Lorenza Marengo, Emilio Enrietti, Melissa Piccinno, Luca Ceroni, Giorgio Marre' Brunenghi, Silvio Boero, Antonio Colella, Daniela Dibello
{"title":"小儿胫骨轴骨折的石膏固定、弹性髓内钉或外固定:哪种治疗方法最合适?一项多中心研究。","authors":"Lorenza Marengo, Emilio Enrietti, Melissa Piccinno, Luca Ceroni, Giorgio Marre' Brunenghi, Silvio Boero, Antonio Colella, Daniela Dibello","doi":"10.1097/BPB.0000000000001165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The main objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate and compare the outcomes and complications of displaced closed tibial fractures in children treated by CRC (closed reduction and casting), elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) or external fixation (EF). One hundred twenty-three consecutive children were treated for displaced closed tibia shaft fracture from July 2014 and January 2020 at two different institutions. Seventy-five of them met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study: 30 (40%) patients were treated with CRC, 33 (44%) with ESIN, and 12 with EF (16%). All clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications were registered and compared. The three groups did not differ with regard to gender, affected side, fracture site and associated fibula fracture. The age at the time of treatment in the CRC group was statistically lower than in ESIN and EF groups (8.43 ± 3.52 years vs. 10.39 ± 2.56 years vs. 11.08 ± 3.55 years, respectively). Immobilization time and time to partial and total weight bearing were significantly reduced in ESIN and EF groups compared to CRC group ( P < 0.05). Overall, no statistically significant differences were found between the three groups regarding complication rate and clinical and radiographic outcomes between the three groups. However, in CRC group, 3 patients (10%) had secondary fracture displacement and underwent ESIN. Surgical treatment is not contraindicated in children with displaced tibia shaft fractures. EF and ESIN provide earlier mobilization and weight-bearing recovery than CRC. However, apart from that, nonoperative treatment was as efficacious as surgical treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":50092,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics-Part B","volume":" ","pages":"27-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Casting, elastic intramedullary nailing or external fixation in pediatric tibial shaft fractures: which is the most appropriate treatment? A multicenter study.\",\"authors\":\"Lorenza Marengo, Emilio Enrietti, Melissa Piccinno, Luca Ceroni, Giorgio Marre' Brunenghi, Silvio Boero, Antonio Colella, Daniela Dibello\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BPB.0000000000001165\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The main objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate and compare the outcomes and complications of displaced closed tibial fractures in children treated by CRC (closed reduction and casting), elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) or external fixation (EF). One hundred twenty-three consecutive children were treated for displaced closed tibia shaft fracture from July 2014 and January 2020 at two different institutions. Seventy-five of them met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study: 30 (40%) patients were treated with CRC, 33 (44%) with ESIN, and 12 with EF (16%). All clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications were registered and compared. The three groups did not differ with regard to gender, affected side, fracture site and associated fibula fracture. The age at the time of treatment in the CRC group was statistically lower than in ESIN and EF groups (8.43 ± 3.52 years vs. 10.39 ± 2.56 years vs. 11.08 ± 3.55 years, respectively). Immobilization time and time to partial and total weight bearing were significantly reduced in ESIN and EF groups compared to CRC group ( P < 0.05). Overall, no statistically significant differences were found between the three groups regarding complication rate and clinical and radiographic outcomes between the three groups. However, in CRC group, 3 patients (10%) had secondary fracture displacement and underwent ESIN. Surgical treatment is not contraindicated in children with displaced tibia shaft fractures. EF and ESIN provide earlier mobilization and weight-bearing recovery than CRC. However, apart from that, nonoperative treatment was as efficacious as surgical treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics-Part B\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"27-32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics-Part B\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BPB.0000000000001165\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics-Part B","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BPB.0000000000001165","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究的主要目的是回顾性评估和比较采用闭合复位和石膏固定、弹性稳定髓内钉或外固定治疗儿童移位性闭合胫骨骨折的疗效和并发症。2014 年 7 月至 2020 年 1 月期间,两家不同机构连续收治了 123 名胫骨闭合性骨折患儿。其中 75 名儿童符合纳入标准并被纳入研究:30名(40%)患者接受了CRC治疗,33名(44%)接受了ESIN治疗,12名(16%)接受了EF治疗。所有临床和影像学结果及并发症都进行了登记和比较。三组患者在性别、患侧、骨折部位和相关腓骨骨折方面没有差异。据统计,CRC组接受治疗时的年龄低于ESIN组和EF组(分别为8.43 ± 3.52岁 vs. 10.39 ± 2.56岁 vs. 11.08 ± 3.55岁)。与 CRC 组相比,ESIN 组和 EF 组的固定时间以及部分和完全负重时间明显缩短(P
Casting, elastic intramedullary nailing or external fixation in pediatric tibial shaft fractures: which is the most appropriate treatment? A multicenter study.
The main objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate and compare the outcomes and complications of displaced closed tibial fractures in children treated by CRC (closed reduction and casting), elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) or external fixation (EF). One hundred twenty-three consecutive children were treated for displaced closed tibia shaft fracture from July 2014 and January 2020 at two different institutions. Seventy-five of them met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study: 30 (40%) patients were treated with CRC, 33 (44%) with ESIN, and 12 with EF (16%). All clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications were registered and compared. The three groups did not differ with regard to gender, affected side, fracture site and associated fibula fracture. The age at the time of treatment in the CRC group was statistically lower than in ESIN and EF groups (8.43 ± 3.52 years vs. 10.39 ± 2.56 years vs. 11.08 ± 3.55 years, respectively). Immobilization time and time to partial and total weight bearing were significantly reduced in ESIN and EF groups compared to CRC group ( P < 0.05). Overall, no statistically significant differences were found between the three groups regarding complication rate and clinical and radiographic outcomes between the three groups. However, in CRC group, 3 patients (10%) had secondary fracture displacement and underwent ESIN. Surgical treatment is not contraindicated in children with displaced tibia shaft fractures. EF and ESIN provide earlier mobilization and weight-bearing recovery than CRC. However, apart from that, nonoperative treatment was as efficacious as surgical treatment.
期刊介绍:
The journal highlights important recent developments from the world''s leading clinical and research institutions. The journal publishes peer-reviewed papers on the diagnosis and treatment of pediatric orthopedic disorders.
It is the official journal of IFPOS (International Federation of Paediatric Orthopaedic Societies).
Submitted articles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool.