Shin Won Chul, Jang Jae Hoon, Moon Nam Hoon, Jun Se Bin
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Trauma Center, Bio-medical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, 179 Gudeok-Ro, Seo-Gu, Busan, 49241, Republic of Korea.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Mar 1;22(1):145. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04016-y.
This study aimed to compare the radiological results between closed nailing without bone graft (BG) and open nailing with BG for aseptic subtrochanteric nonunion and to determine when an open procedure with BG should be considered.
In this retrospective study, we investigated patients who underwent surgical intervention for subtrochanteric nonunion between January 2008 and March 2018 in two institutions. Patients with infection, large bone defect, pathologic fracture, open fracture, previous surgery using plate, and follow-up of less than 1 year were excluded. We compared the demographic details and radiological results between patients who underwent the open procedure with BG (BG group) and the closed procedure without BG (non-BG group) as a historical control, and risk factors for the failure of revision surgery were evaluated.
Thirty-seven patients met the criteria and were divided into the following two groups: the BG group (n=19) who underwent open nailing with BG and the non-BG group (n=18) who underwent closed reamed nailing without BG. The mean degrees of correction of varus and flexion deformity were significantly different (p=0.001, respectively), 6.2° and 2.9° in the BG group and 4.1° and 0.6° in the non-BG group, respectively. Bony union was observed in 17 cases (89.5%) in an average of 7.4 months in the BG group and in 16 cases (88.9%) in 7.6 months in the non-BG group, with no significant differences. The factors that were significantly associated with failure of revision were atypical fracture, two or more previous surgeries, and varus and sagittal anterior angulation.
The radiological results of closed reamed nailing without BG for subtrochanteric nonunion were satisfactory. In the effort of percutaneous realignment, gap reduction, and intramedullary reaming, the radiological results of closed nailing without BG were not different from those of open nailing with BG; therefore, closed procedure without BG may be an acceptable option in appropriately selected patients.
本研究旨在比较闭合交锁髓内钉不植骨(BG)与切开交锁髓内钉植骨治疗无菌性转子下骨不连的影像学结果,并确定何时应考虑采用切开植骨手术。
在这项回顾性研究中,我们调查了2008年1月至2018年3月期间在两家机构接受转子下骨不连手术干预的患者。排除有感染、大的骨缺损、病理性骨折、开放性骨折、既往使用钢板手术以及随访时间少于1年的患者。我们将接受切开植骨手术的患者(BG组)与作为历史对照的闭合不植骨手术患者(非BG组)的人口统计学细节和影像学结果进行比较,并评估翻修手术失败的危险因素。
37例患者符合标准,分为以下两组:BG组(n = 19)接受切开交锁髓内钉植骨,非BG组(n = 18)接受闭合扩髓交锁髓内钉不植骨。内翻和屈曲畸形的平均矫正度数有显著差异(分别为p = 0.001),BG组分别为6.2°和2.9°,非BG组分别为4.1°和0.6°。BG组17例(89.5%)平均在7.4个月时观察到骨愈合,非BG组16例(88.9%)在7.6个月时观察到骨愈合,无显著差异。与翻修失败显著相关的因素是非典型骨折、既往两次或更多次手术以及内翻和矢状面成角。
闭合扩髓交锁髓内钉不植骨治疗转子下骨不连的影像学结果令人满意。在经皮复位、间隙缩小和髓内扩髓的过程中,闭合不植骨髓内钉的影像学结果与切开植骨髓内钉无异;因此,对于适当选择的患者,闭合不植骨手术可能是一个可接受的选择。