Suppr超能文献

不同类型骨盆固定器的效果如何:使用骨盆急救模拟器的研究结果。

How effective are different models of pelvic binders: results of a study using a Pelvic Emergency Simulator.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik Frankfurt, Friedberger Landstraße 430, 60389, Frankfurt, Germany.

Orthopaedicum Wiesbaden, Friedrichstraße 29, 65185, Wiesbaden, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022 Apr;48(2):847-855. doi: 10.1007/s00068-020-01406-0. Epub 2020 May 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The application of pelvic binders in the preclinical and early clinical phase is advisable to avoid or treat C-problems in unstable and potential bleeding pelvic ring fractures, even if the clinical effectivity is not completely proved. The use for pathologies in the posterior pelvic ring is still debatable.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We determined if there is a difference in achievable compression in the dorsal pelvic ring depending on position and pelvic binder model. Can this effect be tested with a simplified artificial model?

METHODS

We simulated a Tile type C fracture within the established pelvic emergency trainer and measured in a test series the effectivity of reduction with a non-invasive stabilization technique using 3 different pelvic binders.

RESULTS

Any therapeutic effect of a pelvic binder with compression to the posterior pelvic ring requires at first a reduction maneuver. While the compression effect in the symphysis depends only on positioning of the binder, in the posterior pelvic ring, the result varies with the used model. The achievable pressure in the SI joint with a pelvic binder is only 20-25% (33.5-47 N) compared to the C-Clamp values (156 N).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of pelvic binders for non-invasive pelvic ring stabilization, even with a posterior pathology, could be proven in a simplified fracture model. A proper fracture reduction and an adequate device positioning influence the effectiveness.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of an emergency pelvic trainer even for a non-invasive maneuver is advisable.

摘要

背景

骨盆固定器在临床前和早期临床阶段的应用是可取的,以避免或治疗不稳定和潜在出血性骨盆环骨折中的 C 型问题,即使其临床效果尚未完全证实。对于骨盆后环的病变,其应用仍存在争议。

问题/目的:我们确定了根据位置和骨盆固定器模型,在背侧骨盆环中可实现的压缩程度是否存在差异。这种效果可以通过简化的人工模型进行测试吗?

方法

我们在已建立的骨盆急救训练器内模拟了 Tile 型 C 型骨折,并在一系列测试中测量了使用 3 种不同骨盆固定器的非侵入性稳定技术对骨折复位的效果。

结果

任何对骨盆后环进行压缩的骨盆固定器的治疗效果都首先需要进行复位操作。虽然固定器对耻骨联合的压缩效果仅取决于其定位,但在后骨盆环中,结果因使用的模型而异。与 C 型夹的数值(156N)相比,骨盆固定器在骶髂关节处可达到的压力仅为 20-25%(33.5-47N)。

结论

即使存在骨盆后环的病变,骨盆固定器也可在简化的骨折模型中被证明可用于非侵入性骨盆环稳定。适当的骨折复位和正确的设备定位会影响其效果。

临床相关性

即使进行非侵入性操作,使用骨盆急救训练器也是可取的。

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