跗骨窦入路与可伸展外侧入路治疗移位跟骨关节内骨折的比较:一项单中心研究。

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q4 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Mehmet Ersin, Mehmet Demirel, Mehmet Ekinci, İbrahim Sungur, Murat Yilmaz
{"title":"跗骨窦入路与可伸展外侧入路治疗移位跟骨关节内骨折的比较:一项单中心研究。","authors":"Mehmet Ersin,&nbsp;Mehmet Demirel,&nbsp;Mehmet Ekinci,&nbsp;İbrahim Sungur,&nbsp;Murat Yilmaz","doi":"10.14744/tjtes.2023.13642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Controversy still exists for optimal treatment for displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures (DIACFs). Conven-tionally, the extensile lateral approach (ELA) has been the most preferred approach. Although ELA provides excellent fracture access and direct evaluation of the depressed posterior facet, this approach has a high rate of serious complications, such as hematoma, superficial/deep infection, and wound healing issues. To overcome such complications, more minimally invasive techniques including external fixation, percutaneous fixation, arthroscopic assisted fixation, and sinus tarsi approach (STA) have been recently described. The primary aim of this study was to compare STA and LEA in the treatment of DIACFs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who were operated for DIACFs in our clinic were included in the study. Patients with closed DIACFs of Sanders Type II, III, IV, and over 18 years of age were identified. Physical examinations and radiological evaluations of the patients were per-formed, and clinical scores were filled. Patients were divided into subgroups according to the Sander's classification and comparisons were made again according to these subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 37 patients (four female and 33 male) in STA group and 44 patients in LEA group (six female and 38 male). The mean age was 44.42±13.57 years (range, 18-61) for STA group and 37.32±11.09 years (range, 18-56) for the LEA group. In clinical outcomes, except for short-form survey (SF-12)/MCS-12 (Mental Score) and visual analog scale score, all the parameters were signifi-cantly better in STA group compared to LEA group. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in radiographic results, except for the Böhler angle. Significantly less infection occurred in the STA group compared to LEA group (P=0.021). According to Sander's classification, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society, foot and ankle disability index, and SF-12/PCS-12 and foot function index scores, no significant differences were determined between STA and LEA groups for Sanders Type 2, whereas the values were considerably higher in STA group than in LEA group for Sanders Type 3 and 4.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In DIACFs, STA is considered a safe and effective method for restoring the width, height, and length of the calca-neus and reconstruction of joint alignment and has now become our standard technique for all calcaneal fractures requiring operative treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":49398,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery","volume":"29 9","pages":"1061-1067"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f0/e5/TJTES-29-1061.PMC10560813.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of sinus tarsi approach versus extensile lateral approach in the management of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures: A single-center study.\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet Ersin,&nbsp;Mehmet Demirel,&nbsp;Mehmet Ekinci,&nbsp;İbrahim Sungur,&nbsp;Murat Yilmaz\",\"doi\":\"10.14744/tjtes.2023.13642\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Controversy still exists for optimal treatment for displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures (DIACFs). Conven-tionally, the extensile lateral approach (ELA) has been the most preferred approach. Although ELA provides excellent fracture access and direct evaluation of the depressed posterior facet, this approach has a high rate of serious complications, such as hematoma, superficial/deep infection, and wound healing issues. To overcome such complications, more minimally invasive techniques including external fixation, percutaneous fixation, arthroscopic assisted fixation, and sinus tarsi approach (STA) have been recently described. The primary aim of this study was to compare STA and LEA in the treatment of DIACFs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who were operated for DIACFs in our clinic were included in the study. Patients with closed DIACFs of Sanders Type II, III, IV, and over 18 years of age were identified. Physical examinations and radiological evaluations of the patients were per-formed, and clinical scores were filled. Patients were divided into subgroups according to the Sander's classification and comparisons were made again according to these subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 37 patients (four female and 33 male) in STA group and 44 patients in LEA group (six female and 38 male). The mean age was 44.42±13.57 years (range, 18-61) for STA group and 37.32±11.09 years (range, 18-56) for the LEA group. In clinical outcomes, except for short-form survey (SF-12)/MCS-12 (Mental Score) and visual analog scale score, all the parameters were signifi-cantly better in STA group compared to LEA group. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in radiographic results, except for the Böhler angle. Significantly less infection occurred in the STA group compared to LEA group (P=0.021). According to Sander's classification, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society, foot and ankle disability index, and SF-12/PCS-12 and foot function index scores, no significant differences were determined between STA and LEA groups for Sanders Type 2, whereas the values were considerably higher in STA group than in LEA group for Sanders Type 3 and 4.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In DIACFs, STA is considered a safe and effective method for restoring the width, height, and length of the calca-neus and reconstruction of joint alignment and has now become our standard technique for all calcaneal fractures requiring operative treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery\",\"volume\":\"29 9\",\"pages\":\"1061-1067\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f0/e5/TJTES-29-1061.PMC10560813.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2023.13642\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2023.13642","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:移位跟骨关节内骨折(DIACF)的最佳治疗方法仍存在争议。传统上,伸展侧入路(ELA)是最受欢迎的入路。尽管ELA提供了极好的骨折途径和对凹陷的后小关节的直接评估,但这种方法有很高的严重并发症发生率,如血肿、浅表/深部感染和伤口愈合问题。为了克服这些并发症,最近描述了更多的微创技术,包括外固定、经皮固定、关节镜辅助固定和睑板窦入路(STA)。本研究的主要目的是比较STA和LEA在治疗DIACF中的作用。方法:将在我们诊所接受DIACF手术的患者纳入研究。确定了Sanders II型、III型、IV型和18岁以上的闭合性DIACF患者。对患者进行体检和放射学评估,并填写临床评分。根据Sander分类法将患者分为亚组,并根据这些亚组再次进行比较。结果:STA组37例(4女33男),LEA组44例(6女38男)。STA组的平均年龄为44.42±13.57岁(范围18-61),LEA组为37.32±11.09岁(范围18-26)。在临床结果方面,除了简短问卷(SF-12)/MCS-12(心理评分)和视觉模拟量表评分外,STA组的所有参数都明显优于LEA组。除了Böhler角外,两组的放射学结果没有显著差异。与LEA组相比,STA组的感染发生率显著降低(P=0.021)。根据Sander分类、美国足踝矫形学会、足部和踝关节残疾指数、SF-12/PCS-12和足部功能指数评分,在Sanders 2型方面,STA和LEA组之间没有显着差异,而Sanders 3型和4型的STA组的值明显高于LEA组。结论:在DIACF中,STA被认为是恢复跟骨宽度、高度和长度以及重建关节排列的一种安全有效的方法,现在已成为我们治疗所有需要手术治疗的跟骨骨折的标准技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of sinus tarsi approach versus extensile lateral approach in the management of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures: A single-center study.

Comparison of sinus tarsi approach versus extensile lateral approach in the management of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures: A single-center study.

Background: Controversy still exists for optimal treatment for displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures (DIACFs). Conven-tionally, the extensile lateral approach (ELA) has been the most preferred approach. Although ELA provides excellent fracture access and direct evaluation of the depressed posterior facet, this approach has a high rate of serious complications, such as hematoma, superficial/deep infection, and wound healing issues. To overcome such complications, more minimally invasive techniques including external fixation, percutaneous fixation, arthroscopic assisted fixation, and sinus tarsi approach (STA) have been recently described. The primary aim of this study was to compare STA and LEA in the treatment of DIACFs.

Methods: Patients who were operated for DIACFs in our clinic were included in the study. Patients with closed DIACFs of Sanders Type II, III, IV, and over 18 years of age were identified. Physical examinations and radiological evaluations of the patients were per-formed, and clinical scores were filled. Patients were divided into subgroups according to the Sander's classification and comparisons were made again according to these subgroups.

Results: There were 37 patients (four female and 33 male) in STA group and 44 patients in LEA group (six female and 38 male). The mean age was 44.42±13.57 years (range, 18-61) for STA group and 37.32±11.09 years (range, 18-56) for the LEA group. In clinical outcomes, except for short-form survey (SF-12)/MCS-12 (Mental Score) and visual analog scale score, all the parameters were signifi-cantly better in STA group compared to LEA group. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in radiographic results, except for the Böhler angle. Significantly less infection occurred in the STA group compared to LEA group (P=0.021). According to Sander's classification, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society, foot and ankle disability index, and SF-12/PCS-12 and foot function index scores, no significant differences were determined between STA and LEA groups for Sanders Type 2, whereas the values were considerably higher in STA group than in LEA group for Sanders Type 3 and 4.

Conclusion: In DIACFs, STA is considered a safe and effective method for restoring the width, height, and length of the calca-neus and reconstruction of joint alignment and has now become our standard technique for all calcaneal fractures requiring operative treatment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
18.20%
发文量
82
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (TJTES) is an official publication of the Turkish Association of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. It is a double-blind and peer-reviewed periodical that considers for publication clinical and experimental studies, case reports, technical contributions, and letters to the editor. Scope of the journal covers the trauma and emergency surgery. Each submission will be reviewed by at least two external, independent peer reviewers who are experts in their fields in order to ensure an unbiased evaluation process. The editorial board will invite an external and independent reviewer to manage the evaluation processes of manuscripts submitted by editors or by the editorial board members of the journal. The Editor in Chief is the final authority in the decision-making process for all submissions.
×
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