...
首页> 外文期刊>Foot and ankle international >Minimally invasive technique versus an extensile lateral approach for intra-articular calcaneal fractures.
【24h】

Minimally invasive technique versus an extensile lateral approach for intra-articular calcaneal fractures.

机译:关节内跟骨骨折的微创技术与可扩展外侧入路的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The optimal method for treating intra-articular fractures of the calcaneus remains controversial. Extensile approaches allow excellent fracture exposure, but high rates of wound complications are seen. Newer minimally invasive techniques for calcaneus fracture fixation offer a potentially lower wound complication rate, but long-term clinical results are not available. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of intra-articular calcaneus fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation via an extensile approach versus those with a minimally invasive sinus tarsi approach.We performed a retrospective review of all intra-articular calcaneal fractures treated operatively between October 2005 and December 2008. A total of 112 fractures were found that met our inclusion criteria; 79 were treated with an extensile lateral approach and 33 via a minimally invasive approach based on surgeon preference. Chart and radiographic results were thoroughly reviewed on all 112 fractures, specifically for wound healing complications and the need for further surgeries within the study period. Additionally, all patients were contacted and asked to return for a research visit that included radiography, clinical examination, and quality of life questionnaires (Short Form 36 [SF-36], foot function index [FFI], visual analog scale [VAS] pain). A total of 47 of 112 (42%) patients returned for a research visit (31 extensile, 16 minimally invasive).The 2 groups were comparable with regard to demographics (age, follow-up, male to female ratio, tobacco use, diabetes, workers' compensation status). In the extensile group, 53% of fractures were Sanders II and 47% were Sanders III, whereas in the minimally invasive group 61% were Sanders II and 39% were Sanders III. The overall wound complication rate was 29% in the extensile group (9% required operative intervention) versus 6% in the minimally invasive group (P = .005) (none required operative intervention). Overall, 20% of the extensile group required a secondary surgery within the study period versus 2% in the minimally invasive group (P = .007). In the group of patients who returned for research visits, the average FFI total score was 31 in the extensile group versus 22 in the minimally invasive group (P = .21). The average VAS pain score with activity was 36 in the extensile group versus 31 in the minimally invasive group (P = .48). Overall, 84% of patients in the extensile group were satisfied with their result versus 94% in the minimally invasive group (P = .32). Both groups had 100% union rates, and no differences were noted in the final postoperative Bohler's angle and angle of Gissane.Clinical results were similar between calcaneal fractures treated with an extensile approach and those treated with a minimally invasive approach. However, the minimally invasive approach had a significantly lower incidence of wound complications and secondary surgeries. The minimally invasive approach was a valuable method for the treatment of intra-articular calcaneal fractures, with low complication rates and results comparable to those treated with an extensile approach.Level III, retrospective comparative case series.
机译:治疗跟骨关节内骨折的最佳方法仍存在争议。广泛的方法可以使骨折极好暴露,但是伤口并发症的发生率很高。用于跟骨骨折固定的较新的微创技术可潜在降低伤口并发症发生率,但尚无长期临床结果。这项研究的目的是比较采用开放复位和内固定通过扩张方法治疗的跟骨关节内骨折与采用微创鼻窦镜治疗的跟骨骨折的结果。我们对所有治疗的跟骨关节内骨折进行回顾性回顾在2005年10月至2008年12月期间进行手术。总共发现了112处符合我们纳入标准的骨折。根据外科医生的偏爱,采用张开的外侧入路治疗79例,通过微创方法入路33例。对所有112处骨折的图表和影像学检查结果进行了全面审查,特别是针对伤口愈合并发症以及在研究期内需要进一步手术的情况。此外,还与所有患者进行了联系,并要求他们返回一次研究访问,包括射线照相,临床检查和生活质量调查表(简短表格36 [SF-36],脚功能指数[FFI],视觉模拟量表[VAS]疼痛)。 112名患者中有47名(42%)返回研究访问(31名可扩展,16名微创),两组在人口统计学(年龄,随访,男女比例,吸烟,糖尿病)方面具有可比性,工人的赔偿状态)。在伸张组中,Sanders II骨折占53%,Sanders III占47%,而微创组中,Sanders II占61%,Sanders III占39%。可伸展组的总体伤口并发症发生率为29%(需要手术干预的占9%),而微创治疗组的总体伤口并发症发生率为6%(P = .005)(不需要手术干预)。总体而言,可伸展组中有20%在研究期内需要进行二次手术,而微创组中则为2%(P = .007)。在返回研究访问的患者组中,伸展组的平均FFI总得分为31,而微创组为22(P = 0.21)。伸展运动组平均VAS疼痛评分为36,而微创组为31(P = 0.48)。总体而言,可伸展组中84%的患者对其结果感到满意,而微创组中则为94%(P = .32)。两组的联合发生率均为100%,术后术后最后的Bohler角和Gissane角均无差异。采用伸展入路治疗的跟骨骨折与采用微创入路治疗的跟骨骨折的临床结果相似。但是,微创方法明显降低了伤口并发症和第二次手术的发生率。微创方法是治疗关节内跟骨骨折的一种有价值的方法,其并发症发生率低,其结果可与伸张法相媲美。III级,回顾性比较病例系列。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号