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 ›› 2023, Vol. 09 ›› Issue (04) : 193 -200. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2023.04.001

股骨骨折

动力交叉钉系统治疗股骨颈骨折其内固定位置与临床疗效的相关性研究
金宇杰, 虞宵, 周晓强, 李志强, 徐人杰, 张向鑫, 陈广祥()   
  1. 215000 苏州,南京医科大学姑苏学院,南京医科大学附属苏州医院,苏州市立医院关节外科
  • 收稿日期:2023-01-27 出版日期:2023-08-05
  • 通信作者: 陈广祥
  • 基金资助:
    南京医科大学姑苏学院青年骨干科学研究培育专项(GSKY20220521); 苏州市第十二批科技发展计划项目(SLJ2021020)

Correlation between the clinical efficacy and the position of internal fixation in the treatment of femoral neck fractures with femoral neck system

Yujie Jin, Xiao Yu, Xiaoqiang Zhou, Zhiqiang Li, Renjie Xu, Xiangxin Zhang, Guangxiang Chen()   

  1. Department of Orthopedics, Gusu School, Nanjing Medical University, The Affiliated Suzhou Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Suzhou 215000, China
  • Received:2023-01-27 Published:2023-08-05
  • Corresponding author: Guangxiang Chen
引用本文:

金宇杰, 虞宵, 周晓强, 李志强, 徐人杰, 张向鑫, 陈广祥. 动力交叉钉系统治疗股骨颈骨折其内固定位置与临床疗效的相关性研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(04): 193-200.

Yujie Jin, Xiao Yu, Xiaoqiang Zhou, Zhiqiang Li, Renjie Xu, Xiangxin Zhang, Guangxiang Chen. Correlation between the clinical efficacy and the position of internal fixation in the treatment of femoral neck fractures with femoral neck system[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2023, 09(04): 193-200.

目的

探究采用股骨颈动力交叉钉系统(FNS)治疗股骨颈骨折其内固定位置与术后临床疗效的相关性。

方法

回顾性分析自2019年1月至2022年4月于苏州市立医院关节外科采用FNS治疗的Garden Ⅳ型股骨颈骨折且获得完整随访的患者60例,分析所有患者的影像学资料,利用术后CT及X片测量并计算FNS动力棒末端相对于股骨头颈中心轴线偏移程度和尖顶距(TAD)。所有患者随访至少一年,并在末次随访时复查骨盆X片测量股骨颈短缩长度并采用髋关节Harris评分评估临床疗效,分析动力棒位置偏移程度、TAD、末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度、髋关节Harris评分之间的相关性。

结果

所有患者均获得随访,随访时间(20.55±5.89)个月。男性27例,女性33例,平均年龄(45.48±10.09)岁。TAD(r=0.327,P<0.05)及末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度(r=0.310,P<0.05)均与术后动力棒末端相对于股骨头颈中心轴线的偏移程度呈显著正相关;而末次随访时髋关节Harris评分与术后动力棒末端相对于股骨头颈中心轴线的偏移程度呈显著负相关(r=-0.275,P<0.05)。末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度与TAD呈显著正相关(r=0.278,P<0.05),而末次随访时髋关节Harris评分与TAD呈显著负相关(r=-0.314,P<0.05),并与末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度呈显著负相关(r=-0.282,P<0.05)。

结论

采用FNS内固定治疗股骨颈骨折,当结合适宜的TAD时,将动力棒尽可能靠近股骨头颈中心轴线置入,术后可能获得更好的临床疗效。

Objective

To explore the correlation between the postoperative clinical efficacy of femoral neck system (FNS) in the treatment of femoral neck fractures and the position of internal fixation.

Methods

Sixty patients with Garden type Ⅳ femoral neck fracture treated with FNS in the Department of Orthopedics, Suzhou Municipal Hospital from January 2019 to April 2022 were included and were followed up completely. The imaging data of all patients were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative CT and X-ray imaging were used to measure and calculate the deviation degree of the end of the FNS screw bolt relative to the central axis of the femoral head and neck and the tip-apex distance (TAD). All patients were followed up for at least 1 year. At the last follow-up, pelvic X-ray imaging was used to measure the femoral neck shortening length, and Harris hip score was used to evaluate the postoperative clinical efficacy. The correlation between the deviation degree of FNS screw bolt and TAD, femoral neck shortening length and Harris hip score at the last follow-up were analyzed.

Results

All patients were followed up for (20.55±5.89) months. There were 27 males and 33 females, with a mean age of (45.48±10.09) years. Both TAD (r=0.327, P<0.05) and femoral neck shortening length at the last follow-up (r=0.310, P<0.05) were significantly positively correlated with the deviation + degree of the end of the FNS screw bolt relative to the central axis of the femoral head and neck. The Harris hip score at the last follow-up was significantly negatively correlated with the deviation of the end of the FNS screw bolt relative to the central axis of the femoral head and neck (r=-0.275, P<0.05). Femoral neck shortening length at the last follow-up was significantly positively correlated with TAD (r=0.278, P<0.05). The Harris hip score at the last follow-up was significantly negatively correlated with TAD (r=-0.314, P<0.05) and femoral neck shortening length at the last follow-up (r=-0.282, P<0.05).

Conclusion

In the treatment of femoral neck fractures with femoral neck system, the FNS screw bolt is placed as close as possible to the central axis of the femoral head and neck with appropriate TAD, which is more likely to achieve better clinical efficacy.

图5 患者术后复查的髋关节侧位X片,Xlat为侧位X片上FNS动力棒末端中点至股骨头顶点的距离,Dlat为侧位X片上FNS动力棒的直径
图7 患者末次随访时拍摄的骨盆正位X片,将健侧股骨头和患侧股骨头进行图像重叠,蓝色圆圈代表健侧股骨头,红色圆圈代表患侧股骨头,θ角为股骨头颈轴线与垂直轴y轴的夹角
图13 表示末次随访时髋关节Harris评分与末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度之间的相关性,随着末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度的增加,末次随访时髋关节Harris评分呈现出下降的趋势,两者间存在负相关性,且呈显著相关(r=-0.282,P<0.05)
表1 尖顶距、末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度以及髋关节Harris评分与FNS动力棒末端相对于股骨头颈中心轴线偏移程度的相关性
表2 末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度以及髋关节Harris评分与尖顶距的相关性
表3 末次随访时髋关节Harris评分与末次随访时股骨颈短缩长度的相关性
1
Slobogean GP, Sprague SA, Scott T, et al. Complications following young femoral neck fractures [J]. Injury, 2015, 46(3): 484-491.
2
Damany DS, Parker MJ, Chojnowski A. Complications after intracapsular hip fractures in young adults: A meta-analysis of 18 published studies involving 564 fractures [J]. Injury, 2005, 36(1): 131-141.
3
Thorngren KG, Hommel A, Norrman PO, et al. Epidemiology of femoral neck fractures [J]. Injury, 2002, 33 Suppl 3: C1-C7.
4
中华医学会骨科学分会创伤骨科学组,中国医师协会骨科医师分会创伤专家工作委员会. 成人股骨颈骨折诊治指南 [J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2018, 20(11): 921-928.
5
Stoffel K, Zderic I, Gras F, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of the femoral neck system in unstable pauwels III femoral neck fractures: a comparison with the dynamic hip screw and cannulated screws [J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2017, 31(3): 131-137.
6
Schopper C, Zderic I, Menze J, et al. Higher stability and more predictive fixation with the Femoral Neck System versus Hansson Pins in femoral neck fractures Pauwels II [J]. J Orthop Translat, 2020, 24: 88-95.
7
Garden RS. Malreduction and avascular necrosis in subcapital fractures of the femur [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1971, 53(2): 183-197.
8
Hu HJ, Cheng JB, Feng ML, et al. Clinical outcome of femoral neck system versus cannulated compression screws for fixation of femoral neck fracture in younger patients [J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2021, 16(1): 370.
9
周孝乾,田智勇,陈洪强, 等. 比基尼入路切开复位PFNA与闭合空心钉治疗青壮年股骨颈骨折的疗效比较 [J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2020, 6(5): 251-256.
10
Schuetze K, Burkhardt J, Pankratz C, et al. Is new always better: comparison of the femoral neck system and the dynamic hip screw in the treatment of femoral neck fractures [J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2023, 143(6): 3155-3161.
11
Moon JK, Lee JI, Hwang KT, et al. Biomechanical comparison of the femoral neck system and the dynamic hip screw in basicervical femoral neck fractures [J]. Sci Rep, 2022, 12(1): 7915.
12
Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, et al. The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1995, 77(7): 1058-1064.
13
Zeng JY, Ye JJ, Xie Y, et al. Effect of screw blade position on proximal femoral nail anti-rotation internal fixation for unstable intertrochanteric fractures in the elderly [J]. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi, 2020, 34(5): 569-573.
14
Li S, Chang SM, Jin YM, et al. A mathematical simulation of the tip-apex distance and the calcar-referenced tip-apex distance for intertrochanteric fractures reduced with lag screws [J]. Injury, 2016, 47(6): 1302-1308.
15
Hsueh KK, Fang CK, Chen CM, et al. Risk factors in cutout of sliding hip screw in intertrochanteric fractures: an evaluation of 937 patients [J]. Int Orthop, 2010, 34(8): 1273-1276.
16
Jung EY, Oh IT, Shim SY, et al. The effect of valgus reduction on the position of the blade of the proximal femoral nail antirotation in intertrochanteric hip fractures [J]. Clin Orthop Surg, 2019, 11(1): 36-42.
17
Parker MJ. Cutting-out of the dynamic hip screw related to its position [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1992, 74(4): 625.
18
Mavrogenis AF, Panagopoulos GN, Megaloikonomos PD, et al. Complications after hip nailing for fractures [J]. Orthopedics, 2016, 39(1): e108-e116.
19
Sim E, Schmiedmayer HB, Lugner P. Mechanical factors responsible for the obstruction of the gliding mechanism of a dynamic hip screw for stabilizing pertrochanteric femoral fractures [J]. J Trauma, 2000, 49(6): 995-1001.
20
Cleveland M, Bosworth DM, Thompson FR, et al. A ten-year analysis of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1959, 41-A: 1399-1408.
21
Kuzyk PRT, Zdero R, Shah S, et al. Femoral head lag screw position for cephalomedullary nails: a biomechanical analysis [J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2012, 26(7): 414-421.
22
姬帅,马腾,王谦, 等. 股骨颈动力交叉钉系统固定PauwelsⅢ型股骨颈骨折头钉不同置入位置的有限元分析 [J]. 中国骨与关节杂志, 2023, 12(3): 210-215.
23
王拯. FNS治疗股骨颈骨折的生物力学分析及其临床应用研究 [D]. 宁夏医科大学, 2022.
24
Rubio-Avila J, Madden K, Simunovic N, et al. Tip to apex distance in femoral intertrochanteric fractures: a systematic review [J]. J Orthop Sci, 2013, 18(4): 592-598.
25
Caruso G, Corradi N, Caldaria A, et al. New tip-apex distance and calcar-referenced tip-apex distance cut-offs May be the best predictors for cut-out risk after intramedullary fixation of proximal femur fractures [J]. Sci Rep, 2022, 12(1): 357.
26
Khanna V, Tiwari M. Significance of tip apex distance in intertrochanteric fracture femur managed with proximal femoral nailing [J]. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2021, 107(6): 103009.
27
Caruso G, Bonomo M, Valpiani G, et al. A six-year retrospective analysis of cut-out risk predictors in cephalomedullary nailing for pertrochanteric fractures: Can the tip-apex distance (TAD) still be considered the best parameter? [J]. Bone Joint Res, 2017, 6(8): 481-488.
28
Nikoloski AN, Osbrough AL, Yates PJ. Should the tip-apex distance (TAD) rule be modified for the proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA)? A retrospective study [J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2013, 8: 35.
29
Cong YX, Wen PF, Duan YC, et al. Orthopedic Robot-Assisted femoral neck system in the treatment of femoral neck fracture [J]. J Vis Exp, 2023 (193): e64267.
30
McDonnell JM, Ahern DP, Ó Doinn T, et al. Surgeon proficiency in robot-assisted spine surgery [J]. Bone Joint J, 2020, 102-B(5): 568-572.
31
张朕,刘华水,段升军, 等. 机器人辅助PFNA与传统手术治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的疗效比较 [J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2020, 6(1): 25-30.
32
Jing Y, Zhang S, Han Z, et al. Short-term effectiveness of orthopedic robot-assisted femoral neck system fixation for fresh femoral neck fractures [J]. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi, 2022, 36(8): 946-950.
33
盛晓磊,刘苏,王进, 等. 3D打印导板辅助新型股骨颈内固定系统置钉治疗中青年股骨颈骨折 [J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2022, 26(33): 5290-5296.
[1] 孟繁宇, 周新社, 赵志, 裴立家, 刘犇. 侧位直接前方入路髋关节置换治疗偏瘫肢体股骨颈骨折[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 865-870.
[2] 齐伟亚, 方杰, 吴衡, 刘波. 掌侧小切口联合腕关节镜治疗AO-C型桡骨远端骨折[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 577-582.
[3] 吴聪, 刘伦, 贾全忠. 老年股骨颈骨折初次全髋关节置换近期疗效影响因素[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 283-287.
[4] 莫亮, 熊贤梅, 马超, 刘予豪, 陈镇秋, 何伟, 周驰. 股骨颈骨折内固定术后因素与股骨头坏死关系的分析[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 735-744.
[5] 唐小花, 孙建霞, 王君, 王美青. 预测老年股骨粗隆间骨折术后并发症的列线图模型构建[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 677-682.
[6] 周晓强, 孙超, 李志强, 徐人杰, 佘远时, 张向鑫, 陈广祥, 虞宵. 动力抗旋交叉钉治疗不稳定股骨颈骨折的早期疗效[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 670-676.
[7] 毛文文, 陈昊, 李立, 朱友森, 张敏, 陈刚. Pilon骨折术后发生手术部位感染的危险因素分析[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(03): 309-314.
[8] 邓玖征, 袁野, 朱剑津, 何大炜, 赵喆, 赵锋, 孔德敬, 潘勇卫. 基于成人掌骨形态学数据设计的掌骨弹性髓内针治疗掌骨骨折的生物力学研究[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2022, 17(04): 330-335.
[9] 张琳袁, 吴佳俊, 崔煦, 沈超, 付备刚, 崔崟, 王秀会, 蔡攀. 大结节解剖钢板与PHILOS内固定治疗伴肩关节脱位的Mutch I/II型肱骨大结节骨折的疗效差异[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 139-145.
[10] 宋晓亮, 郝海虎, 刘渊, 李浩江, 雷晓晶, 邵新中, 李卿源. 股骨重建钉治疗股骨颈骨折的疗效观察[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(04): 201-208.
[11] 刘璇, 胡正霞, 王晓东, 兰海, 李开南. SuperPATH微创全髋关节置换术治疗老年股骨颈骨折的学习曲线研究与临床应用价值分析[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(02): 73-80.
[12] 覃仁镭, 罗显德. 加速康复外科理念在老年股骨颈骨折治疗过程中应用效果的meta分析[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2022, 08(05): 313-320.
[13] 张学斌, 雷凯, 任荣, 李得春, 王小平, 白景棠, 齐园园, 王哲, 刘熹. 高海拔地区股骨颈骨折空心螺钉斜三角与倒三角构型的三维有限元对比研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2022, 08(04): 205-210.
[14] 史洋洋, 贾杰, 童伟, 杨述华, 许伟华, 刘先哲, 叶树楠, 王晶, 冯勇, 田洪涛. 人工全髋关节置换术日间模式治疗高选择性股骨颈骨折患者的临床效益评价[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2022, 08(02): 74-79.
[15] 陈纪宝, 鞠玉亮, 管士伟, 杨家凤, 周峰, 张晋, 刘炜, 盈梅. 股骨颈动力交叉钉与空心拉力钉对Pauwels Ⅲ型股骨颈骨折治疗稳定性的有限元分析[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2022, 08(02): 65-73.
阅读次数
全文


摘要