Suppr超能文献

[锁骨中段骨折的手术治疗——前瞻性随机试验]

[Surgical Treatment of Clavicle Midshaft Fractures - Prospective Randomized Trial].

作者信息

Šimek J, Šmejkal K, Frank M, Hyšpler R, Dědek T, Páral J

机构信息

Katedra vojenské chirurgie, Fakulta vojenského zdravotnictví, Univerzita obrany v Brně, Hradec Králové.

出版信息

Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2020;87(2):101-107.

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Comparison of the outcomes of clavicle midshaft fractures using two different surgical techniques, namely intramedullar osteosynthesis using elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) with medial cap and extramedullar plate osteosynthesis. MATERIAL AND METHODS The prospective randomized trial was conducted at the Department of Trauma Surgery of the Department of Surgery of the University Hospital Hradec Králové in the Czech Republic at the Level I Trauma Center between 2014 and 2018 and compared two types of osteosynthesis of clavicle midshaft fractures. 60 patients were enrolled in the study and were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. In Group 1, the participants were treated by ESIN and in Group 2 by plate osteosynthesis. The operative technique was chosen by the sealed envelope method. According to the randomization list created by a specialised statistical company, every envelope was marked with a unique number and contained the intramedullar "IM", or the extramedullar "EM" sign. RESULTS The observation of statistical parameters by unpaired t test detected significantly different results: a shorter incision using ESIN osteosynthesis (median = 2.9 cm) compared with plate osteosynthesis (median 14 cm, p < 0.001), longer X-ray exposure using ESIN (median = 325 s) compared with plate osteosynthesis (median = 16.5 s, p < 0.001) and radiation dose using ESIN (median = 996 cGy/cm2) compared with plate osteosynthesis (median = 4 cGy/cm2, p < 0.001). The difference in other parameters such as operative time, in-patient length of stay and duration of rehabilitation was not statistically significant. The time to clavicle fracture repair was comparable in both the surgical arms, i.e. approximately 3 months. Also, the duration of incapacity for work was not statistically different. Functional Constant Shoulder Score at a one-year followup is comparable in both the two arms (p = 0.268). The Dunn s method necessitated a longer operative time when treating multifragmental midshaft clavicle fracture by the ESIN compared to simple fractures. No statistically significant difference was detected in the operative time of different procedures and in the number of bone fragments. The functional outcome was excellent in 25 patients (83%) in each method. DISCUSSION Most midshaft clavicle fractures are still treated non-operatively with good outcomes. The indication for surgical treatment is the dislocation of fragments greater than the width of the clavicle bone, the shortening of fragments greater than 2 cm and the angulation of more than 30°. Patient after operative treatment profits from bone healing by absolute or relative stability. In recent years, new intramedullar techniques other than open plate reduction and fixation have emerged. For example, elastic stable intramedullary titan nailing. Both the methods are full-fledged without functional differences in longterm follow-up. CONCLUSIONS We consider the intramedullar osteosynthesis to be the most appropriate surgical approach for simple midshaft spiral, oblique and transverse clavicle fractures and also wedge oblique fractures. Plate osteosynthesis is useful for all types of fractures. No statistically significant difference in the rate of bone healing was observed after intramedullar or extramedullar ostesynthesis, but multifragmentary fractures healed faster when plate osteosynthesis was used. The determining factor for the received radiation dose is solely the surgical method, not the type of fracture. There is a statistically significant difference in shorter X-ray exposure and lower received radiation dose in plate fixation and reduction. The complication rate is comparable in both the methods. Key words: elastic stable intramedullary nailing, midshaft clavicle fracture, ESIN, TEN, titan elastic nail, clavicle plate osteosynthesis, 3.5 LCP clavicular plate, indication for midshaft fracture treatment.

摘要

研究目的

比较两种不同手术技术治疗锁骨中段骨折的疗效,即使用带内侧帽的弹性稳定髓内钉(ESIN)进行髓内骨固定术和髓外钢板骨固定术。

材料与方法

该前瞻性随机试验于2014年至2018年在捷克共和国赫拉德茨克拉洛韦大学医院外科创伤外科进行,该科室为一级创伤中心,比较了两种锁骨中段骨折的骨固定方法。60例患者纳入研究并随机分为两组。第1组患者采用ESIN治疗,第2组采用钢板骨固定术治疗。手术技术通过密封信封法选择。根据专业统计公司创建的随机列表,每个信封都标有唯一编号,并包含髓内“IM”或髓外“EM”标志。

结果

通过非配对t检验观察统计参数,发现结果存在显著差异:与钢板骨固定术相比,ESIN骨固定术切口更短(中位数 = 2.9 cm)(钢板骨固定术中位数为14 cm,p < 0.001);与钢板骨固定术相比,ESIN的X线暴露时间更长(中位数 = 325 s)(钢板骨固定术中位数 = 16.5 s,p < 0.001);与钢板骨固定术相比,ESIN的辐射剂量更高(中位数 = 996 cGy/cm²)(钢板骨固定术中位数 = 4 cGy/cm²,p < 0.001)。其他参数如手术时间、住院时间和康复时间的差异无统计学意义。锁骨骨折修复时间在两个手术组中相当,即约3个月。此外,误工时间也无统计学差异。两组在一年随访时的功能Constant肩关节评分相当(p = 0.268)。与简单骨折相比,ESIN治疗多段锁骨中段骨折时,Dunn法需要更长的手术时间。不同手术方式的手术时间和骨碎片数量无统计学显著差异。每种方法均有25例患者(83%)功能结果良好。

讨论

大多数锁骨中段骨折仍采用非手术治疗,效果良好。手术治疗的指征是骨折碎片移位大于锁骨宽度、碎片缩短大于2 cm以及成角大于30°。手术治疗后的患者通过绝对或相对稳定实现骨愈合。近年来,除了开放钢板复位固定外,新的髓内技术也已出现。例如,弹性稳定髓内钛钉固定。两种方法均成熟,长期随访无功能差异。

结论

我们认为髓内骨固定术是治疗简单的中段螺旋形、斜形和横形锁骨骨折以及楔形斜形骨折最合适的手术方法。钢板骨固定术适用于所有类型的骨折。髓内或髓外骨固定术后骨愈合率无统计学显著差异,但使用钢板骨固定术时多段骨折愈合更快。接受辐射剂量的决定因素仅为手术方法,而非骨折类型。钢板固定和复位时,X线暴露时间更短且接受的辐射剂量更低,存在统计学显著差异。两种方法的并发症发生率相当。

关键词

弹性稳定髓内钉固定术;锁骨中段骨折;ESIN;TEN;钛弹性钉;锁骨钢板骨固定术;3.5 LCP锁骨钢板;中段骨折治疗指征

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验