Department of Trauma Orthopedic, The Naval Medical University, Shanghai, 200433, China.
Department of Trauma Orthopedic, General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command of PLA, Guangzhou, China.
Int Orthop. 2021 Nov;45(11):2955-2962. doi: 10.1007/s00264-021-05004-6. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
The unstable intertrochanteric femur fracture remains a challenge for surgeons. However, few studies have compared the clinical effectiveness of intramedullary nail in combination with a reconstruction plate and intramedullary nail alone in the treatment of patients with unstable intertrochanteric femoral fractures with lateral wall damage.
This study retrospectively analyzed 16 patients with 31 A3 intertrochanteric fractures treated with the intramedullary nail in combination with reconstruction plate (the study group) and 19 patients with 31 A3 intertrochanteric fractures treated with intramedullary nail alone (the control group) between January 2012 and January 2018. The operation time, intra-operative blood loss, time of fracture healing, and complication rates of post-operative fixation failure were assessed between the two groups. At the follow-up of post-operative six and 12 months, Harris hip score (HHS) and the Parker-Palmer mobility score (PPMS) were used to evaluate the functional states and mobility levels.
The distribution of all basic characteristics was similar between the two groups (P ˃ 0.05). The study group had longer operation time and more intra-operative blood loss in comparison with the control group (P < 0.001), while the study group had shorter fracture healing time (P = 0.03) and lower fixation failure rate as compared with the control group. Regarding the functional outcome, the study group had higher HHSs and PPMS than the control group (P = 0.003).
Although intramedullary nails in combination with reconstruction plates had longer operation time and more intra-operative blood loss, it might be superior to intramedullary nail alone in terms of fracture healing time, fixation failure complication rate, and post-operative functional recovery.
不稳定型股骨转子间骨折仍然是外科医生面临的挑战。然而,很少有研究比较髓内钉联合重建钢板与单纯髓内钉治疗合并外侧壁损伤的不稳定型股骨转子间骨折患者的临床疗效。
本研究回顾性分析了 2012 年 1 月至 2018 年 1 月期间采用髓内钉联合重建钢板(研究组)治疗的 16 例 31 例 A3 转子间骨折和单纯髓内钉治疗的 19 例 31 例 A3 转子间骨折患者(对照组)。评估两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间及术后固定失败的并发症发生率。术后 6 个月和 12 个月随访时,采用 Harris 髋关节评分(HHS)和 Parker-Palmer 活动评分(PPMS)评估髋关节功能状态和活动水平。
两组患者的所有基本特征分布相似(P > 0.05)。与对照组相比,研究组手术时间较长,术中出血量较多(P <0.001),但骨折愈合时间较短(P = 0.03),固定失败率较低。在功能结果方面,研究组的 HHS 和 PPMS 均高于对照组(P = 0.003)。
虽然髓内钉联合重建钢板手术时间较长,术中出血量较大,但在骨折愈合时间、固定失败并发症发生率和术后功能恢复方面可能优于单纯髓内钉。