Suppr超能文献

50 岁以下年轻成人合并同侧股骨干骨折的股骨颈骨折:80 例与单纯股骨颈骨折的多中心比较。

Femoral Neck Fractures With Associated Ipsilateral Femoral Shaft Fractures in Young Adults <50 Years Old: A Multicenter Comparison of 80 Cases Versus Isolated Femoral Neck Fractures.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Orlando Health Jewett Orthopedic Institute, Orlando, FL.

Fort Worth Orthopedic Trauma Surgeons, Harris Methodist Hospital Fort Worth, Fort Worth, TX.

出版信息

J Orthop Trauma. 2024 Aug 1;38(8):410-417. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002826.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To analyze patients, injury patterns, and treatment of femoral neck fractures (FNFs) in young patients with FNFs associated with shaft fractures (assocFNFs) to improve clinical outcomes. The secondary goal was to compare this injury pattern to that of young patients with isolated FNFs (isolFNFs).

DESIGN

Retrospective multicenter cohort series.

SETTING

Twenty-six North American level-1 trauma centers.

PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA

Skeletally mature patients, <50 years old, treated with operative fixation of an FNF with or without an associated femoral shaft fracture.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS

The main outcome measurement was treatment failure defined as nonunion, malunion, avascular necrosis, or subsequent major revision surgery. Odds ratios for these modes of treatment were also calculated.

RESULTS

Eighty assocFNFs and 412 isolFNFs evaluated in this study were different in terms of patients, injury patterns, and treatment strategy. Patients with assocFNFs were younger (33.3 ± 8.6 vs. 37.5 ± 8.7 years old, P < 0.001), greater in mean body mass index [BMI] (29.7 vs. 26.6, P < 0.001), and more frequently displaced (95% vs. 73%, P < 0.001), "vertically oriented" Pauwels type 3, P < 0.001 (84% vs. 43%) than for isolFNFs, with all P values < 0.001. AssocFNFs were more commonly repaired with an open reduction (74% vs. 46%, P < 0.001) and fixed-angle implants (59% vs. 39%) (P < 0.001). Importantly, treatment failures were less common for assocFNFs compared with isolFNFs (20% vs. 49%, P < 0.001) with lower rates of failed fixation/nonunion and malunion (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively). Odds of treatment failure [odds ratio (OR) = 0.270, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.15-0.48, P < 0.001], nonunion (OR = 0.240, 95% CI, 0.10-0.57, P < 0.001), and malunion (OR = 0.920, 95% CI, 0.01-0.68, P = 0.002) were also lower for assocFNFs. Excellent or good reduction was achieved in 84.2% of assocFNFs reductions and 77.1% in isolFNFs (P = 0.052). AssocFNFs treated with fixed-angle devices performed very well, with only 13.0% failing treatment compared with 51.9% in isolFNFs treated with fixed-angle constructs (P = <0.001) and 33.3% in assocFNFs treated with multiple cannulated screws (P = 0.034). This study also identified the so-called "shelf sign," a transverse ≥6-mm medial-caudal segment of the neck fracture (forming an acute angle with the vertical fracture line) in 54% of assocFNFs and only 9% of isolFNFs (P < 0.001). AssocFNFs with a shelf sign failed in only 5 of 41 (12%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS

AssocFNFs in young patients are characterized by different patient factors, injury patterns, and treatments, than for isolFNFs, and have a relatively better prognosis despite the need for confounding treatment for the associated femoral shaft injury. Treatment failures among assocFNFs repaired with a fixed-angle device occurred at a lower rate compared with isolFNFs treated with any construct type and assocFNFs treated with multiple cannulated screws. The radiographic "shelf sign" was found as a positive prognostic sign in more than half of assocFNFs and predicted a high rate of successful treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

摘要

目的

分析与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折(FNF)患者的患者特征、损伤模式和治疗方法,以改善临床结果。次要目标是将这种损伤模式与单纯股骨颈骨折(isolFNF)患者的损伤模式进行比较。

设计

回顾性多中心队列研究。

地点

北美 26 家 1 级创伤中心。

患者选择标准

骨骼成熟、<50 岁、接受手术固定股骨颈骨折,伴或不伴股骨干骨折。

主要观察指标

治疗失败的定义为骨不连、畸形愈合、股骨头坏死或随后的重大翻修手术。还计算了这些治疗方式的比值比。

结果

本研究共评估了 80 例与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折和 412 例单纯股骨颈骨折,两组患者在患者、损伤模式和治疗策略方面存在差异。与单纯股骨颈骨折患者相比,与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者年龄更小(33.3±8.6 岁比 37.5±8.7 岁,P<0.001)、平均体重指数(BMI)更高(29.7 比 26.6,P<0.001)、骨折移位更明显(95%比 73%,P<0.001)、“垂直”型 Pauwels 3 型(P<0.001,84%比 43%),所有 P 值均<0.001。与单纯股骨颈骨折患者相比,与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者更常采用切开复位(74%比 46%,P<0.001)和固定角度内固定(59%比 39%)(P<0.001)。重要的是,与单纯股骨颈骨折患者相比,与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者治疗失败的发生率较低(20%比 49%,P<0.001),固定/骨不连和畸形愈合的发生率较低(P<0.001 和 P=0.002)。治疗失败的风险[比值比(OR)=0.270,95%置信区间(CI)0.15-0.48,P<0.001]、骨不连(OR=0.240,95%CI 0.10-0.57,P<0.001)和畸形愈合(OR=0.920,95%CI 0.01-0.68,P=0.002)的风险也较低。与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者的复位效果非常好,84.2%的复位达到优秀或良好,而单纯股骨颈骨折患者的复位效果为 77.1%(P=0.052)。采用固定角度器械治疗的与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者效果非常好,仅 13.0%的患者治疗失败,而单纯股骨颈骨折患者采用固定角度器械治疗的治疗失败率为 51.9%(P<0.001),采用多枚空心螺钉治疗的治疗失败率为 33.3%(P=0.034)。本研究还发现了所谓的“货架征”,即在 54%的与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者中,颈骨折的内侧-尾部有一个≥6mm 的横向段(与垂直骨折线形成锐角),而在单纯股骨颈骨折患者中仅为 9%(P<0.001)。货架征阳性的与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者中,仅 5 例(12%)治疗失败。

结论

与单纯股骨颈骨折患者相比,与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者的患者特征、损伤模式和治疗方法存在差异,但尽管需要对伴发的股骨干骨折进行混杂治疗,与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者的预后相对较好。与单纯股骨颈骨折患者相比,采用固定角度器械治疗的与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者的治疗失败率较低,与采用任何内固定器械治疗的与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者的治疗失败率以及采用多枚空心螺钉治疗的与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者的治疗失败率均较低。在超过一半的与股骨干骨折相关的股骨颈骨折患者中发现了“货架征”,这是一个阳性的预后标志,预测了较高的成功治疗率。

证据等级

治疗学 III 级。请参阅作者说明以获取完整的证据等级描述。

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