经皮桥接钢板内固定与内置外固定支架治疗骨盆前环骨折的临床效果

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2024.09.013

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (1208 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要【目的】探讨经皮桥接钢板内固定与内置外固定支架治疗骨盆前环骨折的临床效果。【方法】选取2020年1月至2022年12月在本院接受手术治疗的72例骨盆前环骨折患者,按照随机数字表法分为内固定组(接受经皮桥接钢板内固定治疗)和外固定组(行内置外固定支架治疗),每组36例。比较两组手术相关指标、术后并发症发生率、骨折愈合时间、术后完全负重时间、骨折复位优良率、功能恢复状态及手术前后骨保护素(OPG)、骨钙素(BGP)水平。【结果】内固定组手术时间长于外固定组(P<0.05),术中出血量多于外固定组(P<0.05)。两组术中透视次数比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。内固定组骨折复位优良率高于外固定组(P<0.05),骨折愈合时间及术后完全负重时间均短于外固定组(P<0.05)。两组患者术后站、坐、工作、性功能、疼痛评分及总分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后,两组OPG、BGP水平高于术前(P<0.05),但两组OPG、BGP水平比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。外固定组术后并发症发生率高于内固定组(P<0.05)。【结论】经皮桥接钢板内固定与内置外固定支架治疗骨盆前环骨折,均可促进患者术后肢体功能的恢复,但内置外固定支架术的手术时间更短、出血量更少,而经皮桥接钢板内固定术后骨折复位效果更优、愈合时间更短。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	梁海群
	史志强
	吕新智

关键词 ：骨盆骨/损伤, 骨折/外科学, 骨折固定术,内, 治疗结果

Abstract：【Objective】To investigate the clinical effect of percutaneous bridging plate internal fixation and internal external fixation in the treatment of anterior pelvic ring fracture. 【Methods】A total of 72 patients with anterior pelvic ring fracture treated in our hospital from January 2020 to December 2022 were selected and divided into the internal fixation group (receiving percutaneous bridging plate internal fixation treatment) and the external fixation group (receiving internal external fixation stent treatment) according to random number table method, with 36 cases in each group. The operative indexes, postoperative complications, fracture healing time, excellent rate of fracture reduction, functional recovery status and the levels of osteopalcin (OPG) and osteocalcin (BGP) were compared between the two groups. 【Results】The operative time in the internal fixation group was longer than that in the external fixation group (P<0.05), and the amount of blood loss was higher than that in the external fixation group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the number of intraoperative fluoroscopy between the two groups (P>0.05). The rate of fracture reduction in the internal fixation group was higher than that in the external fixation group (P<0.05), and the time of fracture healing and postoperative full weight bearing were shorter than that in the external fixation group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in standing, sitting, working, sexual function, pain score and total score between the two groups (P>0.05). After operation, the levels of OPG and BGP were higher than those before operation (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in external fixation group was higher than that in internal fixation group (P<0.05). 【Conclusion】Both percutaneous bridging plate internal fixation and internal external fixation scaffold can promote the recovery of limb function in patients with anterior pelvic ring fracture after surgery, but internal external fixation stenting has shorter operation time and less blood loss, while percutaneous bridging plate internal fixation has better fracture reduction effect and shorter healing time.

Key words： Pelvic Bones/IN Fractures/SU Fracture Fixation, Internal Treatment Outcome

收稿日期: 2024-05-11

中图分类号:

R683.3

引用本文:

梁海群, 史志强, 吕新智. 经皮桥接钢板内固定与内置外固定支架治疗骨盆前环骨折的临床效果[J]. 医学临床研究, 2024, 41(9): 1327-1330.
LIANG Haiqun, SHI Zhiqiang, LYU Xinzhi. Clinical Efficacy of Percutaneous Bridging Plate Internal Fixation versus Internal External Fixation for the Treatment of Anterior Pelvic Ring Fractures. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL RESEARCH, 2024, 41(9): 1327-1330.

链接本文:

http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2024.09.013 或 http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/CN/Y2024/V41/I9/1327

[1] DING S L, HE X J, ZHANG G M, et al. Modified internal fixator for anterior pelvic ring fractures versus conventional two-screw fixation[J].Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg,2021,47(2):533-539.
[2] ELLIS J D, SHAH N S, ARCHDEACON M T, et al. Anterior pelvic ring fracture pattern predicts subsequent displacement in lateral compression sacral fractures[J].J Orthop Trauma,2022,36(11):550-556.
[3] 高文强,周雯,邢怀德,等. 骶髂关节螺钉联合INFIX技术在Tile B型骨盆骨折中的应用[J].南昌大学学报(医学版),2021,61(2):64-67.
[4] 陈同林,郑炫林,王硕磊,等. Infix结合空心钉在中老年耻骨联合分离骨盆损伤患者中的应用[J].中华老年医学杂志,2022,41(7):780-784.
[5] 叶龙飞,官建中,王晓盼,等. 改良内置外固定架联合骶髂螺钉治疗TileC1.3型骨盆骨折[J].中国修复重建外科杂志,2022,36(12):1447-1452.
[6] 杨成志,黄站珠,唐经励,等. 骨科手术机器人与“O”型臂X线导航辅助骨盆骨折经皮内固定术的比较[J].中华骨科杂志,2021,41(19):1387-1395.
[7] 孟祥圣,朱海泉,尚修超,等. 经皮微创桥式内固定治疗对老年骨盆骨折患者髋关节功能、疼痛情况及并发症发生率的影响[J].中国老年学杂志,2023,43(21):5208-5211.
[8] HERTELEER M, BOUDISSA M, HOFMANN A, et al. Plate fixation of the anterior pelvic ring in patients with fragility fractures of the pelvis[J].Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg,2022,48(5):3711-3719.
[9] KUPER M A, TRULSON A, JOHANNINK J, et al. Robotic-assisted plate osteosynthesis of the anterior pelvic ring and acetabulum:an anatomical feasibility study[J].J Robot Surg,2022,16(6):1401-1407.
[10] 郑明,聂娜,刘列华,等. 骨盆前环骨折微创内固定技术研究进展[J].中华创伤杂志,2021,37(6):571-576.
[11] 李木文,胡峰,程建文,等. 皮下内置外架系统微创治疗Tile C1、C2型骨盆骨折的临床疗效[J].广西科学,2022,29(2):334-341.
[12] LI X S, HUANG L B, KONG Y, et al. Modified percutaneous iliosacral screw and anterior internal fixator technique for treating unstable pelvic fractures:a retrospective study[J].BMC Musculoskelet Disord,2022,23(1):1068.
[13] 刘彬彬,罗政强,徐汉青,等. 骨盆前环皮下内固定支架与微创经皮钢板内固定治疗骨盆前环骨折的疗效比较[J].骨科,2021,12(6):545-549.
[14] 樊仕才,侯志勇,陈伟,等. 微创可调式接骨板联合前环撑开复位治疗新鲜骶骨DenisⅡB型骨折合并骶神经损伤的疗效分析[J].中华创伤骨科杂志,2022,24(3):213-218.
[15] 杨成亮,杨晓东,刘佳,等. 骨盆解锁复位架辅助微创治疗Tile C2、C3型骨盆骨折[J].中华骨科杂志,2021,41(19):1380.