固定桡骨头移位骨折的微型钢板与无头螺钉:随机对照试验

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Ahmed Afifi, Mustafa Othman, Ashraf N Moharram, Emad A Abdel-Ati
{"title":"固定桡骨头移位骨折的微型钢板与无头螺钉:随机对照试验","authors":"Ahmed Afifi, Mustafa Othman, Ashraf N Moharram, Emad A Abdel-Ati","doi":"10.1016/j.jse.2024.07.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fixation of displaced radial head fractures using miniplates is technically challenging and has some drawbacks like hardware prominence and limitation of forearm rotation. Fixation by headless compression screws has emerged as a less invasive alternative to miniplates. This study compares the radiological and functional outcomes of both methods of fixation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at an academic level 1 trauma center. Sixty patients with displaced isolated radial head fractures were randomized to treatment using either headless compression screws or miniplates in 2 parallel groups. At the final follow-up of 18 months, patients were evaluated radiologically for union and clinically using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), elbow range of motion, grip strength, the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and the Disabilities of the Shoulder, Arm, and Hand (DASH) score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Union was achieved after 8±1.7 weeks in the screw group and after 8.5±2.7 weeks in the plate group. The MEPS was significantly better in the screw group (87.7±10.7) than in the plate group (80.5±13.9). However, this difference is below the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the MEPS and as such may not be clinically meaningful. No significant differences were observed between both groups regarding flexion, extension ranges, VAS, grip strength, or the DASH score. However, supination and pronation were significantly better in the screw group. The rate of complications was higher in the plate group (26.7%) than in the screw group (3.3%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both techniques yielded comparable outcomes with better forearm rotation, a lower complication rate, and a lower hardware removal rate in the screw group.</p>","PeriodicalId":50051,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Miniplates versus Headless Screws for Fixation of Displaced Radial Head Fractures: A Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Afifi, Mustafa Othman, Ashraf N Moharram, Emad A Abdel-Ati\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jse.2024.07.016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fixation of displaced radial head fractures using miniplates is technically challenging and has some drawbacks like hardware prominence and limitation of forearm rotation. Fixation by headless compression screws has emerged as a less invasive alternative to miniplates. This study compares the radiological and functional outcomes of both methods of fixation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at an academic level 1 trauma center. Sixty patients with displaced isolated radial head fractures were randomized to treatment using either headless compression screws or miniplates in 2 parallel groups. At the final follow-up of 18 months, patients were evaluated radiologically for union and clinically using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), elbow range of motion, grip strength, the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and the Disabilities of the Shoulder, Arm, and Hand (DASH) score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Union was achieved after 8±1.7 weeks in the screw group and after 8.5±2.7 weeks in the plate group. The MEPS was significantly better in the screw group (87.7±10.7) than in the plate group (80.5±13.9). However, this difference is below the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the MEPS and as such may not be clinically meaningful. No significant differences were observed between both groups regarding flexion, extension ranges, VAS, grip strength, or the DASH score. However, supination and pronation were significantly better in the screw group. The rate of complications was higher in the plate group (26.7%) than in the screw group (3.3%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both techniques yielded comparable outcomes with better forearm rotation, a lower complication rate, and a lower hardware removal rate in the screw group.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50051,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.07.016\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.07.016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:使用微型钢板固定移位的桡骨头骨折在技术上具有挑战性,而且存在一些缺点,如硬件突出和前臂旋转受限。无头加压螺钉固定已成为小钢钉的一种微创替代方法。本研究比较了两种固定方法的放射学和功能效果:这项单中心、前瞻性、随机对照试验在一家一级学术创伤中心进行。60名移位孤立性桡骨头骨折患者被随机分为两组,分别使用无头加压螺钉或微型钢板进行治疗。在18个月的最终随访中,对患者进行了放射学结合评估,并使用梅奥肘关节表现评分(MEPS)、肘关节活动范围、握力、疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)和肩、臂、手残疾(DASH)评分对患者进行了临床评估:结果:螺钉组在 8±1.7 周后达到结合,钢板组在 8.5±2.7 周后达到结合。螺钉组的 MEPS(87.7±10.7)明显优于钢板组(80.5±13.9)。不过,这一差异低于 MEPS 的最小临床意义差异 (MCID),因此可能没有临床意义。两组患者在屈伸范围、VAS、握力或DASH评分方面均无明显差异。不过,螺钉组的仰卧位和前伸位明显更好。钢板组的并发症发生率(26.7%)高于螺钉组(3.3%):结论:两种技术的疗效相当,螺钉组的前臂旋转更好,并发症发生率更低,硬件移除率更低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Miniplates versus Headless Screws for Fixation of Displaced Radial Head Fractures: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Fixation of displaced radial head fractures using miniplates is technically challenging and has some drawbacks like hardware prominence and limitation of forearm rotation. Fixation by headless compression screws has emerged as a less invasive alternative to miniplates. This study compares the radiological and functional outcomes of both methods of fixation.

Methods: This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at an academic level 1 trauma center. Sixty patients with displaced isolated radial head fractures were randomized to treatment using either headless compression screws or miniplates in 2 parallel groups. At the final follow-up of 18 months, patients were evaluated radiologically for union and clinically using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), elbow range of motion, grip strength, the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and the Disabilities of the Shoulder, Arm, and Hand (DASH) score.

Results: Union was achieved after 8±1.7 weeks in the screw group and after 8.5±2.7 weeks in the plate group. The MEPS was significantly better in the screw group (87.7±10.7) than in the plate group (80.5±13.9). However, this difference is below the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the MEPS and as such may not be clinically meaningful. No significant differences were observed between both groups regarding flexion, extension ranges, VAS, grip strength, or the DASH score. However, supination and pronation were significantly better in the screw group. The rate of complications was higher in the plate group (26.7%) than in the screw group (3.3%).

Conclusion: Both techniques yielded comparable outcomes with better forearm rotation, a lower complication rate, and a lower hardware removal rate in the screw group.

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
6.50
自引率
23.30%
发文量
604
审稿时长
11.2 weeks
期刊介绍: The official publication for eight leading specialty organizations, this authoritative journal is the only publication to focus exclusively on medical, surgical, and physical techniques for treating injury/disease of the upper extremity, including the shoulder girdle, arm, and elbow. Clinically oriented and peer-reviewed, the Journal provides an international forum for the exchange of information on new techniques, instruments, and materials. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery features vivid photos, professional illustrations, and explicit diagrams that demonstrate surgical approaches and depict implant devices. Topics covered include fractures, dislocations, diseases and injuries of the rotator cuff, imaging techniques, arthritis, arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and rehabilitation.
×
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