Gao Bo, Yang Ling, Wang Hong, Jiang Wei, Zhu Zhong-Lun, Liu Yue-Hong
Department of Orthopaedics, People's Hospital of Deyang City, Deyang 618000, Sichuan, China.
Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2020 Mar 25;33(3):203-8. doi: 10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2020.03.003.
To compare clinical effects of calcaneal traction and external fixator fixation of fractional delayed surgery in treating type C Pilon fractures.
From January 2012 to December 2017, clinical data of 45 patients with tibial Pilon fractures were respectively analyzed. There were 24 patients in traction group, including 16 males and 8 females, aged from 21 to 57 years old with an average age of (38.6 ±10.5) years old; 18 patients caused by falling down, 6 patients caused by traffic accident; 15 patients on the left side and 9 patients on the right side; according to AO/OTA classification, 3 patients classified type C1, 9 patients classified type C2 and 12 patients classified type C3; treated by calcaneal traction on the first stage, and open reduction and internal fixation on the second stage. There were 21 patients in external fixation group, including 15 males and 6 females, aged from 19 to 58 years old with an average age of (37.8 ±11.2) years old; 17 patients caused by falling down, 4 patients caused by traffic accident; 11 patients on the left side and 10 patients on the right side; according to AO/OTA classification, 2 patients classified type C1, 8 patients classified type C2 and 11 patients classified type C3; treated by external fixator on the first stage, and open reduction and internal fixation on the second stage. All patients were closed fracture. Preoperative waiting time, hospital stays, operative time, postoperative complications, fracture reduction and healing time between two groups were compared, VAS score was used to evaluate relief of pain before internal fixation on the second stage, Burwell-Charnley radiological evaluation criteria was applied to evaluate fracture reduction after internal fixation, AOFAS score was used to evaluate recovery of ankle joint function.
There were no statistical difference in operative time, following-up time and fracture healing time between two groups. VAS score before internal fixation in traction group was 3.73± 0.87, while in external fixation group was 2.67±0.69, there was statistical difference between two groups. Preoperative waiting time, and hospital stays in traction group were (9.20±1.40) d ,(12.30±3.60) d; while in external fixation group were (7.60± 1.50) d ,(10.80±2.60) d; and had significant difference between two groups. There was no difference in complications between two groups. According to Burwell-Charnley radiological evaluation criteria, 20 patients obtained anatomical reduction, and 4 patients received normal reduction in traction group; 18 patients obtained anatomical reduction, and 3 patients received normal reduction in external fixation group; while without difference between two groups. There was no difference between two groups in AOFAS score.
For type C Pilon fractures, one-stage calcaneus traction or temporary external fixation also could achieve temporary fixation and provide better soft tissue conditions for the second stage internal fixation, and could receive better ankle joint function after internal fixation. The operation of calcaneus traction is simple, while external fixation may be increase the number of operation times, but external fixation has more advantages in reducing preoperative pain, shortening preoperative waiting days and hospitalization time than traction.
比较跟骨牵引与外固定架固定分期延迟手术治疗C型Pilon骨折的临床效果。
分析2012年1月至2017年12月45例胫骨Pilon骨折患者的临床资料。牵引组24例,男16例,女8例,年龄21~57岁,平均(38.6±10.5)岁;摔伤18例,交通事故伤6例;左侧15例,右侧9例;按AO/OTA分类,C1型3例,C2型9例,C3型12例;一期行跟骨牵引,二期行切开复位内固定。外固定组21例,男15例,女6例,年龄19~58岁,平均(37.8±11.2)岁;摔伤17例,交通事故伤4例;左侧11例,右侧10例;按AO/OTA分类,C1型2例,C2型8例,C3型11例;一期行外固定架固定,二期行切开复位内固定。所有患者均为闭合性骨折。比较两组术前等待时间、住院时间、手术时间、术后并发症、骨折复位及愈合时间,采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估二期内固定术前疼痛缓解情况,应用Burwell-Charnley放射学评估标准评估内固定术后骨折复位情况,采用美国足踝外科协会(AOFAS)评分评估踝关节功能恢复情况。
两组手术时间、随访时间及骨折愈合时间比较,差异无统计学意义。牵引组二期内固定术前VAS评分为3.73±0.87,外固定组为2.67±0.69,两组比较差异有统计学意义。牵引组术前等待时间、住院时间分别为(9.20±1.40)d、(12.30±3.60)d;外固定组分别为(7.60±1.50)d、(10.80±2.60)d;两组比较差异有统计学意义。两组并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义。按Burwell-Charnley放射学评估标准,牵引组解剖复位20例,功能复位4例;外固定组解剖复位18例,功能复位3例;两组比较差异无统计学意义。两组AOFAS评分比较,差异无统计学意义。
对于C型Pilon骨折,一期跟骨牵引或临时外固定均可达到临时固定目的,为二期内固定提供较好的软组织条件,且二期内固定后踝关节功能恢复良好。跟骨牵引操作简单,外固定可能增加手术次数,但外固定在减轻术前疼痛、缩短术前等待天数及住院时间方面优于牵引。