股骨颈系统(FNS)与4枚空心加压螺钉(CCSs)治疗年轻paulwels III型股骨颈骨折患者的回顾性比较研究

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Yang Gao, Tianle Ma, Xiaohu Chang, Peng Jia, Xiaoteng Li, Xin Tang
{"title":"股骨颈系统(FNS)与4枚空心加压螺钉(CCSs)治疗年轻paulwels III型股骨颈骨折患者的回顾性比较研究","authors":"Yang Gao, Tianle Ma, Xiaohu Chang, Peng Jia, Xiaoteng Li, Xin Tang","doi":"10.1186/s13018-025-05461-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the femoral neck system (FNS) compared to four cannulated compression screws (CCSs) for managing Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures in young patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on young patients with Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures treated at our hospital from January 2021 to December 2022. Patients were categorized into two groups based on their respective internal fixation methods: the FNS group (32 cases) and the CCSs group (41 cases). Various demographic and clinical variables, including age, gender, fracture side, mechanism of injury, Garden classification, and time interval between injury and surgery, were collected. Comparisons were made between the two groups regarding operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, hospitalization expenses, time to fracture healing, and Harris hip score at one year post-surgery. Additionally, postoperative complications such as wound infections, nonunion, femoral neck shortening, avascular necrosis of the femoral head, and hardware failure were analyzed. Follow-up duration ranged from 12 to 24 months for all patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences between the FNS and CCSs groups in terms of demographic characteristics, fracture characteristics, time to fracture healing, duration of hospital stay, and Harris hip score at one year post-surgery (p > 0.05). However, the CCSs group exhibited significantly shorter operative time, reduced intraoperative blood loss, and lower hospitalization costs compared to the FNS group (p < 0.05). Patients treated with FNS had longer operative durations (82.33 ± 28.85 min vs. 66.58 ± 14.38 min, p = 0.006), higher blood loss (106.67 ± 65.83 mLvs.70.00 ± 27.39 mL, p < 0.001), and increased hospitalization expenses (58,345.98 ± 3706.57 RMB vs. 35,427.63 ± 3019.30 RMB, p < 0.0001). The incidence of postoperative complications was 21.8% in the FNS group and 26.8% in the CCSs group (p > 0.05), with no significant differences observed in the rates of wound infections, femoral neck shortening, femoral head necrosis, nonunion, and hardware failure between the two groups (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the management of Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures in young patients, FNS demonstrates clinical efficacy comparable to CCSs. However, considering factors such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospitalization costs, CCSs may be preferred.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"65"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11742197/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Femoral neck system (FNS) versus 4 cannulated compression screws (CCSs) in the treatment of young patients with Pauwels type III femoral neck fracture: a retrospective comparative study.\",\"authors\":\"Yang Gao, Tianle Ma, Xiaohu Chang, Peng Jia, Xiaoteng Li, Xin Tang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13018-025-05461-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the femoral neck system (FNS) compared to four cannulated compression screws (CCSs) for managing Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures in young patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on young patients with Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures treated at our hospital from January 2021 to December 2022. Patients were categorized into two groups based on their respective internal fixation methods: the FNS group (32 cases) and the CCSs group (41 cases). Various demographic and clinical variables, including age, gender, fracture side, mechanism of injury, Garden classification, and time interval between injury and surgery, were collected. Comparisons were made between the two groups regarding operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, hospitalization expenses, time to fracture healing, and Harris hip score at one year post-surgery. Additionally, postoperative complications such as wound infections, nonunion, femoral neck shortening, avascular necrosis of the femoral head, and hardware failure were analyzed. Follow-up duration ranged from 12 to 24 months for all patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences between the FNS and CCSs groups in terms of demographic characteristics, fracture characteristics, time to fracture healing, duration of hospital stay, and Harris hip score at one year post-surgery (p > 0.05). However, the CCSs group exhibited significantly shorter operative time, reduced intraoperative blood loss, and lower hospitalization costs compared to the FNS group (p < 0.05). Patients treated with FNS had longer operative durations (82.33 ± 28.85 min vs. 66.58 ± 14.38 min, p = 0.006), higher blood loss (106.67 ± 65.83 mLvs.70.00 ± 27.39 mL, p < 0.001), and increased hospitalization expenses (58,345.98 ± 3706.57 RMB vs. 35,427.63 ± 3019.30 RMB, p < 0.0001). The incidence of postoperative complications was 21.8% in the FNS group and 26.8% in the CCSs group (p > 0.05), with no significant differences observed in the rates of wound infections, femoral neck shortening, femoral head necrosis, nonunion, and hardware failure between the two groups (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the management of Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures in young patients, FNS demonstrates clinical efficacy comparable to CCSs. However, considering factors such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospitalization costs, CCSs may be preferred.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16629,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11742197/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-025-05461-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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 Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-025-05461-4","RegionNum":3,"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:本研究旨在评价股骨颈系统(FNS)与4枚空心加压螺钉(CCSs)在治疗年轻患者Pauwels III型股骨颈骨折中的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析我院2021年1月至2022年12月收治的年轻Pauwels型股骨颈骨折患者。根据不同内固定方式将患者分为两组:FNS组(32例)和CCSs组(41例)。收集各种人口统计学和临床变量,包括年龄、性别、骨折侧面、损伤机制、Garden分类、损伤与手术之间的时间间隔。比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、住院费用、骨折愈合时间、术后1年Harris髋关节评分。此外,还分析了术后并发症,如伤口感染、骨不连、股骨颈缩短、股骨头缺血性坏死和硬体失效。所有患者的随访时间为12至24个月。结果:FNS组与CCSs组在人口学特征、骨折特征、骨折愈合时间、住院时间、术后1年Harris髋关节评分方面差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。然而,与FNS组相比,CCSs组明显缩短了手术时间,减少了术中出血量,降低了住院费用(p 0.05),两组在伤口感染、股骨颈缩短、股骨头坏死、骨不连和硬体失效的发生率方面无显著差异(p 0.05)。结论:在年轻paulwels III型股骨颈骨折患者中,FNS的临床疗效与CCSs相当。然而,考虑到手术时间、术中出血量、住院费用等因素,CCSs可能是首选。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Femoral neck system (FNS) versus 4 cannulated compression screws (CCSs) in the treatment of young patients with Pauwels type III femoral neck fracture: a retrospective comparative study.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the femoral neck system (FNS) compared to four cannulated compression screws (CCSs) for managing Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures in young patients.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on young patients with Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures treated at our hospital from January 2021 to December 2022. Patients were categorized into two groups based on their respective internal fixation methods: the FNS group (32 cases) and the CCSs group (41 cases). Various demographic and clinical variables, including age, gender, fracture side, mechanism of injury, Garden classification, and time interval between injury and surgery, were collected. Comparisons were made between the two groups regarding operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, hospitalization expenses, time to fracture healing, and Harris hip score at one year post-surgery. Additionally, postoperative complications such as wound infections, nonunion, femoral neck shortening, avascular necrosis of the femoral head, and hardware failure were analyzed. Follow-up duration ranged from 12 to 24 months for all patients.

Results: There were no significant differences between the FNS and CCSs groups in terms of demographic characteristics, fracture characteristics, time to fracture healing, duration of hospital stay, and Harris hip score at one year post-surgery (p > 0.05). However, the CCSs group exhibited significantly shorter operative time, reduced intraoperative blood loss, and lower hospitalization costs compared to the FNS group (p < 0.05). Patients treated with FNS had longer operative durations (82.33 ± 28.85 min vs. 66.58 ± 14.38 min, p = 0.006), higher blood loss (106.67 ± 65.83 mLvs.70.00 ± 27.39 mL, p < 0.001), and increased hospitalization expenses (58,345.98 ± 3706.57 RMB vs. 35,427.63 ± 3019.30 RMB, p < 0.0001). The incidence of postoperative complications was 21.8% in the FNS group and 26.8% in the CCSs group (p > 0.05), with no significant differences observed in the rates of wound infections, femoral neck shortening, femoral head necrosis, nonunion, and hardware failure between the two groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: In the management of Pauwels type III femoral neck fractures in young patients, FNS demonstrates clinical efficacy comparable to CCSs. However, considering factors such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospitalization costs, CCSs may be preferred.

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
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.
×
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