前臂开放性骨折节段性骨缺损的游离血管化腓骨移植与 Masquelet 技术的比较:一项回顾性队列研究。

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Ming Zhou, Yunhong Ma, Xueyuan Jia, Yongwei Wu, Jun Liu, Yapeng Wang, Peng Wang, Junhao Luo, Fang Lin, Jianbing Wang, Yongjun Rui
{"title":"前臂开放性骨折节段性骨缺损的游离血管化腓骨移植与 Masquelet 技术的比较:一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Ming Zhou, Yunhong Ma, Xueyuan Jia, Yongwei Wu, Jun Liu, Yapeng Wang, Peng Wang, Junhao Luo, Fang Lin, Jianbing Wang, Yongjun Rui","doi":"10.1186/s10195-024-00787-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Severe open forearm fractures commonly involve segmental bone defects. Although several methods have been proposed to treat segmental bone defects with such fractures, research comparing the radiological and clinical outcomes of free vascularized fibular grafts (FVFG) and the Masquelet technique (MT) is rare.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data on 43 patients with open forearm fractures and segmental bone defects treated surgically in our hospital from January 2005 to January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, and these patients were divided into an FVFG group (18 cases) and an MT group (25 cases). Clinical and radiological evaluations were performed regularly, and the minimum follow-up was 18 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 43 patients were followed up for 18 to 190 months, with a mean of 46.93 months. The mean follow-up time was significantly longer in the FVFG group than in the MT group (p = 0.000). Bone healing time was 3-16 months, with a mean of 4.67 months. The QuickDASH score at the last follow-up was 0-38.6, with a mean of 17.71, and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Operative time, hospital stay, and intraoperative bleeding for bone defect reconstruction were higher in the FVFG group compared to the MT group (p = 0.000), whereas the number of procedures was lower in the FVFG group than in the MT group (p = 0.035).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FVFG and the MT showed satisfactory clinical results for segmental bone defects of the forearm. Compared with FVFG, the MT exhibited a lower operative time, hospital stay, and intraoperative bleeding.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IV. Trial registration This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration no. ChiCTR2300067675; registered 17 January 2023), https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=189458 .</p>","PeriodicalId":48603,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11438757/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of free vascularized fibular grafts and the Masquelet technique for the treatment of segmental bone defects with open forearm fractures: a retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Ming Zhou, Yunhong Ma, Xueyuan Jia, Yongwei Wu, Jun Liu, Yapeng Wang, Peng Wang, Junhao Luo, Fang Lin, Jianbing Wang, Yongjun Rui\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s10195-024-00787-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Severe open forearm fractures commonly involve segmental bone defects. Although several methods have been proposed to treat segmental bone defects with such fractures, research comparing the radiological and clinical outcomes of free vascularized fibular grafts (FVFG) and the Masquelet technique (MT) is rare.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data on 43 patients with open forearm fractures and segmental bone defects treated surgically in our hospital from January 2005 to January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, and these patients were divided into an FVFG group (18 cases) and an MT group (25 cases). Clinical and radiological evaluations were performed regularly, and the minimum follow-up was 18 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 43 patients were followed up for 18 to 190 months, with a mean of 46.93 months. The mean follow-up time was significantly longer in the FVFG group than in the MT group (p = 0.000). Bone healing time was 3-16 months, with a mean of 4.67 months. The QuickDASH score at the last follow-up was 0-38.6, with a mean of 17.71, and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Operative time, hospital stay, and intraoperative bleeding for bone defect reconstruction were higher in the FVFG group compared to the MT group (p = 0.000), whereas the number of procedures was lower in the FVFG group than in the MT group (p = 0.035).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FVFG and the MT showed satisfactory clinical results for segmental bone defects of the forearm. Compared with FVFG, the MT exhibited a lower operative time, hospital stay, and intraoperative bleeding.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IV. Trial registration This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration no. ChiCTR2300067675; registered 17 January 2023), https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=189458 .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48603,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11438757/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s10195-024-00787-x\",\"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 Orthopaedics and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s10195-024-00787-x","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

目的:严重的开放性前臂骨折通常涉及节段性骨缺损。虽然已有多种方法治疗此类骨折的节段性骨缺损,但比较游离血管化纤维移植(FVFG)和 Masquelet 技术(MT)的放射学和临床效果的研究并不多见:回顾性分析我院 2005 年 1 月至 2021 年 1 月期间手术治疗的 43 例开放性前臂骨折和节段性骨缺损患者的数据,并将这些患者分为 FVFG 组(18 例)和 MT 组(25 例)。定期进行临床和放射学评估,最短随访时间为18个月:所有 43 例患者均接受了 18 至 190 个月的随访,平均随访时间为 46.93 个月。FVFG 组的平均随访时间明显长于 MT 组(P = 0.000)。骨愈合时间为 3-16 个月,平均为 4.67 个月。最后一次随访时的 QuickDASH 评分为 0-38.6,平均值为 17.71,两组间无统计学差异。FVFG组与MT组相比,骨缺损重建的手术时间、住院时间和术中出血量更高(P = 0.000),而FVFG组的手术次数低于MT组(P = 0.035):结论:FVFG和MT治疗前臂节段性骨缺损的临床效果令人满意。与 FVFG 相比,MT 的手术时间、住院时间和术中出血量更少:证据等级:IV 级。试验注册 本研究已在中国临床试验注册中心注册(注册号:ChiCTR2300067675;注册时间:2023年1月17日),https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=189458 。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of free vascularized fibular grafts and the Masquelet technique for the treatment of segmental bone defects with open forearm fractures: a retrospective cohort study.

Purpose: Severe open forearm fractures commonly involve segmental bone defects. Although several methods have been proposed to treat segmental bone defects with such fractures, research comparing the radiological and clinical outcomes of free vascularized fibular grafts (FVFG) and the Masquelet technique (MT) is rare.

Methods: Data on 43 patients with open forearm fractures and segmental bone defects treated surgically in our hospital from January 2005 to January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, and these patients were divided into an FVFG group (18 cases) and an MT group (25 cases). Clinical and radiological evaluations were performed regularly, and the minimum follow-up was 18 months.

Results: All 43 patients were followed up for 18 to 190 months, with a mean of 46.93 months. The mean follow-up time was significantly longer in the FVFG group than in the MT group (p = 0.000). Bone healing time was 3-16 months, with a mean of 4.67 months. The QuickDASH score at the last follow-up was 0-38.6, with a mean of 17.71, and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Operative time, hospital stay, and intraoperative bleeding for bone defect reconstruction were higher in the FVFG group compared to the MT group (p = 0.000), whereas the number of procedures was lower in the FVFG group than in the MT group (p = 0.035).

Conclusions: FVFG and the MT showed satisfactory clinical results for segmental bone defects of the forearm. Compared with FVFG, the MT exhibited a lower operative time, hospital stay, and intraoperative bleeding.

Level of evidence: Level IV. Trial registration This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration no. ChiCTR2300067675; registered 17 January 2023), https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=189458 .

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
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, the official open access peer-reviewed journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, publishes original papers reporting basic or clinical research in the field of orthopaedic and traumatologic surgery, as well as systematic reviews, brief communications, case reports and letters to the Editor. Narrative instructional reviews and commentaries to original articles may be commissioned by Editors from eminent colleagues. The Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology aims to be an international forum for the communication and exchange of ideas concerning the various aspects of orthopaedics and musculoskeletal trauma.
×
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