Suppr超能文献

可吸收螺钉固定与可吸收螺钉联合缝线锚钉固定治疗膝关节后交叉韧带胫骨止点撕脱骨折的对比研究

[A comparative study of absorbable screw fixation and absorbable screw combined with suture anchor fixation in treatment of avulsion fracture of posterior cruciate ligament at tibial insertion of knee joint].

作者信息

Wu Shuang, Zhang Kaibo, Fu Weili, Li Jian

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, Insititute of Orthopedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu Sichuan, 610041, P. R. China.

出版信息

Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2023 May 15;37(5):572-577. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202301061.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of open reduction of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) avulsion fracture at tibial insertion of knee joint with absorbable screws fixation and absorbable screw combined with suture anchor fixation.

METHODS

The clinical data of 26 patients with PCL avulsion fracture at tibial insertion who met the selection criteria between March 2015 and October 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 14 patients were fixed with simple absorbable screw (group A), and 12 patients were fixed with absorbable screw combined with suture anchors (group B). All patients were confirmed by X-ray film, CT, or MRI preoperatively, and got positive results in preoperative posterior drawer tests. There was no significant difference in gender, age, side of affected limb, time from injury to operation, comorbidities, and preoperative Meyers & McKeever classification, Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score between the two groups ( >0.05). The operation time and postoperative complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. At last follow-up, Lysholm score and IKDC score were used to evaluate the improvement of knee function.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in operation time between the two groups ( >0.05). All incisions healed by first intention, and no complication such as vascular and nerve injury or venous thrombosis occurred. All 26 patients were followed up 9-89 months, with an average of 55.3 months. The follow-up time of group A and group B was (55.7±23.2) and (56.8±29.3) months, respectively, with no significant difference ( =-0.106, =0.916). Radiographs showed bone healing in both groups at 3 months after operation, and no complication such as infection and traumatic arthritis occurred. At last follow-up, the posterior drawer test was negative in both groups, and the Lysholm score and IKDC score significantly improved when compared with the pre-operative values ( <0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the improvement value between the two groups ( >0.05).

CONCLUSION

For PCL avulsion fracture at tibial insertion of the knee joint, the open reduction and absorbable screw combined with suture anchor fixation can achieve reliable fracture reduction and fixation, which is conducive to the early rehabilitation and functional exercise, and the postoperative functional recovery of the knee joint is satisfactory.

摘要

目的

比较膝关节后交叉韧带(PCL)胫骨止点撕脱骨折切开复位后采用可吸收螺钉固定与可吸收螺钉联合缝线锚钉固定的疗效。

方法

回顾性分析2015年3月至2021年10月间符合入选标准的26例PCL胫骨止点撕脱骨折患者的临床资料。其中,14例采用单纯可吸收螺钉固定(A组),12例采用可吸收螺钉联合缝线锚钉固定(B组)。所有患者术前均经X线片、CT或MRI确诊,且术前抽屉试验阳性。两组患者在性别、年龄、患侧肢体、受伤至手术时间、合并症以及术前Meyers & McKeever分级、Lysholm评分和国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)评分方面比较,差异均无统计学意义(>0.05)。记录并比较两组患者的手术时间及术后并发症。末次随访时,采用Lysholm评分和IKDC评分评估膝关节功能改善情况。

结果

两组患者手术时间比较,差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。所有切口均一期愈合,未发生血管神经损伤、静脉血栓形成等并发症。26例患者均获随访,随访时间9~89个月,平均55.3个月。A组和B组随访时间分别为(55.7±23.2)个月和(56.8±29.3)个月,差异无统计学意义(=-0.106,=0.916)。术后3个月X线片显示两组均骨折愈合,未发生感染、创伤性关节炎等并发症。末次随访时,两组抽屉试验均为阴性,Lysholm评分和IKDC评分较术前均显著改善(<0.05)。但两组改善值比较,差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。

结论

对于膝关节PCL胫骨止点撕脱骨折,切开复位后采用可吸收螺钉联合缝线锚钉固定可获得可靠的骨折复位与固定,有利于早期康复及功能锻炼,膝关节术后功能恢复满意。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

9
Posterior Cruciate Ligament Avulsion Fractures.后交叉韧带撕脱骨折
Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018 Sep;11(3):503-509. doi: 10.1007/s12178-018-9491-2.

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