Suppr超能文献

对于外侧髁肱骨骨折移位>4mm的儿童患者,闭合复位经皮钢针固定与切开复位内固定的疗效对比:一项观察性的横断面研究。

Closed reduction and percutaneous pinning vs open reduction and internal fixation in pediatric lateral condylar humerus fractures displaced by > 4 mm: an observational cross-sectional study.

机构信息

Department of Pediatric Orthopedics, Sichuan Provincial Orthopedics Hospital, Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China.

Department of Geriatrics, Chengdu Shuang-nan Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

出版信息

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Nov 25;22(1):985. doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04880-8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is recommended for lateral condylar humerus fractures (LCHFs) displaced by > 4 mm, several studies have reported the use of closed reduction and percutaneous pinning (CRPP) to treat LCHFs with significant displacement. However, little is known about the clinical differences between these two surgical techniques. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of CRPP and ORIF in treating LCHFs displaced by > 4 mm.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed pediatric LCHFs displaced by > 4 mm treated with either CRPP or ORIF at our center from June 2019 to October 2020. Song and Milch fracture classifications were used. Variables such as age at injury, sex, side injured, fracture displacement, fracture type, operating time, postoperative treatment, and complications were compared between the two techniques.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty LCHFs met inclusion criteria. There were 36 Milch type I and 84 type II LCHFs, and 69 Song stage 4 and 51 stage 5 LCHFs. CRPP was performed in 45 cases and ORIF in 75 cases. No differences were found in age, sex, side injured, preoperative displacement, postoperative displacement, and length of immobilization between the CRPP and ORIF groups. There was a difference between operation time and pin duration. The CRPP group had shorter operation times and pin duration, and required no additional operations to remove internal pins. The average follow-up duration was 13.9 months. All patients achieved fracture union, and no complications such as infection, nonunion, delayed union, osteonecrosis, fishtail deformity, cubitus varus or valgus, or pain were recorded during follow-up. Bone spurs, lateral prominences, and decreased carrying angle were common complications in all groups. No obvious cubitus varus was observed. Unaesthetic scars were only observed in the ORIF groups. No differences in range of motion or elbow function was found among the different therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Both CRPP and ORIF can achieve satisfactory clinical outcomes in treating LCHFs displaced by > 4 mm. No differences were found in complications or prognoses between the two groups. However, CRPP shows some advantages over ORIF, like less invasive surgery, no obvious scarring, and no need for secondary surgery with anesthesia for pin removal.

摘要

背景

对于外侧髁肱骨骨折(LCHF)移位> 4mm 的患者,建议采用切开复位内固定(ORIF),但也有几项研究报道采用闭合复位经皮克氏针固定(CRPP)治疗有明显移位的 LCHF。然而,对于这两种手术技术的临床差异知之甚少。本研究旨在比较 CRPP 和 ORIF 治疗> 4mm 移位的 LCHF 的疗效。

方法

我们回顾性分析了 2019 年 6 月至 2020 年 10 月在我院接受 CRPP 或 ORIF 治疗的> 4mm 移位的小儿 LCHF。采用 Song 和 Milch 骨折分型。比较两种技术的年龄、性别、损伤侧、骨折移位、骨折类型、手术时间、术后治疗和并发症等变量。

结果

共有 120 例 LCHF 符合纳入标准。其中 Milch 型 I 型 36 例,II 型 84 例,Song 分期 4 期 51 例,5 期 69 例。CRPP 组 45 例,ORIF 组 75 例。CRPP 组和 ORIF 组在年龄、性别、损伤侧、术前移位、术后移位、固定时间等方面均无差异。但在手术时间和克氏针固定时间上存在差异。CRPP 组的手术时间和克氏针固定时间较短,且无需进行额外的手术取出内固定针。平均随访时间为 13.9 个月。所有患者均达到骨折愈合,随访期间无感染、不愈合、延迟愈合、骨坏死、鱼尾畸形、肘内翻或肘外翻、疼痛等并发症。骨赘、外侧突出和携带角减小是所有组的常见并发症。未观察到明显的肘内翻。只有 ORIF 组观察到不美观的疤痕。不同治疗方法之间的关节活动度或肘功能无差异。

结论

CRPP 和 ORIF 均可治疗> 4mm 移位的 LCHF,取得满意的临床效果。两组并发症和预后无差异。但 CRPP 具有手术创伤小、无明显疤痕、无需再次手术麻醉取针等优点。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/58d7/8620550/4372bef13914/12891_2021_4880_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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