• 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

大转子与梨状窝入钉治疗股骨干骨折:解决争议。

Greater trochanteric versus piriformis fossa entry nails for femur shaft fractures: Resolving the controversy.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector-12, Chandigarh, 160012, India.

出版信息

Injury. 2019 Oct;50(10):1715-1724. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.07.011. Epub 2019 Jul 14.

DOI:10.1016/j.injury.2019.07.011
PMID:31358301
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Intramedullary nailing is the treatment of choice for shaft of femur fractures in adults. Antegrade nails involve entry through either piriformis fossa (PE) or greater trochanteric (GT) tip. The superiority of one entry point over the other is a matter of debate, and the present review was done to determine the same.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is GT entry for antegrade femur nailing superior to the PE for shaft femur fractures in adults?

OBJECTIVE

The present systematic review was conducted to determine the superiority of one entry point over the other by comparing the outcome parameters like operative time, exposure to fluoroscopy, mal-unions, non unions, abductor weakness, varus malalignment and Harris Hip scores (HHS).

METHODOLOGY

Three databases of PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS were searched for relevant articles that directly compared GT with PE for nailing in shaft femur fractures in adults.

RESULTS

We analysed a total of 9 studies published between the years 2011-2017. There were 5 retrospective and 4 prospective studies, out of which 3 were randomised. The total number of patients was 256 in GT group and 460 in PE group.

OUTCOMES

There was significant superiority of GT entry over PE on meta analysis; lesser operation time: standard mean difference (SMD): -21.01; lesser exposure to fluoroscopy : SMD: 36.36; lesser incidence of abductor weakness: Odd's ratio (OR): 14.35; better functional outcome (HHS): SMD -2.48.

CONCLUSION

GT entry nails are superior to PE nails for treating shaft of femur fractures in adults. They have a shorter learning curve and better functional outcomes, however the rates of union are comparable in both.

摘要

背景

髓内钉是成人股骨干骨折的首选治疗方法。顺行钉通过梨状肌窝(PE)或大转子尖端(GT)进入。一个入钉点优于另一个入钉点是一个有争议的问题,本综述旨在确定这一点。

研究问题

对于成人股骨干骨折,顺行股骨干钉的 GT 入钉点是否优于 PE 入钉点?

目的

本系统评价旨在通过比较手术时间、透视暴露、畸形愈合、不愈合、外展肌无力、内翻畸形和 Harris 髋关节评分(HHS)等结局参数来确定一个入钉点优于另一个入钉点。

方法

在 PubMed、EMBASE 和 SCOPUS 三个数据库中搜索直接比较 GT 与 PE 用于成人股骨干骨折髓内钉固定的相关文章。

结果

我们分析了 2011 年至 2017 年发表的 9 项研究。其中 5 项为回顾性研究,4 项为前瞻性研究,其中 3 项为随机研究。GT 组患者总数为 256 例,PE 组为 460 例。

结果

GT 入钉点在荟萃分析中有显著优势;手术时间更短:标准均数差(SMD):-21.01;透视暴露更少:SMD:36.36;外展肌无力发生率更低:比值比(OR):14.35;功能结局更好(HHS):SMD-2.48。

结论

GT 入钉点在治疗成人股骨干骨折方面优于 PE 入钉点。它们的学习曲线更短,功能结局更好,但两者的愈合率相当。

相似文献

1
Greater trochanteric versus piriformis fossa entry nails for femur shaft fractures: Resolving the controversy.大转子与梨状窝入钉治疗股骨干骨折:解决争议。
Injury. 2019 Oct;50(10):1715-1724. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.07.011. Epub 2019 Jul 14.
2
Trochanteric versus piriformis entry portal for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures.股骨转子与梨状肌入路治疗股骨干骨折
J Orthop Trauma. 2006 Nov-Dec;20(10):663-7. doi: 10.1097/01.bot.0000248472.53154.14.
3
Trochanteric entry femoral nails yield better femoral version and lower revision rates-A large cohort multivariate regression analysis.转子入路股骨钉可获得更好的股骨扭转角度及更低的翻修率——一项大型队列多因素回归分析
Injury. 2017 Jun;48(6):1165-1169. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.017. Epub 2017 Mar 18.
4
Nailing precision: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing piriformis and trochanteric entry points for femoral antegrade nailing.钉入精度:比较梨状肌入路和转子下入路行股骨干顺行髓内钉固定的随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Jun;144(6):2527-2538. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05359-6. Epub 2024 May 14.
5
The impact of antegrade intramedullary nailing start site using the SIGN nail in proximal femoral fractures: A prospective cohort study.使用SIGN髓内钉时顺行髓内钉固定起始部位对股骨近端骨折的影响:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Injury. 2018 Feb;49(2):323-327. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.11.020. Epub 2017 Nov 16.
6
Functional outcome following intramedullary nailing of the femur: a prospective randomized comparison of piriformis fossa and greater trochanteric entry portals.股骨髓内钉固定后的功能结果:梨状窝入路和大转子入路的前瞻性随机比较。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Aug 3;93(15):1385-91. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00760.
7
Muscle function and functional outcome following standard antegrade reamed intramedullary nailing of isolated femoral shaft fractures.孤立性股骨干骨折采用标准顺行扩髓髓内钉固定后的肌肉功能及功能预后
J Orthop Trauma. 2008 Jan;22(1):10-5. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e31815f5357.
8
Retrograde versus antegrade nailing of femoral shaft fractures.股骨干骨折的逆行与顺行髓内钉固定
J Orthop Trauma. 2001 Mar-Apr;15(3):161-9. doi: 10.1097/00005131-200103000-00003.
9
A critical analysis of the eccentric starting point for trochanteric intramedullary femoral nailing.股骨转子髓内钉偏心起始点的批判性分析
J Orthop Trauma. 2005 Nov-Dec;19(10):681-6. doi: 10.1097/01.bot.0000184145.75201.1b.
10
Antegrade versus retrograde nailing techniques and trochanteric versus piriformis intramedullary nailing entry points for femoral shaft fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.股骨干骨折的顺行与逆行髓内钉技术及大转子与梨状肌入路髓内钉固定的进针点:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Can J Surg. 2017 Feb;60(1):19-29. doi: 10.1503/cjs.000616.

引用本文的文献

1
The "foothill" entry for cephalomedullary nailing in unstable proximal femoral fractures: a technical note with a review of the literature.不稳定股骨近端骨折髓内钉固定的“山麓”入路:技术说明并文献复习
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024 Aug;34(6):3365-3371. doi: 10.1007/s00590-024-04014-5. Epub 2024 Jun 26.
2
Nailing precision: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing piriformis and trochanteric entry points for femoral antegrade nailing.钉入精度:比较梨状肌入路和转子下入路行股骨干顺行髓内钉固定的随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Jun;144(6):2527-2538. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05359-6. Epub 2024 May 14.
3
Choice of Entry Point Does Not Affect Clinical and Radiological Outcomes in Antegrade Intra-medullary Nailing in Patients with Shaft of Femur Fracture: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.
股骨骨干骨折患者顺行髓内钉固定时入钉点的选择对临床和影像学结果无影响:一项前瞻性随机对照试验
Indian J Orthop. 2024 Feb 14;58(4):339-344. doi: 10.1007/s43465-024-01104-8. eCollection 2024 Apr.
4
The characteristics and influence of iatrogenic fracture comminution following antegrade interlocking nailing for simple femoral shaft fractures, a retrospective cohort study.顺行交锁髓内钉治疗单纯股骨干骨折所致医源性骨折粉碎的特点及影响:一项回顾性队列研究。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 May 14;23(1):456. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05418-2.
5
Patterns, Management, and Outcome of Traumatic Femur Fracture: Exploring the Experience of the Only Level 1 Trauma Center in Qatar.创伤性股骨骨折的模式、管理及结果:探索卡塔尔唯一一家一级创伤中心的经验
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 May 31;18(11):5916. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18115916.
6
Traction methods in the retrograde intramedullary nailing of femur shaft fractures: the double reverse traction repositor or manual traction.股骨干骨折逆行髓内钉固定术中的牵引方法:双反向牵引复位器或手法牵引。
Int Orthop. 2021 Oct;45(10):2711-2718. doi: 10.1007/s00264-021-04961-2. Epub 2021 Feb 2.
7
Is gluteus medius injured in patients treated with a trochanter tip entry intramedullary nail? Clinical, electrophysiological and functional outcomes.使用转子尖入路髓内钉治疗的患者中臀中肌会受伤吗?临床、电生理和功能结果。
Jt Dis Relat Surg. 2020;31(2):312-319. doi: 10.5606/ehc.2020.74801. Epub 2020 Jun 18.