Ekin Barış Demir, Fatih Barça, Çağrı Havıtçıoğlu, Halis Atıl Atilla, Mutlu Akdoğan
{"title":"后骨盆环损伤椎盂内固定与髂骶螺钉内固定的比较。","authors":"Ekin Barış Demir, Fatih Barça, Çağrı Havıtçıoğlu, Halis Atıl Atilla, Mutlu Akdoğan","doi":"10.14744/tjtes.2024.32050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no consensus in the literature regarding the optimal treatment method for posterior pelvic ring injuries. This study aims to compare the radiologic and clinical outcomes, as well as complications of spinopelvic fixation (SPF) and iliosacral screw fixation (ISF) in patients with posterior pelvic ring injuries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study analyzed 54 patients (37 females, 17 males; mean age 38.9±18.7 years) with pelvic ring injuries classified as Tile type B and type C involving the posterior pelvic ring. These patients were treated with either SPF or ISF and followed for at least one year at two centers between 2016 and 2023. Of these, 28 patients comprised the SPF group, and 26 patients were in the ISF group. Comparisons were made regarding perioperative data (hemoglobin loss, blood product replacement, hospitalization duration, intensive care unit stay, surgery time, and fluoroscopy duration) and clinical outcomes (limb length discrepancy, Majeed score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and Short Form-36 (SF-36) score). Radiological outcomes were assessed using Matta outcome grading. Complications were also investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Hemoglobin loss (median 2.2 vs. 1 g/dL; p=0.027) and surgery time (67±10.6 vs. 37.7±11.3 minutes; p<0.001) were higher in the SPF group, whereas fluoroscopy duration (median 2 vs. 51.5 seconds; p<0.001) was higher in the ISF group. Other perioperative parameters did not differ between the groups. At a minimum follow-up of one year, clinical scores (Majeed score, VAS, SF-36), limb length discrepancy, and Matta outcome grades were similar between the groups. The SPF group had higher total complication rates (46.4% vs. 19.2%; p=0.034) and infection rates (42.9% vs. 3.8%; p<0.001), while rates of neurological deficits, screw malposition, and other hospitalization complications (e.g., thromboembolic or cardiovascular events, pulmonary complications, sepsis) were not significantly different.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both spinopelvic fixation and iliosacral screw fixation techniques are similarly effective in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes, with both methods demonstrating a low rate of complications. However, SPF was associated with higher infection rates and greater hemoglobin loss, while ISF required increased fluoroscopy exposure.</p>","PeriodicalId":94263,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES","volume":"31 1","pages":"75-83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of spinopelvic fixation and iliosacral screw fixation for posterior pelvic ring injuries.\",\"authors\":\"Ekin Barış Demir, Fatih Barça, Çağrı Havıtçıoğlu, Halis Atıl Atilla, Mutlu Akdoğan\",\"doi\":\"10.14744/tjtes.2024.32050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no consensus in the literature regarding the optimal treatment method for posterior pelvic ring injuries. This study aims to compare the radiologic and clinical outcomes, as well as complications of spinopelvic fixation (SPF) and iliosacral screw fixation (ISF) in patients with posterior pelvic ring injuries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study analyzed 54 patients (37 females, 17 males; mean age 38.9±18.7 years) with pelvic ring injuries classified as Tile type B and type C involving the posterior pelvic ring. These patients were treated with either SPF or ISF and followed for at least one year at two centers between 2016 and 2023. Of these, 28 patients comprised the SPF group, and 26 patients were in the ISF group. Comparisons were made regarding perioperative data (hemoglobin loss, blood product replacement, hospitalization duration, intensive care unit stay, surgery time, and fluoroscopy duration) and clinical outcomes (limb length discrepancy, Majeed score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and Short Form-36 (SF-36) score). Radiological outcomes were assessed using Matta outcome grading. Complications were also investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Hemoglobin loss (median 2.2 vs. 1 g/dL; p=0.027) and surgery time (67±10.6 vs. 37.7±11.3 minutes; p<0.001) were higher in the SPF group, whereas fluoroscopy duration (median 2 vs. 51.5 seconds; p<0.001) was higher in the ISF group. Other perioperative parameters did not differ between the groups. At a minimum follow-up of one year, clinical scores (Majeed score, VAS, SF-36), limb length discrepancy, and Matta outcome grades were similar between the groups. The SPF group had higher total complication rates (46.4% vs. 19.2%; p=0.034) and infection rates (42.9% vs. 3.8%; p<0.001), while rates of neurological deficits, screw malposition, and other hospitalization complications (e.g., thromboembolic or cardiovascular events, pulmonary complications, sepsis) were not significantly different.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both spinopelvic fixation and iliosacral screw fixation techniques are similarly effective in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes, with both methods demonstrating a low rate of complications. However, SPF was associated with higher infection rates and greater hemoglobin loss, while ISF required increased fluoroscopy exposure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"75-83\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2024.32050\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2024.32050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:关于骨盆后环损伤的最佳治疗方法,文献尚未达成共识。本研究旨在比较脊柱骨盆固定(SPF)和髂骶螺钉固定(ISF)治疗骨盆后环损伤患者的影像学和临床结果以及并发症。方法:对54例患者进行回顾性分析,其中女性37例,男性17例;平均年龄38.9±18.7岁),骨盆环损伤分Tile B型和C型,累及骨盆后环。这些患者接受SPF或ISF治疗,并在2016年至2023年期间在两个中心随访至少一年。其中SPF组28例,ISF组26例。比较围手术期数据(血红蛋白损失、血液制品更换、住院时间、重症监护病房时间、手术时间和透视时间)和临床结果(肢体长度差异、Majeed评分、视觉模拟评分(VAS)评分和SF-36评分)。使用Matta结果分级评估放射预后。并发症也进行了调查。结果:血红蛋白损失(中位数2.2 vs. 1 g/dL;P =0.027),手术时间(67±10.6∶37.7±11.3 min);结论:就临床和影像学结果而言,脊柱骨盆固定和髂骶螺钉固定技术同样有效,两种方法的并发症发生率均较低。然而,SPF与较高的感染率和较大的血红蛋白损失相关,而ISF需要增加透视暴露。
Comparison of spinopelvic fixation and iliosacral screw fixation for posterior pelvic ring injuries.
Background: There is no consensus in the literature regarding the optimal treatment method for posterior pelvic ring injuries. This study aims to compare the radiologic and clinical outcomes, as well as complications of spinopelvic fixation (SPF) and iliosacral screw fixation (ISF) in patients with posterior pelvic ring injuries.
Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 54 patients (37 females, 17 males; mean age 38.9±18.7 years) with pelvic ring injuries classified as Tile type B and type C involving the posterior pelvic ring. These patients were treated with either SPF or ISF and followed for at least one year at two centers between 2016 and 2023. Of these, 28 patients comprised the SPF group, and 26 patients were in the ISF group. Comparisons were made regarding perioperative data (hemoglobin loss, blood product replacement, hospitalization duration, intensive care unit stay, surgery time, and fluoroscopy duration) and clinical outcomes (limb length discrepancy, Majeed score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and Short Form-36 (SF-36) score). Radiological outcomes were assessed using Matta outcome grading. Complications were also investigated.
Results: Hemoglobin loss (median 2.2 vs. 1 g/dL; p=0.027) and surgery time (67±10.6 vs. 37.7±11.3 minutes; p<0.001) were higher in the SPF group, whereas fluoroscopy duration (median 2 vs. 51.5 seconds; p<0.001) was higher in the ISF group. Other perioperative parameters did not differ between the groups. At a minimum follow-up of one year, clinical scores (Majeed score, VAS, SF-36), limb length discrepancy, and Matta outcome grades were similar between the groups. The SPF group had higher total complication rates (46.4% vs. 19.2%; p=0.034) and infection rates (42.9% vs. 3.8%; p<0.001), while rates of neurological deficits, screw malposition, and other hospitalization complications (e.g., thromboembolic or cardiovascular events, pulmonary complications, sepsis) were not significantly different.
Conclusion: Both spinopelvic fixation and iliosacral screw fixation techniques are similarly effective in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes, with both methods demonstrating a low rate of complications. However, SPF was associated with higher infection rates and greater hemoglobin loss, while ISF required increased fluoroscopy exposure.