Iliac Periosteal Bone Autografting vs Talus Non-Weight-Bearing Surgery in Hepple V Talus Osteochondral Injuries: Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 Medicine
Liu Lin, Zengyue Zhu, Heda Liu, Yingli Li
{"title":"Iliac Periosteal Bone Autografting vs Talus Non-Weight-Bearing Surgery in Hepple V Talus Osteochondral Injuries: Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes.","authors":"Liu Lin, Zengyue Zhu, Heda Liu, Yingli Li","doi":"10.12659/MSM.944912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND Hepple stage V osteochondral injuries of the talus include subchondral cyst formation, secondary degenerative change, and secondary osteoarthritis. This retrospective study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes from iliac periosteal bone autografting and talus non-weight-bearing surgery in 162 patients with Hepple V osteochondral injuries of the talus. MATERIAL AND METHODS According to the inclusion criteria, 162 eligible patients were selected for analysis and divided into an iliac periosteal bone autograft group (n=82) and a talus non-weight-bearing group (n=80) according to the surgical methods. General data and data on perioperative conditions, complications, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, ankle-hindfoot scoring system (AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale), and plantar flexion and extension range of motion were collected to assess ankle joint function and were compared between groups. RESULTS The comparison of perioperative results between the 2 groups showed that the incision length (P=0.000), operation time (P=0.000), and length of hospital stay (P=0.000) in the iliac periosteal bone autograft group were longer than those in the talus non-weight-bearing group. The intraoperative blood loss in the anterior group was greater than that in non-weight-bearing group (P=0.000). Regarding complications, there were more cases of donor site paresthesia (P=0.014) and postoperative pain aggravation in the iliac periosteal bone autograft group than in the non-weight-bearing group. CONCLUSIONS In patients with Hepple V osteochondral injury of the talus, the incision length, operation time, and length of hospital stay in the talus non-weight-bearing group were shorter, there was less intraoperative blood loss, and there were fewer postoperative complications. In the short term, bone transplantation in the talus non-weight-bearing group was more \"minimally invasive\" and the postoperative recovery was better than in the iliac periosteal bone allograft group.</p>","PeriodicalId":48888,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Monitor","volume":"30 ","pages":"e944912"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568631/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Science Monitor","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.944912","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Hepple stage V osteochondral injuries of the talus include subchondral cyst formation, secondary degenerative change, and secondary osteoarthritis. This retrospective study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes from iliac periosteal bone autografting and talus non-weight-bearing surgery in 162 patients with Hepple V osteochondral injuries of the talus. MATERIAL AND METHODS According to the inclusion criteria, 162 eligible patients were selected for analysis and divided into an iliac periosteal bone autograft group (n=82) and a talus non-weight-bearing group (n=80) according to the surgical methods. General data and data on perioperative conditions, complications, intraoperative fluoroscopy times, preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, ankle-hindfoot scoring system (AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale), and plantar flexion and extension range of motion were collected to assess ankle joint function and were compared between groups. RESULTS The comparison of perioperative results between the 2 groups showed that the incision length (P=0.000), operation time (P=0.000), and length of hospital stay (P=0.000) in the iliac periosteal bone autograft group were longer than those in the talus non-weight-bearing group. The intraoperative blood loss in the anterior group was greater than that in non-weight-bearing group (P=0.000). Regarding complications, there were more cases of donor site paresthesia (P=0.014) and postoperative pain aggravation in the iliac periosteal bone autograft group than in the non-weight-bearing group. CONCLUSIONS In patients with Hepple V osteochondral injury of the talus, the incision length, operation time, and length of hospital stay in the talus non-weight-bearing group were shorter, there was less intraoperative blood loss, and there were fewer postoperative complications. In the short term, bone transplantation in the talus non-weight-bearing group was more "minimally invasive" and the postoperative recovery was better than in the iliac periosteal bone allograft group.

Hepple V 距骨骨软骨损伤的髂骨骨膜自体骨移植与距骨无负重手术:围手术期结果比较分析。
背景 Hepple V 期距骨软骨损伤包括软骨下囊肿形成、继发性退行性改变和继发性骨关节炎。本回顾性研究旨在比较 162 例 Hepple V 期距骨软骨损伤患者髂骨骨膜自体骨移植和距骨不负重手术的围手术期疗效。材料与方法 根据纳入标准,筛选出 162 名符合条件的患者进行分析,并根据手术方法分为髂骨骨膜骨自体移植组(82 人)和距骨不负重组(80 人)。收集一般数据和围手术期情况、并发症、术中透视时间、术前和术后疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)、踝-后足评分系统(AOFAS踝-后足量表)、跖屈和伸展活动范围等数据,以评估踝关节功能,并进行组间比较。结果 两组围手术期结果比较显示,髂骨骨膜骨自体移植组的切口长度(P=0.000)、手术时间(P=0.000)和住院时间(P=0.000)均长于距骨不负重组。前路组的术中失血量大于非负重组(P=0.000)。在并发症方面,髂骨骨膜自体骨移植组的供体部位麻痹(P=0.014)和术后疼痛加重的病例多于非负重组。结论 在 Hepple V 型距骨骨软骨损伤患者中,距骨不负重组的切口长度、手术时间和住院时间更短,术中失血量更少,术后并发症更少。从短期来看,距骨不负重组的骨移植比髂骨骨膜骨同种异体移植更 "微创",术后恢复也更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Science Monitor
Medical Science Monitor MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
514
审稿时长
3.0 months
期刊介绍: Medical Science Monitor (MSM) established in 1995 is an international, peer-reviewed scientific journal which publishes original articles in Clinical Medicine and related disciplines such as Epidemiology and Population Studies, Product Investigations, Development of Laboratory Techniques :: Diagnostics and Medical Technology which enable presentation of research or review works in overlapping areas of medicine and technology such us (but not limited to): medical diagnostics, medical imaging systems, computer simulation of health and disease processes, new medical devices, etc. Reviews and Special Reports - papers may be accepted on the basis that they provide a systematic, critical and up-to-date overview of literature pertaining to research or clinical topics. Meta-analyses are considered as reviews. A special attention will be paid to a teaching value of a review paper. Medical Science Monitor is internationally indexed in Thomson-Reuters Web of Science, Journals Citation Report (JCR), Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI), Index Medicus MEDLINE, PubMed, PMC, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Chemical Abstracts CAS and Index Copernicus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信