Xiaofei Yu, Xu Zhang, Nan Li, Yadong Yu, Xiaoliang Yang
{"title":"使用双外固定器经皮治疗 C 型桡骨远端骨折。","authors":"Xiaofei Yu, Xu Zhang, Nan Li, Yadong Yu, Xiaoliang Yang","doi":"10.1016/j.jos.2024.07.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to introduce a potential alternative percutaneous treatment for AO types C1, C2, and C3 distal radius fractures using dual-external fixator (a no-bridging cemented-pin frame and a conventional wrist-bridging external fixator).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From January 2018 to January 2021, 52 patients (52 distal radius fractures) were treated with dual-external fixator. For comparison, 61 patients (61 distal radius fractures) were treated with a plate and screw system. Wrist function was assessed using the Mayo Wrist Score. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fracture healing was achieved in all patients. At the final follow-up of 29 months (range, 24-34 months) vs 36 months (range, 26-39 months) (P > 0.05), the patients treated with dual-external fixator and a plate and screw system achieved mean ulnar deviations of 31° vs 29° (P < 0.05), mean Mayo Wrist Scores of 91.12 ± 5.98 vs 88.12 ± 7.54 (P < 0.05), and mean patient satisfaction scores of 23.42 ± 2.47 vs 23.04 ± 2.32 (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AO types C1, C2, and C3 distal radius fractures can be treated successfully using dual-external fixator. The technique is a potential alternative in addition to the conventional treatments.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IIa.</p>","PeriodicalId":16939,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Percutaneous treatment of type C distal radius fractures using dual-external fixator.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaofei Yu, Xu Zhang, Nan Li, Yadong Yu, Xiaoliang Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jos.2024.07.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to introduce a potential alternative percutaneous treatment for AO types C1, C2, and C3 distal radius fractures using dual-external fixator (a no-bridging cemented-pin frame and a conventional wrist-bridging external fixator).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From January 2018 to January 2021, 52 patients (52 distal radius fractures) were treated with dual-external fixator. For comparison, 61 patients (61 distal radius fractures) were treated with a plate and screw system. Wrist function was assessed using the Mayo Wrist Score. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fracture healing was achieved in all patients. At the final follow-up of 29 months (range, 24-34 months) vs 36 months (range, 26-39 months) (P > 0.05), the patients treated with dual-external fixator and a plate and screw system achieved mean ulnar deviations of 31° vs 29° (P < 0.05), mean Mayo Wrist Scores of 91.12 ± 5.98 vs 88.12 ± 7.54 (P < 0.05), and mean patient satisfaction scores of 23.42 ± 2.47 vs 23.04 ± 2.32 (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AO types C1, C2, and C3 distal radius fractures can be treated successfully using dual-external fixator. The technique is a potential alternative in addition to the conventional treatments.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IIa.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16939,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2024.07.004\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2024.07.004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究背景本研究旨在介绍使用双外固定器（无桥接骨水泥钉框架和传统腕部桥接外固定器）治疗 AO C1、C2 和 C3 型桡骨远端骨折的潜在替代经皮治疗方法：2018年1月至2021年1月，52名患者（52例桡骨远端骨折）接受了双外固定器治疗。作为对比，61 名患者（61 例桡骨远端骨折）接受了钢板和螺钉系统治疗。腕关节功能采用梅奥腕关节评分进行评估。患者满意度采用 "患者满意度简短评估 "进行评估。A P 结果：所有患者的骨折均已愈合。在29个月（24-34个月）对36个月（26-39个月）的最终随访中（P>0.05），使用双外固定器和钢板螺钉系统治疗的患者的平均尺骨偏差为31°对29°（P 0.05）：结论：使用双外固定器可成功治疗 AO C1、C2 和 C3 型桡骨远端骨折。结论：使用双外固定器可成功治疗 AO C1、C2 和 C3 型桡骨远端骨折，该技术是传统治疗方法之外的一种潜在替代方法：证据等级：IIa 级。
Percutaneous treatment of type C distal radius fractures using dual-external fixator.
Background: This study aimed to introduce a potential alternative percutaneous treatment for AO types C1, C2, and C3 distal radius fractures using dual-external fixator (a no-bridging cemented-pin frame and a conventional wrist-bridging external fixator).
Materials and methods: From January 2018 to January 2021, 52 patients (52 distal radius fractures) were treated with dual-external fixator. For comparison, 61 patients (61 distal radius fractures) were treated with a plate and screw system. Wrist function was assessed using the Mayo Wrist Score. Patient satisfaction was assessed using the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: Fracture healing was achieved in all patients. At the final follow-up of 29 months (range, 24-34 months) vs 36 months (range, 26-39 months) (P > 0.05), the patients treated with dual-external fixator and a plate and screw system achieved mean ulnar deviations of 31° vs 29° (P < 0.05), mean Mayo Wrist Scores of 91.12 ± 5.98 vs 88.12 ± 7.54 (P < 0.05), and mean patient satisfaction scores of 23.42 ± 2.47 vs 23.04 ± 2.32 (P > 0.05).
Conclusions: AO types C1, C2, and C3 distal radius fractures can be treated successfully using dual-external fixator. The technique is a potential alternative in addition to the conventional treatments.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Orthopaedic Science is the official peer-reviewed journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association. The journal publishes the latest researches and topical debates in all fields of clinical and experimental orthopaedics, including musculoskeletal medicine, sports medicine, locomotive syndrome, trauma, paediatrics, oncology and biomaterials, as well as basic researches.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
