• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

颅面外科中移除刚性内固定装置的原因:20 年的更新。

Reasons for Removal of Rigid Internal Fixation Devices in Craniofacial Surgery: A 20-year Update.

机构信息

Section of Plastic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

出版信息

J Craniofac Surg. 2024 Jun 1;35(4):1052-1056. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000010032. Epub 2024 Feb 13.

DOI:10.1097/SCS.0000000000010032
PMID:38349348
Abstract

The hardware utilized for rigid internal fixation of the craniofacial skeleton has evolved over time. Thus, the reasons for the unplanned removal of hardware continue to change. The purpose of this study is to compare past (1989-1995) and present (2000-2020) patient cohorts to establish trends related to unplanned removal of craniofacial hardware. A retrospective review study was designed. Data from our institution's original publication describing the unplanned removal of craniofacial hardware (1989-1995) was obtained. Data related to patients who underwent unplanned removal of hardware from 2000 to 2020 was collected from the electronic medical record. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed to compare demographics, reasons for hardware placement, and reasons for unplanned hardware removal between cohorts. This study includes 55 patients treated from 1989 to 1995 and 184 patients treated from 2000 to 2020. The average age at hardware placement decreased from 32 years (1989-1995) to 28 years (2000-2020). The most common reason for hardware placement changed from motor vehicle accident (1989-1995) to congenital deformity (2000-2020). The length of time with hardware in situ increased from 13 months (1989-1995) to 25 months (2000-2020). The most common reason for hardware removal changed from prominent hardware (1989-1995) to hardware exposure (2000-2020). In summary, patients who underwent rigid internal fixation of the craniofacial skeleton from 2000 to 2020 retained their hardware 2 times longer than patients treated from 1989 to 1995. Factors potentially contributing to increased retention include improved surgical technique, decreased profile of hardware, and increased surgeon experience. Further studies are warranted to define preoperative risk factors for unplanned hardware removal.

摘要

颅面骨骼的刚性内固定所使用的硬件随着时间的推移而发展。因此,计划外移除硬件的原因仍在不断变化。本研究的目的是比较过去(1989-1995 年)和现在(2000-2020 年)的患者队列,以确定与颅面硬件计划外移除相关的趋势。本研究设计为回顾性研究。从我院原始出版物中获取了描述颅面硬件计划外移除的相关数据(1989-1995 年)。从电子病历中收集了 2000 年至 2020 年期间因计划外移除硬件而接受治疗的患者的数据。对两组患者的人口统计学数据、硬件放置原因和计划外硬件移除原因进行描述性统计分析。本研究共纳入 1989 年至 1995 年治疗的 55 例患者和 2000 年至 2020 年治疗的 184 例患者。硬件放置的平均年龄从 32 岁(1989-1995 年)降至 28 岁(2000-2020 年)。硬件放置的最常见原因从机动车事故(1989-1995 年)变为先天性畸形(2000-2020 年)。硬件在位时间从 13 个月(1989-1995 年)延长至 25 个月(2000-2020 年)。硬件移除的最常见原因从突出的硬件(1989-1995 年)变为硬件暴露(2000-2020 年)。总之,2000 年至 2020 年接受颅面骨骼刚性内固定治疗的患者比 1989 年至 1995 年接受治疗的患者保留硬件的时间长 2 倍。导致保留时间增加的因素可能包括手术技术的提高、硬件轮廓的减小和外科医生经验的增加。进一步的研究是必要的,以确定计划外硬件移除的术前危险因素。

相似文献

1
Reasons for Removal of Rigid Internal Fixation Devices in Craniofacial Surgery: A 20-year Update.颅面外科中移除刚性内固定装置的原因:20 年的更新。
J Craniofac Surg. 2024 Jun 1;35(4):1052-1056. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000010032. Epub 2024 Feb 13.
2
Reasons for removal of rigid internal fixation devices in craniofacial surgery.
J Craniofac Surg. 1998 Jan;9(1):40-4. doi: 10.1097/00001665-199801000-00009.
3
Plate fixation of midshaft clavicular fractures: patient-reported outcomes and hardware-related complications.锁骨中段骨折的钢板固定:患者报告的结果及与内固定相关的并发症
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016 May;25(5):739-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.09.029. Epub 2015 Dec 15.
4
The burden of hardware removal in ankle fractures: How common is it, why do we do it and what is the cost? A ten-year review.踝关节骨折内固定取出的负担:其发生率如何、为何要进行以及费用多少?十年回顾。
Foot Ankle Surg. 2019 Aug;25(4):546-549. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2018.05.006. Epub 2018 May 29.
5
Deep Peroneal Nerve Injury Following Hardware Removal for Lisfranc Joint Injury.经皮内固定取出术后腓深神经损伤:Lisfranc 关节损伤治疗的相关问题
Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Mar;41(3):320-323. doi: 10.1177/1071100719893699. Epub 2019 Dec 7.
6
Is Routine Hardware Removal Following Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Tarsometatarsal Joint Fracture/Dislocation Necessary?跗跖关节骨折/脱位切开复位内固定术后常规取出内固定物是否必要?
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2019 Mar;58(2):226-230. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2018.08.016.
7
Utility of pathologic evaluation following removal of explanted orthopaedic internal fixation hardware.
Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2010;68(1):18-21.
8
Hardware removal after fracture fixation procedures in the femur.股骨骨折固定术后的硬件移除。
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012 Jan;72(1):282-7. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e318219fea9.
9
Functional outcomes after removal of hardware in patellar fracture: are we helping our patients?髌骨骨折内固定取出后的功能结局:我们真的在帮助患者吗?
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2018 Mar;138(3):325-330. doi: 10.1007/s00402-017-2852-2. Epub 2017 Nov 28.
10
Economic impact of syndesmosis hardware removal.下胫腓联合内固定取出的经济影响。
Foot (Edinb). 2015 Sep;25(3):131-3. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2015.03.001. Epub 2015 Mar 7.