Keating J F, O'Brien P J, Blachut P A, Meek R N, Broekhuyse H M
Vancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre, British Columbia, Canada.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997 Mar;79(3):334-41. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199703000-00003.
Ninety-one patients who had ninety-four open fractures of the tibial shaft were randomized into two treatment groups. Fifty fractures (nine type-I, eighteen type-II, sixteen type-IIIA, and seven type-IIIB fractures, according to the classification of Gustilo et al.) were treated with nailing after reaming, and forty-four fractures (five type-I, sixteen type-II, nineteen type-IIIA, and four type-IIIB fractures) were treated with nailing without reaming. The average diameter of the nail was 11.5 millimeters (range, nine to fourteen millimeters) in the group treated with reaming and 9.2 millimeters (range, eight to ten millimeters) in the group treated without reaming. Follow-up information was adequate for forty-five patients (forty-seven fractures) who had been managed with reaming and forty patients (forty-one fractures) who had been managed without reaming. No clinically important differences were found between the two groups with regard to the technical aspects of the procedure or the rate of early postoperative complications. The average time to union was thirty weeks (range, thirteen to seventy-two weeks) in the group treated with reaming and twenty-nine weeks (range, thirteen to fifty weeks) in the group treated without reaming. Four (9 per cent) of the fractures treated with reaming and five (12 per cent) of the fractures treated without reaming did not unite (p = 0.73). There were two infections in the group treated with reaming and one in the group treated without reaming. Significantly more screws broke in the group treated without reaming (twelve; 29 per cent) than in the group treated with reaming (four; 9 per cent) (p = 0.014). There was no difference between the two groups with regard to the frequency of broken nails (two nails that had been inserted after reaming broke, compared with one that had been inserted without reaming). The functional outcome, in terms of pain in the knee, range of motion, return to work, and recreational activity, did not differ significantly between the groups. We concluded that the clinical and radiographic results of nailing after reaming are similar to those of nailing without reaming for fixation of open fractures of the tibial shaft, although more screws broke when reaming had not been done.
91例胫骨干开放性骨折患者的94处骨折被随机分为两个治疗组。50处骨折(根据Gustilo等人的分类,9处I型、18处II型、16处IIIA型和7处IIIB型骨折)采用扩髓后髓内钉治疗,44处骨折(5处I型、16处II型、19处IIIA型和4处IIIB型骨折)采用非扩髓髓内钉治疗。扩髓治疗组髓内钉的平均直径为11.5毫米(范围9至14毫米),非扩髓治疗组为9.2毫米(范围8至10毫米)。对45例(47处骨折)接受扩髓治疗和40例(41处骨折)接受非扩髓治疗的患者进行了充分的随访。两组在手术技术方面或术后早期并发症发生率上未发现临床上的重要差异。扩髓治疗组骨折平均愈合时间为30周(范围13至72周),非扩髓治疗组为29周(范围13至50周)。扩髓治疗的骨折中有4处(9%)未愈合,非扩髓治疗的骨折中有5处(12%)未愈合(p = 0.73)。扩髓治疗组有2例感染,非扩髓治疗组有1例感染。非扩髓治疗组螺钉断裂的数量(12枚;29%)明显多于扩髓治疗组(4枚;9%)(p = 0.014)。两组在断钉频率方面无差异(扩髓后植入的2枚钉子断裂,非扩髓植入的1枚钉子断裂)。两组在膝关节疼痛、活动范围、恢复工作及娱乐活动等功能结果方面无显著差异。我们得出结论,胫骨干开放性骨折固定时,扩髓后髓内钉治疗的临床和影像学结果与非扩髓髓内钉治疗相似,尽管未扩髓时更多螺钉发生断裂。