSFs regarding fracture healing, complications and functional results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective multicenter analysis of 60 PSFs classified as Rorabeck type I or II was performed. Thirty-one cases were treated with LP while in 29 cases RIN were used. Out of the latter, 14 had nailed cementoplasty, while 15 an uncemented nail.

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable concerning gender, ASA score, operated side, follow-up time, fracture type and mechanism of injury. The LP was significantly younger than the RIN group. Forty-six cases had fracture union at an average of six months, 11 were healed between seven and twelve months (delayed unions), and three developed non-unions. There was no significant difference in the median union time between RIN and LP groups (six vs five months, p = 0.707) or cemented and uncemented nailing groups (5.5 vs six months, p = 0.354). The RIN group had fewer delayed unions or non-unions than LP group; however, not reaching significance (4 vs 10, p = 0.190). Complications were fewer but non-significantly different between cemented and uncemented nails (one vs five, p = 0.481). The mean postoperative flexion was comparable between RIN and LP groups (99.1° vs 94.9°, p = 0.547) or cemented and uncemented nails (102° vs 96.3°, p = 0.4). The mean Oxford Knee Score did not differ between LP and RIN groups (30.8 vs 31.3, p = 0.93) as well as between cemented and uncemented nails (31.5 vs 30.6, p = 0.801).

DISCUSSION

PSFs with good bone stock can be treated equally with LP or RIN. Nails demonstrated advantages concerning the fracture healing potential. Orthopaedic surgeons need to be trained in both treatment options to manage PSFs. Cemented nails may increase stability and healing capacity in elderly osteoporotic patients; however, further studies are needed.

摘要

简介

生物力学研究表明,逆行髁上髓内钉(RIN)在治疗假体周围髁上股骨骨折(PSF)方面优于锁定钢板(LP);然而,临床结果仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较 LP 和 RIN 以及骨水泥固定和非骨水泥固定钉在治疗 PSF 方面的骨折愈合、并发症和功能结果。

材料和方法

对 60 例 Rorabeck Ⅰ型或Ⅱ型 PSF 进行回顾性多中心分析。31 例采用 LP 治疗,29 例采用 RIN 治疗。后者中有 14 例采用钉骨水泥成形术,15 例采用非骨水泥固定钉。

结果

两组在性别、ASA 评分、手术侧、随访时间、骨折类型和损伤机制方面具有可比性。LP 组患者明显比 RIN 组年轻。46 例骨折在平均 6 个月时愈合,11 例在 7-12 个月时愈合(延迟愈合),3 例出现不愈合。RIN 和 LP 组的中位愈合时间无显著差异(6 个月 vs 5 个月,p=0.707)或骨水泥固定和非骨水泥固定钉组(5.5 个月 vs 6 个月,p=0.354)。RIN 组的延迟愈合或不愈合发生率低于 LP 组,但无统计学意义(4 例 vs 10 例,p=0.190)。并发症在骨水泥固定和非骨水泥固定钉之间较少,但无统计学意义(1 例 vs 5 例,p=0.481)。RIN 和 LP 组的术后平均膝关节屈曲度相似(99.1° vs 94.9°,p=0.547)或骨水泥固定和非骨水泥固定钉组(102° vs 96.3°,p=0.4)。LP 和 RIN 组的平均牛津膝关节评分无差异(30.8 分 vs 31.3 分,p=0.93)以及骨水泥固定和非骨水泥固定钉组(31.5 分 vs 30.6 分,p=0.801)。

讨论

具有良好骨量的 PSF 可以用 LP 或 RIN 同等治疗。钉固定具有潜在的骨折愈合优势。骨科医生需要接受这两种治疗方案的培训,以治疗 PSF。骨水泥固定钉可能会增加老年骨质疏松患者的稳定性和愈合能力;然而,还需要进一步的研究。

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