Suppr超能文献

切开复位内固定与桡骨头切除术治疗肘关节恐怖三联征:若无法进行桡骨头置换该怎么办?

Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Versus Resection of the Radial Head to Treat Terrible Triad Injury of the Elbow: What if Radial Head Replacement is not Possible?

作者信息

Aslani Hossein, Zamani Esfahlani Mehrdad, Athari MirBahador, Salimi Sohrab, Sadighi Ali, Baroutkoub Mojtaba, Hajikarimloo Bardia, Mirbolook Ahmadreza

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan, Iran.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Imam Hossein Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Adv Biomed Res. 2025 Jul 21;14:67. doi: 10.4103/abr.abr_136_22. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Terrible triad of elbow injury (TTI) has great potential for joint instability with a relatively poor prognosis. Different surgical methods have been introduced for radial head fractures. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the results of treatment of radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and resection in TTI patients when radius head replacement was not attainable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, 48 patients with TTI who underwent radial head fracture surgery with ORIF (n = 33) or resection (n = 15) were included. During follow-up, patients were evaluated for elbow range of motion (ROM), pain score, complications, need for reoperation, and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS). ORIF and resection groups were followed for 49.47 ± 28.58 and 52.79 ± 23.57 months, respectively.

RESULTS

Compared to the resection group, the ORIF group had significantly better ROM in extension and pronation and lower supination, although, when compared with a subgroup of mason type III fractures, the resection group had substantially better ROM in extension, pronation, and supination and better MEPS. The resection group had lower rates of pain score, instability, arthritis, heterotopic ossification, and need for reoperation compared to ORIF and its subgroup; however, the difference was not significant.

CONCLUSION

Compared to resection of radial head fractures in TTI, ORIF had significantly better ROM overall, but resection efficacy was better than ORIF when comparing the Mason type III fractures.

摘要

背景

肘关节损伤三联征(TTI)具有导致关节不稳定的巨大风险,预后相对较差。针对桡骨头骨折已引入了不同的手术方法。在本研究中,我们旨在评估在无法进行桡骨头置换的TTI患者中,采用切开复位内固定术(ORIF)和切除术治疗桡骨头骨折的效果。

材料与方法

在这项回顾性研究中,纳入了48例接受ORIF(n = 33)或切除术(n = 15)治疗桡骨头骨折的TTI患者。在随访期间,对患者的肘关节活动范围(ROM)、疼痛评分、并发症、再次手术需求以及梅奥肘关节功能评分(MEPS)进行评估。ORIF组和切除组的随访时间分别为49.47±28.58个月和52.79±23.57个月。

结果

与切除组相比,ORIF组在伸展和旋前时的ROM明显更好,旋后时则较低;不过,与Mason III型骨折亚组相比,切除组在伸展、旋前和旋后时的ROM明显更好,MEPS也更好。与ORIF组及其亚组相比,切除组的疼痛评分、不稳定、关节炎、异位骨化和再次手术需求的发生率较低;然而,差异并不显著。

结论

与TTI中桡骨头骨折切除术相比,ORIF总体上具有明显更好的ROM,但在比较Mason III型骨折时,切除效果优于ORIF。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d05f/12373054/07a7e344a661/ABR-14-67-g001.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