Yan Dong, Li Hua, Shao Botian, Jiang Ge, Yang Junpeng, Liu Dehu, Zhang Miao, Fu Lei
First District of Orthopedics Department, The 960th Hospital of Joint Logistic Support Force of PLA Zibo 255300, Shandong, China.
Fifth Department of Surgery, Penglai People's Hospital Yantai 265600, Shandong, China.
Am J Transl Res. 2022 May 15;14(5):3261-3268. eCollection 2022.
To explore the efficacy of arthroscopic-assisted reduction and internal fixation (ARIF) and traditional open reduction and internal fixation in the treatment of talus fractures.
This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 92 patients with talus fractures admitted to our hospital. The patients were divided into a control group (treated with traditional open reduction and internal fixation) and a research group (with ARIF) with 46 cases in each. The operation indices, the score of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scoring System (AOFAS-AH), callus growth score, pain score, treatment effect, complications and quality of life score were compared between the two groups.
The research group showed shorter time of fracture healing, hospitalization and less intraoperative blood loss than the control group (all P<0.001). The ankle-hindfoot score in the research group was higher than those in the control group 3 and 6 months after surgery (both P<0.001). The excellent and good rate of treatment in the research group (93.48%) was higher than that in the control group (78.26%; P<0.05). Compared with the control group, the VAS score was lower and the callus growth score was higher in the research group at 1, 3 and 6 month after surgery (all P<0.01). The incidence of complications in the research group (2.17%) was lower than that in the control group (13.04%; P<0.05). Six months after surgery, the SF-36 score increased compared with that before surgery, with higher parameters in the research group than in the control group (P<0.001).
ARIF is more effective than traditional open reduction and internal fixation in treating talus fractures, with less complications and higher safety.
探讨关节镜辅助下复位内固定（ARIF）与传统切开复位内固定治疗距骨骨折的疗效。
本研究回顾性分析了我院收治的92例距骨骨折患者的临床资料。将患者分为对照组（采用传统切开复位内固定治疗）和研究组（采用ARIF），每组46例。比较两组的手术指标、美国矫形足踝协会踝 - 后足评分系统（AOFAS - AH）评分、骨痂生长评分、疼痛评分、治疗效果、并发症及生活质量评分。
研究组骨折愈合时间、住院时间均短于对照组，术中出血量少于对照组（均P<0.001）。研究组术后3个月和6个月的踝 - 后足评分高于对照组（均P<0.001）。研究组治疗优良率（93.48%）高于对照组（78.26%；P<0.05）。与对照组相比，研究组术后1个月、3个月和6个月的视觉模拟评分（VAS）较低，骨痂生长评分较高（均P<0.01）。研究组并发症发生率（2.17%）低于对照组（13.04%；P<0.05）。术后6个月，两组的简明健康状况调查量表（SF - 36）评分均较术前升高，且研究组高于对照组（P<0.001）。
ARIF治疗距骨骨折的效果优于传统切开复位内固定，并发症少，安全性高。
