开闭锁钉治疗成人股骨干骨折的临床疗效

Mazhar Mahmood, Abdul Hannan, Usama bin Saeed, Asad Ramzan, Huzaifa Tariq, Hamza Tariq
{"title":"开闭锁钉治疗成人股骨干骨折的临床疗效","authors":"Mazhar Mahmood, Abdul Hannan, Usama bin Saeed, Asad Ramzan, Huzaifa Tariq, Hamza Tariq","doi":"10.37723/jumdc.v14i3.731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: There are different methods for treatment of the long bone fractures, including femoral diaphyseal fractures, ranging from closed intramedullary nail, open intramedullary nail to flexible nail, plating, and external fixator in open type 3 B and 3C fractures. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome of open versus closed techniques in treating femoral diaphyseal fractures in skeletally mature adults. \nMETHODOLOGY: A simple observational study was conducted at the Department of Orthopedics, Allied Hospital Faisalabad, from January 2018 to January 2020 with a total of 60 skeletally mature patients with mean age 38.4+1.2 who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were operated, and five patients lost in follow-up. Group A consisted of 27 patients (18 males and 9 females) who were operated with closed interlocking technique. Group B consisted of 28 patients (12 males and 16 females) who were operated with open technique. Both groups were followed prospectively for two years to evaluate the outcome. T-test was used for statistical analysis. \nRESULTS: The rate of union in group A was better than in group B. Patients in group A had a reunion 1.99±0.86 weeks earlier than group B a significant difference between the two groups with p<0.001. Nonunion occurred in 02(7.40%) patients of group A and 03(10.71%) patients of group B. Only 01 (3.7%) patient from group A and 02 (7.40%) patient of group B suffered from deep infections. \nCONCLUSION: Closed interlocking for femoral diaphyseal fractures provides earlier reunion of the bone and should be considered the treatment of choice. In case of lack of technical availabilities, open interlocking should be considered as a suitable option.","PeriodicalId":178216,"journal":{"name":"Journal of University Medical &amp; Dental College","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical outcome of femoral diaphyseal fractures in adults treated with open verses closed interlocking nail\",\"authors\":\"Mazhar Mahmood, Abdul Hannan, Usama bin Saeed, Asad Ramzan, Huzaifa Tariq, Hamza Tariq\",\"doi\":\"10.37723/jumdc.v14i3.731\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: There are different methods for treatment of the long bone fractures, including femoral diaphyseal fractures, ranging from closed intramedullary nail, open intramedullary nail to flexible nail, plating, and external fixator in open type 3 B and 3C fractures. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome of open versus closed techniques in treating femoral diaphyseal fractures in skeletally mature adults. \\nMETHODOLOGY: A simple observational study was conducted at the Department of Orthopedics, Allied Hospital Faisalabad, from January 2018 to January 2020 with a total of 60 skeletally mature patients with mean age 38.4+1.2 who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were operated, and five patients lost in follow-up. Group A consisted of 27 patients (18 males and 9 females) who were operated with closed interlocking technique. Group B consisted of 28 patients (12 males and 16 females) who were operated with open technique. Both groups were followed prospectively for two years to evaluate the outcome. T-test was used for statistical analysis. \\nRESULTS: The rate of union in group A was better than in group B. Patients in group A had a reunion 1.99±0.86 weeks earlier than group B a significant difference between the two groups with p<0.001. Nonunion occurred in 02(7.40%) patients of group A and 03(10.71%) patients of group B. Only 01 (3.7%) patient from group A and 02 (7.40%) patient of group B suffered from deep infections. \\nCONCLUSION: Closed interlocking for femoral diaphyseal fractures provides earlier reunion of the bone and should be considered the treatment of choice. In case of lack of technical availabilities, open interlocking should be considered as a suitable option.\",\"PeriodicalId\":178216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of University Medical &amp; Dental College\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of University Medical &amp; Dental College\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37723/jumdc.v14i3.731\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of University Medical &amp; Dental College","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37723/jumdc.v14i3.731","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的:对于包括股骨干骨折在内的长骨骨折,开放性3b型和3C型骨折的治疗方法有闭合性髓内钉、开放性髓内钉、柔性髓内钉、钢板、外固定架等。本研究的目的是比较开放与封闭技术治疗成熟成人股骨骨干骨折的功能结果。方法:2018年1月至2020年1月在费萨拉巴德联合医院骨科进行了一项简单的观察性研究,共对60例骨骼成熟患者进行了手术,平均年龄38.4+1.2,符合纳入标准,其中5例失访。A组27例患者(男18例,女9例)采用闭式联锁术。B组28例患者(男12例,女16例)采用开放式手术。对两组患者进行了为期两年的前瞻性随访,以评估结果。采用t检验进行统计分析。结果:A组患者的愈合率优于B组,A组患者的愈合时间比B组早1.99±0.86周,两组间差异有统计学意义(p<0.001)。A组02例(7.40%)、B组03例(10.71%)发生骨不连,A组01例(3.7%)、B组02例(7.40%)发生深部感染。结论:闭合性联锁治疗股骨骨干骨折可使骨折早日愈合,应考虑采用联锁治疗。在缺乏可用技术的情况下,应考虑开放式联锁是一种合适的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical outcome of femoral diaphyseal fractures in adults treated with open verses closed interlocking nail
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: There are different methods for treatment of the long bone fractures, including femoral diaphyseal fractures, ranging from closed intramedullary nail, open intramedullary nail to flexible nail, plating, and external fixator in open type 3 B and 3C fractures. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome of open versus closed techniques in treating femoral diaphyseal fractures in skeletally mature adults. METHODOLOGY: A simple observational study was conducted at the Department of Orthopedics, Allied Hospital Faisalabad, from January 2018 to January 2020 with a total of 60 skeletally mature patients with mean age 38.4+1.2 who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were operated, and five patients lost in follow-up. Group A consisted of 27 patients (18 males and 9 females) who were operated with closed interlocking technique. Group B consisted of 28 patients (12 males and 16 females) who were operated with open technique. Both groups were followed prospectively for two years to evaluate the outcome. T-test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The rate of union in group A was better than in group B. Patients in group A had a reunion 1.99±0.86 weeks earlier than group B a significant difference between the two groups with p<0.001. Nonunion occurred in 02(7.40%) patients of group A and 03(10.71%) patients of group B. Only 01 (3.7%) patient from group A and 02 (7.40%) patient of group B suffered from deep infections. CONCLUSION: Closed interlocking for femoral diaphyseal fractures provides earlier reunion of the bone and should be considered the treatment of choice. In case of lack of technical availabilities, open interlocking should be considered as a suitable option.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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