切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 04 ›› Issue (03) : 163 -167. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2018.03.008

所属专题: 文献

膝关节

顺势复位治疗胫骨平台骨折的临床研究
迪力夏提·多力坤1, 郑龙坡1,()   
  1. 1. 200072 同济大学附属第十人民医院(上海市第十人民医院)骨科
  • 收稿日期:2017-12-05 出版日期:2018-06-05
  • 通信作者: 郑龙坡
  • 基金资助:
    十三五国家重点研发计划项目(2017YFC0110600)

Clinical study of homeopathic bidirection-traction reduction device for tibial plateau fractures

Duolikun Dilixiati1, Longpo Zheng1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tenth People's Hospital of Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China
  • Received:2017-12-05 Published:2018-06-05
  • Corresponding author: Longpo Zheng
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Zheng Longpo, Email:
引用本文:

迪力夏提·多力坤, 郑龙坡. 顺势复位治疗胫骨平台骨折的临床研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2018, 04(03): 163-167.

Duolikun Dilixiati, Longpo Zheng. Clinical study of homeopathic bidirection-traction reduction device for tibial plateau fractures[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2018, 04(03): 163-167.

目的

探讨应用顺势复位治疗胫骨平台骨折的临床效果。

方法

采用回顾性病例对照研究分析上海市第十人民医院2016年1月~2017年4月收治的87例胫骨平台骨折患者的临床资料。按照治疗方法将患者分为顺势复位组和切开复位组。顺势复位组应用顺势双反牵引复位器复位,共47例,切开复位组共40例,两组患者均采用锁定钢板内固定。比较两组患者手术时间、术中出血量及术后6个月时根据Rasmussen影像学评分评估的患侧膝关节功能恢复情况。

结果

所有患者均获随访,随访时间5~8个月,平均为(6.4±1.0)个月,顺势复位组手术时间为(108±15)min,切开复位组为(129±16)min,两组数据差异有统计学意义(t=6.295,P<0.05);顺势复位组术中出血量为(67±23)ml,切开复位组为(93±22)ml,两组数据差异有统计学意义(t=5.313,P<0.05);Rasmussen影像学评分顺势复位组平均分数为(23±4)分,优良率80.9%,切开复位组平均分数为(20±5)分,优良率为65%,两组数据差异有统计学意义(t=4.599,P<0.05)。两组患者均得到骨性愈合,均未出现复位丢失、钢板松动及断裂等情况;切开复位组有3例患者术后出现切口感染,予加强抗感染消毒换药后均愈合良好。

结论

顺势复位治疗胫骨平台骨折成功率高,与切开复位比较,可缩短手术时间,减少术中出血量,膝关节功能恢复良好。

Objective

To investigate the clinical effect of homeopathic bidirection-traction reduction device in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures.

Methods

A retrospective case-control study was conducted to analys the clinical data of 87 patients with tibial plateau fractures who were treated in Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital from January 2016 to April 2017. According to the method of treatment, patients were divided into the bidirection-traction group and open reduction group. The bidirection-traction group applied homeopathic bidirection-traction device (47 cases), open reduction group including 40 cases, both group used locking plate fixation. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss and functional recovery of the affected knee were evaluated by Rasmussen imaging score at 6 months after operation.

Results

All patients were followed up for 5-8 months with an average of (6.4±1.0) months. The duration of operation was (108±15) min for the bidirection-traction group and (129±16) min for the open reduction group, there was significant difference between two groups (t=6.295, P<0.05). The blood loss in the bidirection-traction group was (67±23) ml and the open reduction group was (93±22) ml (t=5.313, P<0.05). The mean score of Rasmussen imaging score was (23±04), the excellent and good rate was 80.9%, and the average score of open reduction was (20±5), the excellent and good rate was 65%. There was significant difference between two groups (t=4.599, P<0.05). Both groups got bony union without loss of restitution, looseness and plate rupture. In the open reduction group, there were 3 incision infection after operation, which healed well after strengthening anti-infective dressing.

Conclusions

Homeopathy reduction has a high success rate in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures. Compared with open reduction, it can shorten the operation time, reduce the intraoperative blood loss and restore the knee joint function well.

表1 两组胫骨平台骨折患者的年龄、伤后手术时间、骨折分型的数据比较
图2~9 男性,36岁,右侧胫骨平台SchatzkerⅥ型骨折,伤后2 d应用顺势双反牵引复位器复位并行双钢板内固定,术后1年复查示骨折段愈合满意,膝关节屈伸活动良好。图2 术前X线正位片;图3 术前X线侧位片;图4 顺势复位成功后,微创小切口进行内固定;图5~6 术后X线片示骨折复位满意,内固定位置良好;图7 术后1年伤口愈合良好;图8~9 术后1年膝关节屈伸活动良好
表2 两组患者手术时间、术中出血量和术后6个月时Rasmussen评分的数据比较(±s
1
Ruffolo MR, Gettys FK, Montijo HE, et al. Complications of High-Energy bicondylartibial plateau fractures treated with dual plating through 2 incisions [J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2015, 29(2): 85-90.
2
Morris BJ, Unger RZ, Archer KR, et al. Risk factors of infection after ORIF of bicondylartibial plateau fractures [J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2013, 27(9): e196-e200.
3
Moorcroft CI, Thomas PB, Ogrodnik PJ, et al. A device for improved reduction of tibial fractures treated with external fixation [J]. ProcInstMechEng H, 2000, 214(5): 449-457.
4
罗东斌, 张永, 汤永南, 等. 双切口双钢板内固定与单侧锁定钢板内固定治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折的疗效比较[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2016, 36(6): 1413-1415.
5
刘青林, 姜丰山, 孙世伟. 双切口双钢板内固定治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折[J]. 中医正骨, 2012, 24(3): 54-55, 57.
6
Onoda Y, Hagiwara Y, Ando A, et al. Joint haemorrhage partly accelerated immobilization-induced synovial adhesions and capsular shortening in rats [J]. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc, 2014, 22(11): 2874-2883.
7
Lin S, Mauffrey C, Hammerberg EM, et al. Surgical site infection after open reduction and internal fixation of tibial plateau fractures [J]. Eur J OrthopSurgTraumatol, 2014, 24(5): 797-803.
8
Zhao XW, Ma JX, Ma XL, et al. A meta-analysis of external fixation versus open reduction and internal fixation for complex tibial plateau fractures [J]. Int J Surg, 2017, 39: 65-73.
9
陈奇, 徐晓峰, 黄永辉, 等. 膝关节囊外复位内固定治疗胫骨平台骨折的疗效观察[J]. 中国修复重建外科杂志, 2014(12): 1464-1468.
10
潘月帆, 黄俊文, 黄安劲, 等. 关节镜辅助下微创治疗SchatzkerⅠ-Ⅳ型胫骨平台骨折的临床研究[J]. 中华骨与关节外科杂志, 2016, 9(1): 53-56.
11
王健, 唐晓波, 董佩龙. 胫骨平台骨折关节镜监视下复位内固定与切开复位内固定的疗效比较[J]. 中华关节外科杂志:电子版, 2013, 7(4): 469-472.
12
Wang Z, Tang Z, Liu C, et al. Comparison of outcome of ARIF and ORIF in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures [J]. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc, 2017, 25(2): 578-583.
13
张英泽. 尊重科学规律不断求实创新[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2017, 3(1): 1-3.
14
叶丹丹, 李升, 侯志勇, 等. 牵引复位器治疗四肢长骨骨折的生物力学特性分析[J]. 河北医科大学学报, 2017, 38(10): 1229-1231.
15
陈伟, 魏宁, 杜晨光,等. 顺势双反牵引复位和牵引床复位对手术治疗老年股骨转子间骨折疗效的影响[J]. 中华创伤杂志, 2017, 33(4): 332-336.
16
Li DQ, Song DY, Ni JD, et al. A case report of Schatzker type VI tibial plateau fracture treated with double reverse traction closed reduction combined with minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis technique: A case report [J]. Medicine, 2017, 96(45): e8394.
17
Chen W, Zhang T, Wang J, et al. Minimally invasive treatment of displaced femoral shaft fractures with a rapid reductor and intramedullary nail fixation [J]. IntOrthop, 2016, 40(1): 167-172.
18
常恒瑞, 于沂阳, 邢欣, 等. 顺势牵引微创治疗胫骨平台骨折[J]. 中华关节外科杂志:电子版, 2017, 11(1): 23-27.
19
唐鹏, 郭书权, 刘剑, 等. 双反牵引闭合复位微创治疗SchatzkerⅡ-Ⅲ型胫骨平台骨折的临床效果[J]. 临床与病理杂志, 2016, 36(9): 1322-1326.
20
郑占乐, 常恒瑞, 于沂阳, 等. 胫骨平台骨折微创复位固定要点[J]. 河北医科大学学报, 2016, 37(12): 1469-1472.
[1] 刘晓雁, 徐飚, 林欢, 别凤杰, 陈前军. 腔镜技术在乳腺外科中的应用进展[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 229-234.
[2] 刘瀚忠, 黄生辉, 万俊明, 李家春, 舒涛. 髌上入路和髌旁外侧入路髓内钉治疗胫骨骨折疗效比较[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 795-801.
[3] 夏效泳, 王立超, 朱治国, 丛云海, 史宗新. 深度塌陷性胫骨平台骨折的形态特点和治疗策略[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 625-632.
[4] 吴萍, 刘永林, 陈能彬, 季明军, 万晓波. 应用皮瓣联合负压封闭引流及灌洗引流治疗胫骨骨折术后钢板外露的临床效果[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(04): 317-320.
[5] 岳聚安, 郭晓忠, 王冉东, 李兵, 孙强, 刘忘言, 陈蛟. 单中心前瞻性研究囊性变对早期股骨头坏死微创保髋手术后疗效的影响[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(03): 207-212.
[6] 郭晓忠. 股骨头坏死早期保髋手术的选择与疗效评定[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(03): 191-194.
[7] 唐健雄, 李绍春, 李绍杰. 中国腹腔镜疝手术20年回顾与展望[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(06): 603-605.
[8] 杨德法, 王克俭, 李耀. 真空辅助旋切术治疗乳腺良性肿块的效果分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(05): 562-565.
[9] 张天献, 吕云福, 郑进方. 胆总管结石微创治疗进展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 585-588.
[10] 郭世龙, 杨潇, 胡欢欢, 杨梁, 周文富, 丛魁武, 张雨胜, 李英锋. ERCP在胆胰疾病微创治疗中的有效性及安全性[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(02): 216-220.
[11] 罗发, 陈焕伟. 腹腔镜肝切除治疗肝细胞癌现状及挑战[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(02): 128-132.
[12] 李志伟, 齐瑞兆, 赵新, 常伟华, 常正尧, 张鹰, 王胜智, 梁峰. 门静脉高压症脾切除切口微创化发展[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(01): 17-20.
[13] 王栋, 阴继凯, 董瑞, 鲁建国. 门静脉高压症微创手术全程管理模式单中心经验[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(01): 21-26.
[14] 高岩, 张泽, 张进, 张登峰, 刘杰, 刘沛东, 包勤济, 张永红. 主辅钢板内固定治疗胫骨中下1/3骨折的初步临床研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(01): 39-44.
[15] 赵阔, 王忠正, 王宇钏, 张浚哲, 郭家良, 郑占乐, 陈伟, 张英泽. 双反牵引复位器联合MIPO技术治疗肱骨近端骨折的初步应用[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2021, 07(06): 321-325.
阅读次数
全文


摘要