骶骨脆性骨折中三种不同经骶骨植入物的压缩效应和塌陷行为--对 106 例病例的回顾性分析。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
C Fischer, F Klauke, P Schenk, H Bauerfeld, P Kobbe, T Mendel
{"title":"骶骨脆性骨折中三种不同经骶骨植入物的压缩效应和塌陷行为--对 106 例病例的回顾性分析。","authors":"C Fischer, F Klauke, P Schenk, H Bauerfeld, P Kobbe, T Mendel","doi":"10.1007/s00068-024-02629-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study were the retrospective evaluation of the compressive effect and complication rates of transsacral stabilization of osteoporosis-associated sacral fragility fractures in 106 patients using three different implants (6.0 mm sacral bar, n = 32; 7.3 mm screw, n = 26; 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System, n = 48) with regard to the image morphological and clinical-perioperative outcome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this purpose, the sacral width was determined preoperatively and postoperatively using multiplanar CT reconstructions and correlated with the measured bone density (HU). The results were compared with each other on an implant-specific basis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant compressive effect was found for all implants (6.0 mm sacral bar 7.1 ± 3.4 mm, 7.3 mm screw 6.9 ± 1.8 mm, 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System 8 ± 2.4 mm). No implant-specific difference in compression could be detected. Overall, the washers broke into the iliac cortex in 9% of cases. The subgroups did not differ significantly in this respect (6.0 mm sacral bar: 4 [13%], 7.3 mm screw 1 [1%], 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System (5 [10%], p = 0.581). A correlation between the degree of osteoporosis and the compressive effect could not be demonstrated. Significant implant-specific differences were found in the incision-suture time, with only ø0:39 ± 0:13 h required for implantation of the 7.5 mm ISG Rod System (6.0 mm sacral bar: ø1:09 ± 0:22 h, 7.3 mm screw: ø0:55 ± 0:20 h). The fluoroscopy time was significantly lower with the 7.3 mm screw (ø0:57 ± 0:23 min) and the 7.5 mm ISG Rod System (ø0:42 ± 00:17 min) than with the 6.0 mm sacral bar (ø1:36 ± 0:46 min).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A significant compressive effect was demonstrated with all three implants. No implant-specific complications or surgical site complications were identified in either the overall cohort or the subgroups. The 7.5 mm ISG Rod System shows advantages with regard to the duration of surgery and fluoroscopy.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compressive effect and collapse behavior of three different transsacral implants in sacral fragility fractures - a retrospective analysis of 106 cases.\",\"authors\":\"C Fischer, F Klauke, P Schenk, H Bauerfeld, P Kobbe, T Mendel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00068-024-02629-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study were the retrospective evaluation of the compressive effect and complication rates of transsacral stabilization of osteoporosis-associated sacral fragility fractures in 106 patients using three different implants (6.0 mm sacral bar, n = 32; 7.3 mm screw, n = 26; 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System, n = 48) with regard to the image morphological and clinical-perioperative outcome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this purpose, the sacral width was determined preoperatively and postoperatively using multiplanar CT reconstructions and correlated with the measured bone density (HU). The results were compared with each other on an implant-specific basis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant compressive effect was found for all implants (6.0 mm sacral bar 7.1 ± 3.4 mm, 7.3 mm screw 6.9 ± 1.8 mm, 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System 8 ± 2.4 mm). No implant-specific difference in compression could be detected. Overall, the washers broke into the iliac cortex in 9% of cases. The subgroups did not differ significantly in this respect (6.0 mm sacral bar: 4 [13%], 7.3 mm screw 1 [1%], 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System (5 [10%], p = 0.581). A correlation between the degree of osteoporosis and the compressive effect could not be demonstrated. Significant implant-specific differences were found in the incision-suture time, with only ø0:39 ± 0:13 h required for implantation of the 7.5 mm ISG Rod System (6.0 mm sacral bar: ø1:09 ± 0:22 h, 7.3 mm screw: ø0:55 ± 0:20 h). The fluoroscopy time was significantly lower with the 7.3 mm screw (ø0:57 ± 0:23 min) and the 7.5 mm ISG Rod System (ø0:42 ± 00:17 min) than with the 6.0 mm sacral bar (ø1:36 ± 0:46 min).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A significant compressive effect was demonstrated with all three implants. No implant-specific complications or surgical site complications were identified in either the overall cohort or the subgroups. The 7.5 mm ISG Rod System shows advantages with regard to the duration of surgery and fluoroscopy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02629-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02629-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在对106例骨质疏松症相关骶骨脆性骨折患者使用三种不同植入物(6.0毫米骶骨棒,32例;7.3毫米螺钉,26例;7.5毫米ISG-Rod系统,48例)经骶骨稳定的压迫效应和并发症发生率进行回顾性评估,以了解图像形态和临床围手术期结果:为此,在术前和术后使用多平面 CT 重建确定骶骨宽度,并将其与测量的骨密度(HU)相关联。根据植入物的具体情况对结果进行比较:结果:所有植入物(6.0 毫米骶骨杆 7.1 ± 3.4 毫米、7.3 毫米螺钉 6.9 ± 1.8 毫米、7.5 毫米 ISG-Rod 系统 8 ± 2.4 毫米)都有明显的压缩效应。没有检测到种植体在压缩方面的特定差异。总体而言,9%的病例中垫圈破入髂骨皮质。亚组在这方面没有明显差异(6.0 毫米骶骨杆:4 [13%];7.0 毫米骶骨杆:4 [13%]):4 [13%],7.3 毫米螺钉 1 [1%],7.5 毫米 ISG-Rod 系统(5 [10%],P = 0.581)。骨质疏松症程度与压迫效应之间没有相关性。在切口-缝合时间方面发现了显著的植入物特异性差异,7.5 毫米 ISG 棒系统的植入时间仅为 ø0:39 ± 0:13 小时(6.0 毫米骶骨棒:ø1:09 ± 0:22 小时,7.3 毫米螺钉:ø0:55 ± 0:20 小时)。7.3毫米螺钉(ø0:57 ± 0:23分钟)和7.5毫米ISG杆系统(ø0:42 ± 00:17分钟)的透视时间明显低于6.0毫米骶骨杆(ø1:36 ± 0:46分钟):结论:所有三种植入物都具有明显的压迫效果。结论:所有三种植入物都具有明显的压迫效果,无论是总体组还是分组,均未发现植入物特有的并发症或手术部位并发症。7.5 mm ISG杆系统在手术时间和透视方面具有优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Compressive effect and collapse behavior of three different transsacral implants in sacral fragility fractures - a retrospective analysis of 106 cases.

Compressive effect and collapse behavior of three different transsacral implants in sacral fragility fractures - a retrospective analysis of 106 cases.

Purpose: The aim of this study were the retrospective evaluation of the compressive effect and complication rates of transsacral stabilization of osteoporosis-associated sacral fragility fractures in 106 patients using three different implants (6.0 mm sacral bar, n = 32; 7.3 mm screw, n = 26; 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System, n = 48) with regard to the image morphological and clinical-perioperative outcome.

Methods: For this purpose, the sacral width was determined preoperatively and postoperatively using multiplanar CT reconstructions and correlated with the measured bone density (HU). The results were compared with each other on an implant-specific basis.

Results: A significant compressive effect was found for all implants (6.0 mm sacral bar 7.1 ± 3.4 mm, 7.3 mm screw 6.9 ± 1.8 mm, 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System 8 ± 2.4 mm). No implant-specific difference in compression could be detected. Overall, the washers broke into the iliac cortex in 9% of cases. The subgroups did not differ significantly in this respect (6.0 mm sacral bar: 4 [13%], 7.3 mm screw 1 [1%], 7.5 mm ISG-Rod System (5 [10%], p = 0.581). A correlation between the degree of osteoporosis and the compressive effect could not be demonstrated. Significant implant-specific differences were found in the incision-suture time, with only ø0:39 ± 0:13 h required for implantation of the 7.5 mm ISG Rod System (6.0 mm sacral bar: ø1:09 ± 0:22 h, 7.3 mm screw: ø0:55 ± 0:20 h). The fluoroscopy time was significantly lower with the 7.3 mm screw (ø0:57 ± 0:23 min) and the 7.5 mm ISG Rod System (ø0:42 ± 00:17 min) than with the 6.0 mm sacral bar (ø1:36 ± 0:46 min).

Conclusion: A significant compressive effect was demonstrated with all three implants. No implant-specific complications or surgical site complications were identified in either the overall cohort or the subgroups. The 7.5 mm ISG Rod System shows advantages with regard to the duration of surgery and fluoroscopy.

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
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
×
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