Suppr超能文献

肱骨近端骨折:胸大肌三角肌入路切开复位内固定术与三角肌劈开微创钢板接骨术:哪种手术方式效果更佳?

Proximal humerus fractures: deltopectoral open reduction and internal fixation vs deltosplit minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis: which surgical approach provides superior results?

作者信息

Oldrini Lorenzo Massimo, Sangiorgio Alessandro, Feltri Pietro, Marbach Francesco, Filardo Giuseppe, Candrian Christian

机构信息

Service of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Surgery, EOC, Lugano, Switzerland.

Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland.

出版信息

EFORT Open Rev. 2023 Aug 1;8(8):662-671. doi: 10.1530/EOR-22-0110.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the two main surgical approaches to address proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) stratified for Neer fracture types, to demonstrate which approach gives the best result for each fracture type.

METHODS

A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to 4 January 2022. Inclusion criteria were studies comparing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with deltopectoral (DP) approach and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with deltosplit (DS) approach of PHFs. Patient's demographic data, fracture type, Constant-Murley Score (CMS), operation time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, fluoroscopy time, and radiological outcomes were extracted. Results were stratified for each type of Neer fracture.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (798 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. No functional difference was found in the CMS between the two groups for each type of Neer (P = n.s.): for PHFs Neer II, the mean CMS was 72.5 (s.e. 5.9) points in the ORIF group and 79.6 (s.e. 2.5) points in the MIPO group; for Neer III, 77.8 (s.e. 2.0) in the ORIF and 76.4 (se 3.0) in the MIPO; and for Neer IV, 70.6 (s.e. 2.7) in the ORIF and 60.9 (s.e. 6.3) in the MIPO. The operation time in the MIPO group was significantly lower than in the ORIF group for both Neer II (P = 0.0461) and Neer III (P = 0.0037) fractures.

CONCLUSION

The MIPO with DS approach demonstrated no significant differences in the results to the ORIF with DP approach for the different Neer fractures in terms of functional results, with a similar outcome, especially for the Neer II and III fracture types. The MIPO technique proved to be as safe and effective as the ORIF approach.

摘要

目的

比较治疗肱骨近端骨折(PHF)的两种主要手术方法,并根据Neer骨折类型进行分层,以证明哪种方法对每种骨折类型能产生最佳效果。

方法

根据系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目指南,在PubMed、科学网和Cochrane数据库中进行文献检索,检索截至2022年1月4日的文献。纳入标准为比较肱骨近端骨折切开复位内固定术(ORIF)与经三角肌胸大肌入路(DP)以及微创钢板接骨术(MIPO)与经三角肌劈开入路(DS)的研究。提取患者的人口统计学数据、骨折类型、Constant-Murley评分(CMS)、手术时间、失血量、住院时间、并发症、透视时间和影像学结果。结果按每种Neer骨折类型进行分层。

结果

11项研究(798例患者)纳入Meta分析。对于每种Neer骨折类型,两组之间的CMS无功能差异(P = 无统计学意义):对于Neer II型肱骨近端骨折,ORIF组的平均CMS为72.5(标准误5.9)分,MIPO组为79.6(标准误2.5)分;对于Neer III型,ORIF组为77.8(标准误2.0)分,MIPO组为76.4(标准误3.0)分;对于Neer IV型,ORIF组为70.6(标准误2.7)分,MIPO组为60.9(标准误6.3)分。对于Neer II型(P = 0.0461)和Neer III型(P = 0.0037)骨折,MIPO组的手术时间均显著低于ORIF组。

结论

对于不同的Neer骨折,经三角肌劈开入路的MIPO与经三角肌胸大肌入路的ORIF相比,在功能结果方面无显著差异,结果相似,尤其是对于Neer II型和III型骨折。MIPO技术被证明与ORIF方法一样安全有效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/707c/10441256/6a0a4453414d/EOR-22-0110fig1.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