[Comparative study on effectiveness of double reverse traction reduction versus open reduction internal fixation in treating complex tibial plateau fractures].

Q3 Medicine
Hao Liu, Zhihao Lin, Yueyan Ma, Haifeng Gong, Tianrui Wang, Fagang Ye, Yanling Hu
{"title":"[Comparative study on effectiveness of double reverse traction reduction versus open reduction internal fixation in treating complex tibial plateau fractures].","authors":"Hao Liu, Zhihao Lin, Yueyan Ma, Haifeng Gong, Tianrui Wang, Fagang Ye, Yanling Hu","doi":"10.7507/1002-1892.202504101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effectiveness and advantages of the double reverse traction reduction versus open reduction internal fixation for treating complex tibial plateau fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A clinical data of 25 patients with Schatzker type Ⅴ or Ⅵ tibial plateau fractures, who met the selection criteria and were admitted between January 2019 and January 2023, was retrospectively analyzed. Thirteen patients underwent double reverse traction reduction and internal fixation (double reverse traction group), while 12 patients underwent open reduction and internal fixation (traditional open group). There was no significant difference in the baseline data (age, gender, injury mechanism, Schatzker classification, interval between injury and operation) between the two groups ( <i>P</i>>0.05). The effectiveness were evaluated and compared between the two groups, included operation time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, hospital stay, full weight-bearing time, complications, fracture healing, Rasmussen radiological score (reduction quality), knee Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, and knee flexion/extension range of motion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The double reverse traction group demonstrated significantly superior outcomes in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, incision length, and time to full weight-bearing ( <i>P</i><0.05). Two patients in traditional open group developed incisional complications, while the double reverse traction group had no complication. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complication between the two groups ( <i>P</i>>0.05). All patients were followed up 24-36 months (mean, 30 months), with no significant difference in follow-up duration between groups ( <i>P</i>>0.05). Fractures healed in both groups with no significant difference in healing time ( <i>P</i>>0.05). At 6 months after operation, Rasmussen radiological scores and grading showed no significant difference between the two groups ( <i>P</i>>0.05); the double reverse traction group had significantly higher HSS scores compared to the traditional open group ( <i>P</i><0.05). At 12 months after operation, knee flexion/extension range of motion were significantly greater in the double reverse traction group than in the traditional open group ( <i>P</i><0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Double reverse traction reduction offers advantages over traditional open reduction, including shorter operation time, reduced blood loss, minimized soft tissue trauma, and improved joint functional recovery. It is a safe and reliable method for complex tibial plateau fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":23979,"journal":{"name":"中国修复重建外科杂志","volume":"39 7","pages":"795-800"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12279911/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中国修复重建外科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7507/1002-1892.202504101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness and advantages of the double reverse traction reduction versus open reduction internal fixation for treating complex tibial plateau fractures.

Methods: A clinical data of 25 patients with Schatzker type Ⅴ or Ⅵ tibial plateau fractures, who met the selection criteria and were admitted between January 2019 and January 2023, was retrospectively analyzed. Thirteen patients underwent double reverse traction reduction and internal fixation (double reverse traction group), while 12 patients underwent open reduction and internal fixation (traditional open group). There was no significant difference in the baseline data (age, gender, injury mechanism, Schatzker classification, interval between injury and operation) between the two groups ( P>0.05). The effectiveness were evaluated and compared between the two groups, included operation time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, hospital stay, full weight-bearing time, complications, fracture healing, Rasmussen radiological score (reduction quality), knee Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, and knee flexion/extension range of motion.

Results: The double reverse traction group demonstrated significantly superior outcomes in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, incision length, and time to full weight-bearing ( P<0.05). Two patients in traditional open group developed incisional complications, while the double reverse traction group had no complication. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complication between the two groups ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 24-36 months (mean, 30 months), with no significant difference in follow-up duration between groups ( P>0.05). Fractures healed in both groups with no significant difference in healing time ( P>0.05). At 6 months after operation, Rasmussen radiological scores and grading showed no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05); the double reverse traction group had significantly higher HSS scores compared to the traditional open group ( P<0.05). At 12 months after operation, knee flexion/extension range of motion were significantly greater in the double reverse traction group than in the traditional open group ( P<0.05).

Conclusion: Double reverse traction reduction offers advantages over traditional open reduction, including shorter operation time, reduced blood loss, minimized soft tissue trauma, and improved joint functional recovery. It is a safe and reliable method for complex tibial plateau fractures.

[双反向牵引复位与切开复位内固定治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折的疗效比较研究]。
目的:比较双反向牵引复位与切开复位内固定治疗复杂胫骨平台骨折的疗效和优势。方法:回顾性分析2019年1月至2023年1月收治的25例符合入选标准的Schatzker型Ⅴ或Ⅵ胫骨平台骨折患者的临床资料。双反向牵引复位内固定13例(双反向牵引组),切开复位内固定12例(传统切开组)。两组患者的基线资料(年龄、性别、损伤机制、Schatzker分型、伤至手术间隔)比较,差异均无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。从手术时间、术中出血量、切口长度、住院时间、完全负重时间、并发症、骨折愈合、Rasmussen放射学评分(复位质量)、膝关节特殊外科医院(HSS)评分、膝关节屈伸活动范围等方面对两组的疗效进行评估和比较。结果:双反牵引组在手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、切口长度、完全负重时间等方面均明显优于双反牵引组(p < 0.05)。所有患者均随访24 ~ 36个月(平均30个月),各组随访时间差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。两组骨折愈合时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。术后6个月,两组患者Rasmussen放射学评分及分级比较,差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05);双反向牵引组HSS评分明显高于传统切开复位组(ppp)。结论:双反向牵引复位优于传统切开复位,手术时间短,出血量少,软组织损伤最小,关节功能恢复较好。对于复杂的胫骨平台骨折是一种安全可靠的治疗方法。
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
中国修复重建外科杂志
中国修复重建外科杂志 Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11334
期刊介绍:
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信